[2018] Garcia Notes - Criminal Law Book 1

- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018]

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW BY: ATTY. VICTORIA GARCIA

Transcribed by: Maria Aurora Mon, Carmel Liria, Gretchen Sy, Anne Rose De Guia, Ma. Althea Raypon, J-ann Javillonar & Maria Maica Angelika Roman. Updated by: Updated by Anonymous Lawyer (https://www.facebook.com/Anon (https://www.facebook.com/Anonymouslawer/) ymouslawer/)

CRIMINAL LAW – branch of division of law which defines crimes, treats of their nature and provides for their punishment. CRIME – CRIME – act committed or omitted in violation of the law.

2 injuries are committed; 1. Injury committed against a person; 2. Injury committed against the s tate; Injury committed against a person Personal injury against the private offended party. Civil indemnity is awarded to the offended party on the heirs. Injury committed against the state - Punishment is imprisonment. Social injury against the state for the disturbance of peace. Note: for every crime committed, it is more of an offense against the state rather than against the private offended par ty. Example: A hit B. B sustained a fatal wound but he survived. Thereafter, B filed frustrated homicide. The fiscal found probable cause. In the information filed by the fiscal, the title is People of the Philippines vs A. The trial continued and the judge found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The first penalty of the judge is imprisonment due to social injury. Aside from this, B will pay a civil indemnity. Definition of Terms There are three kinds of Crime; 1. Felony – – Acts or omissions punished by the Revised Penal Code (RPC); 2. Offense – Offense – punished by a special law; 3. Acts/Infractions – Acts/Infractions – punished by ordinances, local legislation;

*Note that all three are under the umbrella term of Crime. Q: Who has the power to enact Penal Laws? A: As a general Rule the Legislative Department has the power to enact Laws. However, in case of emergency, president may issue a Penal Issuance Order provided that there is a law granting it to the president. Q: Is the power of Congress absolute? A: No, there are limitations.

1 Limitations to the Power of Congress to enact Penal Laws: 1. Penal law must be General in in application otherwise it would be violative of the Equal Protection Clause; – ex 2. Must not partake the nature of an ex post facto law – e x post facto law makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was innocent when done, and punishes such an act; 3. Not a Bill of Attainder – – A bill of attainder is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without judicial trial; 4. Cannot impose cruel or excessive penalties or punishments - e.g. congress cannot amend article 308-309 death, by saying that henceforth that any who commit theft will be given death. This is unusual punishment so it is prohibited. Characteristics of Penal Laws The following are the characteristics of penal laws; 1. Generality - Persons to whom criminal law shall apply; 2. Territoriality - Place where penal law shall be applied ; 3. Prospectivity - Time when it shall apply GENERALITY  Penal laws shall be applied to all persons on being within the Philippine territory whether they are Filipino Citizens or foreigners regardless of any of their personal circumstances;  Applicable to all so long as within the Philippines;  Applies to non-citizens since while they are within the Philippines, they are given protection in the same way that the government protects its own citizen;  Article 14 of the Civil Code – penal laws shall be binding on all those who live or sojourn in the Philippines whether citizen or not; Exceptions to the GENERALITY characteristic: 1. Generally Accepted Principles of International Law; 2. Laws of Preferential Application; Generally Accepted Principles of PIL; Heads of state, chief of state and other diplomatic heads such as ambassadors and public ministers enjoys blanket immunity from from the criminal jurisdiction of the country where they are assigned. Since they are immune, they cannot be arrested, prosecuted or punished. (Diplomatic Immunity from Suit); Laws of Preferential Application; Laws which exempt certain individuals from criminal prosecution such as members of Congress are immune from libel, slander and defamation for every speech made in the House of Congress during a regular or special session. Example; X, the head of state Japan, went to the Philippines for a working visit. X was summoned to Malacañang. However, the driver of X was not feeling well so instead, X drove himself to Malacañang. X drove the vehicle in a reckless manner. As a result, he hit and killed an innoc ent pedestrian. Q: May X be prosecuted? A: No. As a head of state, X enjoys blanket immunity from prosecution.

*Consuls – not among those who enjoy the diplomatic immunity from suit

Sy , Anne Rose Rose De Guia, Guia, Ma. Althea Althea Raypon, Raypon, J-ann Javillonar Javillonar & Maria Maria Maica Angelika Roman] [Maria Aurora Mon, Carmel Liria, Gretchen Sy , Updated by Anonymous Lawyer (https://www.facebook.com/Anonymouslawer/)

Trusted by over 1 million members

Try Scribd FREE for 30 days to access over 125 million titles without ads or interruptions! Start Free Trial Cancel Anytime.
























2

Generally, consuls are subject to penal laws of the country where they are assigned unless there is a treaty or an agreement between the home country of the consul and the country where he is designated stating that the consul is immune from the criminal jurisdiction of the host country.

2.1 Basis of criminal liability is man’s social environment ;  “All men are born good, they only become evil due to the influence of the community.”  Crimes are a social phenomenon;

Example; A is an employee in ADB, a foreigner economist. A Filipino filed an oral defamation against the foreigner economist. The DFA issued a letter and protocol to the court which states that ADB and PH has an agreement that the ADB economist is immune from suit. The SC held that it was erroneous that there was a decision immediately to dismiss the case without adducing any evidence, without informing the fiscal. SC ruled that diplomatic immunity is only applied in the exercise of one’s function, but in this defamation case, it immunity will not lie. Evidence first must be gathered to determine if the act was done in the exercise of one’s functions. (Liang v. People, G.R. No. 125865. January 28, 2000)



TERRITORIALITY Penal laws shall be applicable only within the Philippine jurisdiction including its atmosphere, internal waters, etc; General Rule Crimes committed outside the Philippine jurisdiction cannot be under Philippine courts. Exception; Art. 2 of the Revised Penal Code provides situations where the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the Revised Penal Code may be applied. PROSPECTIVITY Penal laws Penal laws shall only be applied from the time of effectivity. It be given retroactive application unless; 1. If penal laws are favorable to the accused provided that the is not a habitual criminal; and 2. If the penal laws allow retroactivity; Philosophies under the Criminal Law System 1. Classical/ Juristic Philosophy; 2. Positivist/ Realistic Philosophy; 3. Mixed/Eclectic; CLASSICAL/JURISTIC PHILOSOPHY 3.1 Basis of criminal activity is human free will ;  Man is a moral creature which understands right from wrong;  When he commits a wrong, he voluntarily does the same, therefore, he shall be ready for the consequences of his acts

1.2 Purpose of penalty is Retribution;  Evolves from the maxim “an eye for an eye.” therefore, for every crime committed, there is a corresponding penalty

2.2. Purpose of penalty is for purposes of rehabilitation; Offender is a socially sick individual who need to be corrected not to be punished; 2.3. Determination of penalty is done on the case to case basis

2.4. Emphasis of the law is on the offender and not to the offense;  ...on the criminal not on the crime;  great regard to the human element of the crime;  takes into consideration why the offender committed the crime; CLASSICAL PHILOSOPHY Basis of criminal activity is human free will ; Purpose of penalty is Retribution; Determination of penalty is done mechanically; Emphasis is on the crime and not on the criminal;

4.

POSITIVIST PHILOSOPHY Basis of criminal liability is man’s social environment ; Purpose of penalty is for purposes of rehabilitation; Determination of penalty is done on the case to case basis; Emphasis of the law is on the offender and not to the offense;

MIXED/ECCLECTIC PHILOSOPHY  Crimes which are heinous/obnoxious in nature-classical  Crimes which are social/economic – positivist

* The Revised Penal Code adheres to Classical philosophy; Merely copied from Spanish...French espoused classical;



Although RPC is molded with classical philosophy, the amendments are geared toward the positivist philosophy; Example;  Indeterminate Sentence Law – – once served the minimum of his penalty, eligible for parole (rehabilitation);  Probation Law – 6 years and below, probation report to probation officer;  RA 9346 –abolished death penalty; THEORIES/RULES CONCERNING CRIMINAL LAW; The following are the theories concerned with Criminal Law; 1. Utilitarian. Protective theory; 2. Doctrine of Pro Reo; 3. Lenity Rule; 4. Equipoise Rule;
























3

Potential wrongdoer was not Magno rather it was Mrs. Teng. She should not have deposited the check upon withdrawing the machineries. She was the one who acted in bad faith.

There are no common law crimes in the Philippines since the Philippines is a civil law country . Penal laws are enacted. They do n ot evolve through time;

Q: Should Magno should be convicted of violation of B.P. 22? A: NO. If Magno will be the one to be punished, then it will bring about opportunism. Magno was acquitted on the ground of good faith.

--xXx--

Doctrine of Pro Reo Penal laws should always be construed liberally in favor of the accused and strictly against the state. Lenity Rule Whenever a penal law or a provision of penal law is susceptible of 2 interpretations, the one lenient to the accused which will bring about acquittal and the other one strictly against the accused which will bring about conviction, the lenient interpretation shall prevail.

Maxim: In case of doubt, rule always for the accused; Constitution: Unless proven guilty, deemed innocent. “Guilt must be proven.” Equipoise Rule Whenever the evidence of the prosecution is equally balanced with the evidence of the defense, the scales of justice shall be titled towards the accused;

Reason: Presumption of innocence; Prosecution has the burden of proving conviction beyond reasonable doubt. Conviction based on the strength of the evidence of the accused. Example; Police officers received a tip from a credible source that a person wearing white shirt and blue shorts will arrive at bus terminal in Cubao at 10pm carrying shabu. Acting thereon, the police officers arrived at the bus station and waited. When a man wearing white shirt and blue shorts came out of the bus, the police immediately frisked and searched the man. A white crystalline substance was found in his possession which was identified as shabu by the crime lab. During the trial, the defense presented two witnesses who were passengers of the same bus with the a ccused, and seated beside him. The witnesses said that they did not see the police officer frisked a nd searched the accused. Furthermore, they did not see any drugs apprehended from the accused. How should the judge rule the case?

The Judge should rule in favor of the accused. Under the equipoise rule, when the evidence of the prosecution and the defense is equally balanced, justice should be tilted in favor of the accused. Q: What if what has performed was a perverted/immoral act but

Article 1. Time when Act takes effect. — This Code shall take effect on the first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-two.

RPC took effect on January 1, 1932 passed into law on December 8, 1930. --xXx-Article 2.Application of its provisions. - Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction, against those who: 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship; 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands; 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding number; 4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the exercise of their functions; or 5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code. Art. 2 of the RPC has 2 scopes of application ; 1. Intraterritorial application – application – Intraterritorial application provides that the RPC shall enforced within the Philippine archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone; 2. Extraterritorial application; Q: What does the phrase ‘Except as provided in the t reaties and laws of preferential application’ mean? mean? A: This phrase means treaties entered with other countries, laws of

preferential palliation takes preference over the provision of the RPC.  Therefore, if there is any conflict between any agreements entered into by the Philippines with another country, if it is in conflict with any provisions of the RPC, the said agreement shall prevail over the provision of RPC. *Remember the Larranaga case, based on the RPC, a person who is convicted of a crime shall serve his sentence in the New Bilibid prison, that is the national penitentiary. However, the Philippines entered into an agreement with Spain. This agreement was ratified by the Senate. As a result thereof, after Larranaga has been convicted of























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Example; Many heads of state arrived here for the 2017 Ms. Universe. Among these was Pres. X, of X state. He found Ms Portugal very attractive and invited her to a date in a hotel. Afterwards, Pres. X raped her. Q: Can Pres. X be prosecuted for rape? A: YES. Immunity is NOT absolute, limited only to official functions. As rape is outside of the functions of the head of state, Pres. X may be prosecuted here. Example; Pres. X was driving his car on his way to the pageant, and he hit a pedestrian, who died. Q: May Pres. X be prosecuted? A: No. This time he is perfor ming official functions, thus he cannot be prosecuted in Philippine courts. EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION: There are 5 instances where the Revised Penal Code shall take effect outside the Philippine Territory; 1st : Those who should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship. Q: When is it a Philippine ship or airship? A: If it’s registered in the Philippines and under the Philippine laws. Even if totally or wholly owned by a Filipino citizen, if it is not registered in the Philippines it cannot be considered as a Philippine ship/airship. It is only upon registration that this aircraft/vessel can fly the Philippine flag. Therefore, it is registration which is the operative act which makes it a Philippine ship/airship.

This is a situation where a crime is committed on board a Philippine vessel while it is outside Philippine territory but not in the territory of another country. Q: If a Philippine vessel is on waters of the Philippines, and a crime was committed on board. What country will have jurisdiction? A: Obviously, the Philippines. Q: What if that Philippine Vessel is on the high seas or international waters and a crime was committed on board the said Philippine Vessel. What country will have jurisdiction over the said crime? A: Still the Philippines. Because of the extraterritorial application of the RPC. It is the situation referred to as the 1st circumstance under paragraph 2 of Art. 2. It is the situation where the Philippine ship is outside the Philippine territory but not in the territory of another country. Q: What if the Philippine Vessel is on the waters on Malaysia and a crime was committed on board. What co untry will have jurisdiction? A: Malaysian courts will have the jurisdiction because of the

4 that is the Intraterritorial application of the RPC because it is as the crime is committed within the Philippine territory; Jurisdictional Rules for Merchant Vessels There are two jurisdictional rules for merchant vessels; 1. French Rule; 2. British Rule; French Rule The French Rule states that crimes committed on board while the foreign vessel is on the water of another country is within the jurisdiction of the flag country . That is the country where the country is registered; Exception; when the crime committed affects the public order, the peace and security of the host country, then the host country will have jurisdiction over the said crime. Therefore, the French Rule Rule recognizes the jurisdiction of the country where the vessel is registered.

French Rule = flag country English Rule The English Rule states that when a crime is committed on board a foreign merchant vessel while on the waters of another country it is the host country which which will have jurisdiction over the said crime; Exception; When the crime merely affects the internal management of the vessel, then it is the flag country which will have jurisdiction. In eff ect, the English Rule is territorial in nature.

*Philippines adhere to the English Rule which is strictly territorial in nature. Example; A foreign merchant vessel is on Manila Bay. A crime was committed on board, the Philippines will have jurisdiction over the said crime and criminal because we follow the English Rule. 2nd : Those who should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands. 3rd : Those who should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding number. Example; So X was in Japan. He counterfeited Philippine coins. He then introduced these coins in to the Philippine Islands. Although the crime has been committed in Japan, he can be held liable before Philippine courts. This is necessary in order to maintain and preserve the























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] This refers to public officers or employees who are working in another country, while they are working, they committed a crime. The crime committed by this public officers or employees must be in connection with the exercise of their functions. If the crime they committed is not connected with with the exercise of their functions, then they should be prosecuted in the courts of the country where they are assigned; Example; OFW who lost his passport, he went to the Philippine Embassy in Japan applying for a new passport. He has been going there back and forth that it has not it was not yet approved or it was not yet released. On his way out, he saw the approving authority (AA). He talked to AA requesting and begging him that it be immediately approved and released. He was invited to a coffee shop, while having coffee, AA asked $500 from him and promised on that same afternoon, his passport would be released. So the poor OFW gave the $500. Q: Where may this AA be prosecuted? Before Philippine courts or before the courts of Japan? A: AA may be prosecuted before the Philippine courts. He did not commit in effect a crime in approving the said passport because it his obligation to approve the said passport. However, he would not perform his obligation without a bribe. He would not perform his function without the money given by the said OFW. So in effect, he committed bribery in its 2nd form – he performs an act not constituting a crime in connection with the exercise of his function in consideration of the bribe money. So here, he committed bribery, he can be prosecuted before Philippine courts. His act is in connection with the exercise of his functions.

What if instead of the AA, here comes a Filipino filing clerk (FC) inside the Philippine Embassy. The FC followed the OFW, the FC told him that he can facilitate the release of his passport if he will him $50. Desperate, the OFW gave him the money. However, that afternoon, the passport was still not released. He wanted to file a case against the FC. Q: Where can he file a case? Before courts of Japan or Philippines? A: It should be filed before the courts of Japan because the act performed by FC has nothing to do with the exercise of his official functions. In effect, what he has committed is estafa because he made this OFW believe that he has the authority to facilitate the release of the said passport but he d id not have such qualification. He committed estafa under Art.315 (2)(a). Therefore, he should be prosecuted before the courts of Japan. Example; There is this Philippine consul (PC). The PC told his secretary to work overtime. So S followed PC. In the evening, PC gave coffee to S. Unknown to S, there was something mixed in the coffee to make her unconscious. So after drinking the coffee, she became unconscious

5 the Philippine territory. Therefore, S should file the case before the Philippine courts because it is as if the crime was committed within the Philippine archipelago. The reason for this is the Intraterritorial application of the RPC. But if the rape was committed at any other place outside the Philippine Embassy, then PC should be prosecuted before the courts of Japan because rape is in no way connected with the exercise of his functions and a consul does not enjoy diplomatic immunity. 5th: Those who should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.

Crimes against National Security includes the f ollowing; 1. Treason; 2. Conspiracy/proposal to commit treason; 3. Misprision of treason; 4. Espionage; 5. enticing to war or giving motives for reprisals; If any of this crime is committed, even if it is done outside the Philippine archipelago the offender can be prosecuted before the Philippine courts. Crime committed against the Law of Nations include the following; 1. Piracy; 2. Qualified piracy; 3. Mutiny; and 4. Qualified mutiny Likewise, if the crime committed is against the Law of Nations the said offender can also be prosecuted before the Philippine courts; Example; A, B, C, D, and E are in America. They decided to over throw the government of the Philippines. In preparation for their plan, they bought guns, ammos, and grenades. However, before they can proceed with their plan, thy got cau ght. Q: Can A, B, C, D, and E be tried in the Philippines? A: NO. Their crime is conspiracy to commit rebellion which is a crime against public order, Title Three of the Revised Penal Code, thus they are outside the scope of extra-territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines under Article 2 of the RPC. Example; Accused A, B, C, D, and E were in America. At that time, America is at war with the Philippines. The accused decided to over throw the government of the Philippines. However, before they can overthrow the government, all the accused were caught. Q: Can A, B, C, D, and E be tried in the Philippines? A: YES. All the accused committed conspiracy to commit treason























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa). There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill. Felonies Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the RPC. When the law says ‘by law’, i t means the RPC. Acts Acts refer to any body movement which has a direct connection to the felony intended to be committed. It is an external act, an overt act in connection with the felony intended to be committed. Internal acts or mere criminal thoughts will never give rise to a crime; Example; A lust for his neighbor. Whenever the neighbor would pass by going to work, A would always look at the neighbor. And for the whole day, he would think of the n eighbor with nothing but lust. No matter how criminal his thoughts are it will never give rise to a crime because it is merely an internal unless he performs an external act or an overt act related to acts of lasciviousness or attempted rape or rape. The law requires an act.

6 FAULT (CULPA) Fault (culpa) or culpable felony exist when the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight or lack of skill; Elements; 1. Criminal negligence; 2. Freedom of action; 3. Intelligence;

Under Art. 365, a culpable felony is defined as one wherein the offender, although without malice or deliberate intent caused an injury to another by the means of negligence or imprudence. Therefore, even a culpable felony is a voluntary act; Voluntariness In so far as criminal law is concerned, voluntariness is actually the concurrence of the 3 elements of intentional felony and the concurrence of the 3 elements of culpable felony;

In other words, in so far as voluntariness of intentional felony is concerned, it is the concurrence of criminal intent, freedom of action and intelligence; Therefore, without voluntariness, there can neither be an intentional felony nor a culpable felony;

Omission Omission is the failure of a person to perform an act or to do a duty which is required by law.

Freedom There is freedom of action when the offender performs the act on his own free will, without force, duress, uncontrollable fear.

Example; If a person found, any personal property on the street or on any place and he failed to deliver the same to the owner or to the local authorities. Under Art.308 he becomes liable for theft. Or if a person was driving his vehicle, then he bumped and hit another person. And instead of helping that person, he increased his speed and left. It is a hit-and-run situation. Such fact that he failed to lend help and assistance to that victim will aggravate his criminal liability under Art. 365. So here, for failing to perform an act which is required by law to be done. He commits a felony. So felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the RPC.

So note if the offender performs the criminal act but he did the act because there was this compulsion and irresistible fear or under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear. There is no criminal liability. They are exempting circumstances under Art. 12 of the RPC because there is no freedom of action, an element of voluntariness. There is neither an intentional felony nor culpable felony because there is wanting of freedom of action, an element of voluntariness. Intelligence Intelligence is the mental capacity of a person to know wrong from right and to appreciate the cons equences of one’s act.

Kinds of Felonies 2 kinds of felonies that are may be committed under Art. 3; 1. Deceit (dolo); 2. Fault;

If the person acted without intelligence, there is no criminal liability. So if the criminal act has been committed by an insane, an imbecile or a minor, the said offender is said to be exempted from criminal liability.

DECEIT (DOLO) Deceit (Dolo) or intentional felony exist when the act is done with deliberate intent;

Under Art. 12, they are exempting circumstances, he is free of both intentional and culpable felony because he acted without intelligence, an element of voluntariness.

Elements: 1. Criminal intent on on the part of the offender;

INTENT Intent is the use of a p articular means to achieve the desired result;

























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] 2. 3. 4.

The nature, location, and number of wounds sustained by the victim; The conduct of the malefactors before, during, or immediately after the killing of the victim; and The circumstances under which the crime was committed and the motives of the accused;

Example; A was walking. Then here comes B with a lead pipe and hit the head of A with it. B hit it hard and thereafter ran away. A went to the hospital, however, based on the medical certificate no injury whatsoever was sustained by the head of A. So there was no injury. Nevertheless, A filed a case for attempted homicide against B. Therefore, intent to kill is incumbent to be proven by the pros ecution because the case filed is attempted homicide. Q: Will B be held liable for attempted homicide? Was there intent to kill? A: There was NO intent to kill. Let us apply in this case the factors to determine whether intent is present; Q: Was there motive? A: NO. In the problem, there was no motive. Q: What was the nature and number of weapon used? A: B used a lead pipe. Q: What is the nature, number and location of wound inflicted on the victim? A: The victim did not sustain any wound despite the fact that it was hit with a lead pipe. Q: What was the manner of committing the crime? A: After hitting A once, B ran away. If he had intended to kill the victim, he would have hit A several times. Q: What were the act, deeds and words made by the offender before, during or after the commission of the crime? A: He just saw the victim, hit the victim thereafter ran away. All of these would show there was no intent to kill on the part of said offender.

7 The prosecution does not have the burden to prove it;

Therefore, it must be proven by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt;

Example; Intent to kill must be proven in frustrated/attempted homicide. A and B were fighting. A was losing and so A shot B. B was hit on the left arm. He was brought to the hospital. Thereafter, after B’s release from the hospital, he filed a case against A for attempted homicide. Since the case filed is attempted homicide. The prosecution has the burden of proving intent to kill on the part of A when he shot B and hit him on the left arm. Otherwise, if the prosecution failed to prove intent to kill on the part of A. Then A can only be convicted of serious/less serious/slight physical injuries depending on the date required for medical intervention or he should be acquitted of the crime. Intent to kill must be proven.

But what if in the course of their fight, A was losing and so A took out his pistol and he shot B. B was shot on the heart, a fatal wound, a mortal wound was sustained because it was a vital organ which was hit. A immediately bought B to the hospital. However, upon arrival, he was pronounced dead. Therefore, the heirs of B filed a case for homicide against A. A’s defense, I have no intention to kill B. According to him, he only intended to threaten B because they were fighting. Q: Will A’s defense stand in court? A: NO. A’s defense that he has not intent to kill B will not lie. The reason is since the victim died, intent to kill becomes a General Criminal Intent which is presumed by law. Prosecution need not p rove intent to kill in homicide, parricide, murder, infanticide because the victim died. It is only in the attempted and frustrated stages of the HPMI wherein intent to kill is considered an element. Q: Why is it only in the consummated stage of Homicide, Patricide, Murder, Infacnticide that intent to kill is presumed? A: Because the best evidence to prove intent to kill is that the victim died. So it is presumed by law. Q: Is there a defense to negate criminal intent? A: YES. The accused may plead mistake of fact























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Example; City mayor (CM) was jogging near the seashore. Here comes X who went to CM and him. CM was not in the performance of his official duty when he was shot. Therefore, the act of X in killing and shooting CM may result to variant crimes depending on the motive, depending on the reason of X of killing. If the reason is a personal grudge/vendetta, murder is committed. But if the reason is because of CM’s past performance of his duty, then the crime committed is direct assault with homicide. Example; There are so many suspects, A, B, C, D and E. There’s doubt as to who among the committed the crime. Then motive will become material in determining the criminal liability of the offender. Example; Who was the last person s een together with the victim before he was killed? Why was he with the victim at that time? What could be the motive behind the kill? All of these must be taken into consideration because there was no eyewitness, no direct evidence in the commission of the crime.

*Motive alone, however strong, will never bring about conviction. But motive and circumstantial evidence, or motive and supporting evidence is necessary for c onviction. People v. Mapalo (G.R. No.172608, February 6, 2007) SC convicted him only of ill treatment of another by deed, a form of slight physical injury. Ill treatment of another by deed is the circumstance wherein a person was hit or there was injury caused to the person but there was no intent. Q: How do you prove Motive? A: Motive is proved by the testimony of the witnesses as to the acts or statements made by the accused before or immediately after the commission of the crime. Example; Before the killing of A, a witness saw B threatening to kill A. Therefore, B would have the motive because of his acts prior to the commission of the crime. Or right after the killing of A, a witness saw B running away from the scene of the crime laughing saying “finally, I have my

8 immediately after the commission of the crime; MISTAKE OF FACT is the misapprehension of facts on the person who Mistake of Fact is caused injury to another.

If a person acted under mistake of fact, he is absolved of criminal liability because he acted without criminal intent. That is, had the facts been as he believed them to be, his act done would have been lawful and justifiable. Elements of Mistake of Fact Before one may be absolved of criminal liability for having acted under mistake of fact, the following are elements: 1. That the act done would have been lawful and justifiable had the facts been what the accused believed them to be Had it been as he believed, the act performed would’ve amounted to a justifying or exempting circumstance; 2. That the intention of the accused in doing the act must be lawful - The must be ignited by a noble or lawful or justifiable intent 3. That the mistake must be without fault, negligence, careless on the part of the offender - The offender cannot be negligent in ascertaining the true facts of the case and at the same time invoke mistake of fact; Q: Can a mistake of fact be used as a defense against culpable felony? A: NO. One of the elements of Mistake of Fact is that the intent must be lawful. Since intent is not an element in culpable felonies, then mistake of fact cannot be used as a efense. US v. Ah Chong (G.R. No. L-5272 March 19, 1910.) Ah Chong was acquitted because he acted under mistake of fact. [M’Garcia: BUT that was because the case was decided a long time ago. If the case is decided now, I doubt if there will be an acquittal. Let’s go by the elements: 2nd and 3rd elements are present.

However, the 1st element is wanting - that the act done would have been lawful and justifiable had the facts been as the accused believed them to be - the victim was only trying to enter.























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Q: Will his defense of mistake of facts lie in his favor? A: NO. The 1st element is wanting. Granting for argument that what X was picking was the gun, it will not constitute unlawful aggression because the gun was not yet pointed at A. it will not yet bring an immediate danger on the life of A. Also, the 3rd element is wanting. A was negligent, there was fault or carelessness on his part in ascertaining the true facts of the case. He was asking for the license and X said he has one. Definitely, what would be shown to him would be the license not the gun. Yapyucu v. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 120744-46, June 25, 2012) Yapyucu were members of the Police stationed in Pampanga. They received a tip that NPA were spotted near their vicinity. Thus, Yapyucu and his men convened in a nearby road to wait for the alleged vehicle of the NPA. Upon seeing a Tamaraw Jeep reportedly containing NPA soldiers, Yapyucu and his men immediately open shot the jeep. As a result, Licup, one of the passengers of the jeep, died, and another one, Villanueva, was injured. Upon closer inspection of the jeep, it was later found out that the passengers were not members of the NPA, and that they were not armed. An information for homicide was filed against Yapyuco. Yapyucu on the other hand, pleaded mistake of facts. He argued that had the passengers been members of the NPA, he would have been justified in firing at them. Q: Is the contention Yapyucu justified? A: NO. The 1st element of Mistake of fact is that the act done would have been lawful had they been what the offender believed them to be. In this case, even if the passengers were members of the NPA, the accused was not justified in firing at them absent of any reason to believe that their lives were in danger. Also, the 3rd element of Mistake of fact is that the mistake must be without fault, negligence, or carelessness of the offender. In this case, the accused could have been more prudent in the exercise of his functions. He could have stopped the jeep to ascertain the passengers. Likewise, even if the jeep did not stop, they could have pur sued the jeep seeing as they have an available car and the jeep was moving in a slow speed due to the potholes in the road.

The Supreme Court convicted the accused of homicide and denied their defense of mistake of fact. Q: Can a crime be committed without criminal intent?

9 Example; Killing another, taking the thing of another; MALA IN SE Inherently evil, wrong per se;

Criminal liability is based on the intent or morality of the offender; Good faith or lack of criminal intent is a valid defense; Modifying circumstances such as mitigating and aggravating are considered by the court in the imposition of penalty;

Degree of participation of the offender (principal, accomplice, or accessory) is considered in the imposition of the penalty;

Stage (attempted, frustrated, or consummated) is taken into consideration in the imposition of the penalty;

MALA PROHIBITA Not inherently evil or wrong; Criminal liability is based on the mere doing of the prohibited act; Good faith or lack of criminal intent is not a valid defense; Modifying circumstances such as mitigating and aggravating are NOT considered by the court in the imposition of penalty UNLESS otherwise provided by Special Penal Law; Degree of participation by the offender is NOT considered. All perpetrators of the act are equally punished UNLESS otherwise provided by the Special Penal Law; The only stage considered is the consummated stage. No attempted or frustrated stage UNLESS otherwise provided by the Special Penal Law;

**Not all acts punishable by special penal laws are mala prohibita!! There are some special penal laws which punish acts mala in se, e.g. plunder is a special penal law yet the SC said plunder is malum in se. criminal intent matters. Garcia v. CA (G.R. No. 157171 March 14, 2006) Garcia was the head of the board of canvassers. The number of votes of Sen. Pimentel was decreased. In decreasing the number of votes, the said votes were not added to any candidate. So it did not favor any candidate. So according to him, he acted in good faith, no criminal intent. But according to the other side, it is a special penal law, therefore they should be held criminally liable.























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] People the Supreme Court held that that A: NO. In the case of Loney v. People intent is a material element in acts mala prohibita, on the other hand intent is immaterial in acts mala prohibita. Lonely v. People (G.R. No. 152644, February 10, 2006) Lonely and company, the head of marcopper company were charged 4 cases – violation of the water code of the Philippines, violation of the Philippine mining act, violation of national pollution control se – degree – all three are acts mala prohibita and one act malum in se – that is violation of Art.365 reckless imprudence resulting to damage to property. Their contention was that the 3 other information involving violation of special penal law should already be quashed because they are absorb by Art. 365. Anyway, the incident resulted from the same act of polluting. Q: Should reckless imprudence resulting to damage to property under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code absorb the violation of special penal laws? A: NO. Acts mala in se cannot absorb acts mala prohibita. What makes an act malum in se is the presence of intent, deceit or dolo or fault or culpa. On the other hand, what makes an act malum prohibitum is the fact that it’s in violation of a special penal law. Therefore, one cannot absorb the other. So they have to be prosecuted on all 4 cases. Example; X killed B with the use of motor vehicle. X hit and bumped B. X was charged with murder. So the information charges an intentional felony of murder. Trial on merits ensued, after the prosecution presented evidence, the defense presented evidence. The defense was able to show, to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the reason for the said act of killing B was because X lost control of his brake. Therefore, according to them, there was only imprudence and so X should only be held liable for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide. The judge believed the defense. So in an information for an intentional felony of murder, the said court convicted X only of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide, a culpa ble felony. Q: Is the judge correct? Can the judge convict a person of a culpable felony in an information that charges him of intentional felony? A: Yes. The reason is that a culpable felony is necessarily included in an intentional felony because a culpable felony is of lesser offense than that of intentional felony.

10 Proximate Cause - Proximate cause is the cause that sets in to motion all other causes and which unbroken by efficient intervening cause produces the felony without which the felony would have not been committed.

For one to be criminally liable under the Proximate Cause doctrine, it is necessary that the felonious act and the resulting felony must not be broken by any efficient intervening cause. No efficient or supervening intervening cause must have broken the causal connection between the felonious act of the offender and the resulting felony. Elements; In the case of Garcia v. People (G.R. No. 171951, August 28, 2009) , The Supreme Court enumerated the following elements of proximate cause: 1. The intended act is a felonious act; intended act is 2. The resulting act is is a felony; 3. The resulting act is the direct, natural and logical consequence of the felonious act of the offender;

Therefore, for one to be criminally liable under the Proximate Cause doctrine, it is necessary that the offender is performing a felonious act and since he is performing a felonious act, he becomes liable for all the resulting crime although different from that which he intended. Provided that the resulting felony is the direct, natural and logical consequence of his felonious act. Otherwise stated, his felonious act must be the proximate cause of the resulting felony. For one to be criminally liable under the Proximate Cause doctrine, it is not necessary that the offender should have even touch the body of the victim. It suffices that the felonious act performed by the offender has generated in in the mind of the victim, fear for his life. By reason of that fear for his life the victim performed acts, made risk that injured himself. The accused will become criminally liable. Example; B and G were boyfriend and girlfriend respectively. During their relationship, B promised G that he would marry her. One day, B told G that she should wait for him outside the church at 7pm that night so they could get married. However, instead of showing up, B sent G























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Q: Is G liable for the death of the pedestrian by virtue of the proximate cause? A: NO. Under the Revised Penal Code, committing suicide is not considered a felony. EFFICIENT INTERVENING CAUSE (EIC) Efficient Intervening Force is an active force which is a distinct act absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the offender.

In order that an act is considered an Efficient Intervening Cause, it is necessary that it is totally foreign from the felonious act that is performed by the offender; Proximate Cause is not always the immediate cause. At times it may be a remote cause; Example; A was driving his car along SLEX followed by B, by C, by D, by E. When A reached the tollgate, he stopped to pay the toll, so B stopped as well as C and D. E however was very sleepy, he d id not put to stop so he hit D, D hit C, C hit B, B hit A. Because of the impact the car of A sustained serious damage. Q: What is the proximate cause of the damage sustained by the car of A? A: The Proximate Cause was E because it was the car of E which sets into motion all other cars to bump each other. It was not the immediate cause because the immediate cause was the car of B because it is the car of B which hit the car of A. So a PC is not always the immediate cause, at times it may be the remote cause. Example; A bus was going to Quezon, suddenly 4 men boarded a bus, 2 man seated at front seats and the other 2 seated at back. While they were traversing a zigzag portion on the road, the 4 men stood up and announced a hold up. One passenger was so afraid of the robber as he had a previous experience of robbers. He was so afraid that he opened a window and he jumped out of a window, he fell on a cliff and he died. Q: Are the robbers liable for the death of the passenger? A: Yes. The robbers in announcing a holdup are committing a

11 Q: Is X criminally liable for the death of the boy? A: YES. First element, the intended act is a felonious act. He was not committing a felonious act. He was just acting his right when he said he will call the police considering that the boys were taking his mangoes, they were committing theft. Therefore, he was just acting within his right. Since X was not committing a felonious act, he cannot be held criminally liable for the resulting felony.

* So if you are given a problem, the first thing you should do is to determine if the person is committing a felonious act. If not, a person cannot be held liable for the resulting felony. If he is, then he is liable for the resulting felony. Example; In the same case, X told the boys, if you will not come down I have here my shotgun, I will shoot each one of you and he fired shots in the air. The boys were so afraid and hurriedly went down, one of them jumped, fell and suffered serious physical injuries because of his broken legs. Q: Is X criminally liable for the injuries sustained by the boy? A: NO. Because this time he was committing a felonious act. He was threatening to shoot the children. It is a felonious act amounting to grave threats. Therefore, this time he is criminally liable for the resulting felony although different from that which he intended.

* For one to be criminally liable under the Proximate Cause Doctrine, it is necessary that there is no efficient intervening cause that has broken the chain between the felonious act and the resulting felony. Example; A and B, they are boyfriend and girlfriend respectively. The A promised to marry B that night. B waited in vain, however, A did not arrive. Instead B received a text message saying that A would not be able to come, and could not marry B because A is already a married man with 5 children. So B became so sad. Frustrated, she began crying terribly and went out of the house, walked on the streets, not on her own rightful self. She fell on a canal and she died. Q: Is A the boyfriend, liable for the death of B? A: NO. It is a settled rule that breach of promise to marry is not a felonious act. Since B was not committing a felony, therefore, he

























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] woman, therefore, the said woman may be held liable for simple negligence resulting to homicide for the death of the said child. People vs. Villacorta (G.R. No. 186412, August 28, 2009) January 23, 2002, there was a stabbing incident. Cruz was stabbed by Villacorta on the left side of his body with a sharpened bamboo stick. He was brought to the Tondo Medical Center. He was released on the very same day as out patient because his wound was not fatal. February 14, 2002 he was brought to San Lazaro Hospital. He was already suffering from tetanus infection. A day after February 15 he died. The cause of his death was tetanus infection. Villacorta was prosecuted for the crime of homicide for the death of Cruz. The lower court convicted him. Q: Is the accused liable for homicide? A: NO. Supreme Court: Citing Urbano case, he cannot be convicted of the crime of homicide. Based on the expert testimony of the doctor, the incubation period of the tetanus virus is within 14 days. In the case, it took the victim 22 days before he died. Therefore the stab wound was without tetanus virus. Cruz may have performed acts which brought about the tetanus virus. The stabbing was only a remote cause and the tetanus infection was the proximate infection which brought about the death of the victim.

So Villacorta was only convicted of slight physical injuries because they were not able to prove intent to kill. First, no evidence of motif. Second nature and number of weapon used. A sharpened bamboo stick, not even a little weapon made of metal. Third, the nature, number and location of wound. It was only on the left side of the body. Fourth, manner of committing the crime. After one stabbing,

12 precisely he needed medical intervention, he needed treatment of the doctor because he sustained a stab wound from A. Therefore, there is a connection between the felonious act and the medical treatment. It there for cannot be considered as an EIC. The doctors negligence would only make him liable administratively but not criminally. Example; A and B were friends. After far ming while they were having a drinking spree, they had a political discussion, A was pro Pnoy and B was pro GMA. Their agreement heated, B stood up and broke a bottle of beer, stabbed A. A was wounded. They par ted ways. A was on his way home when suddenly it rained. After it rained there was lightning and A was hit by lightning. A died. The heirs of A filed a case of homicide against B. Q: Is B criminally liable for the death of A? A: NO. Under the proximate cause doctrine, B is not criminally liable for the death of A because there was an EIC that is the lightning. The lightning was an active force which is a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the offender which was the stabbing of the victim. Therefore he cannot be held liable for the death of A but only physical injuries sustained by the victim. 3 SITUATIONS WHEREIN A PERSON BECOMES CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR THE RESULTING FELONY ALTHOUGH DIFFERENT FROM THAT WHICH HE INTENDED: 1. Abberatio Ictus (Mistake in the blow) 2. Error in Personae (Mistake in the identity); 3. Praeter intentionem;























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] or less grave felonies, we have compound crime or a complex crime. Thus, the crime committed by X is Murder with attempted murder because it results from the single act of the crime. Q: In the same case as mentioned above, the tricycle driver survived but sustained a mortal wound. What crime may be charged to X? A: As to Y, X is liable for attempted murder. As to the tricycle driver, X is liable for serious Physical injuries only because there is no intent to kill on his part. Q: What if when the tricycle driver was hit by the bullet, he only sustained a slight physical injury which is a light felony, are you going to complex? A: NO. This time you cannot complex because under Art. 48, you can only complex grave and less grave felonies. You cannot complex a light felony. Therefore, there would be 2 cases filed separately. Attempted murder murder in so far as B is concerned. Slight physical injury in so far as C is concerned. So 2 informations, 2 cases must be filed in the court. People v. Flora (G.R. No. 125909, June 23, 2000). Hermogenes Flora and his brother Edwin Flora were in a party. In that party, they saw Ireneo Gallarte, the uncle of their enemy Villanueva. As a revenge against Villanueva, the brothers shot Gallarte, but because of poor aim, they hit Flor Espinas and killed Emerita Roma. However, the brothers succeeded in killing Gallarte. Q: What is the liability of the brothers to the deceased Gallarte and Roma? A: As to Gallarte and Roma, the Supreme Court held that the brothers

13 ERROR IN PERSONAE Error in Personae is a situation wherein the victim actually received the bullet but he was mistaken to be the intended victim. The intended victim was not at the scene of the crime. Effects The effect of error error in personae depends on the variance between the intended crime and the actual crime committed;

Mitigating - If there is variance between the penalty of of the intended crime and the penalty of the actual crime committed, the lesser between the two shall apply; penalty between If there is no variance between the penalty of of the intended crime and the crime actually committed, then it will not affect the criminal liability of the offender; Example; A and B were fighting. A punched B so hard, he fell o n the ground, his face facing the ground. A left the scene of the crime. At that precise moment when A left, here comes the father of B who saw his poor son boxed by A so he came to the rescue of his son and went near him. To retaliate, B took out his balisong and stabbed the person next to him thinking that it was still his opponent A but in truth it was already his father. Let's say the father died. Q: What was the intended crime committed by B? A: B intended to commit homicide because he intended to kill A, the person who boxed him.























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] friend of B arrived a nd was the one stabbed by B and died. Therefore, B killed his own best friend. The crime committed is homicide. Q: What was B’s intended crime? A: B intended to commit homicide. Q: What crime did B actually commit? A: B actually committed homicide because he killed his own best friend. Q: What crime would you charge him of? A: B should be charged of Homicide because that was his actual crime. Q: After trial on the merits what penalty will you impose? A: The penalty to be imposed against B is the penalty for homicide because there is no variance between the intended felony and the felony actually committed. In this case, Error in Personae will not mitigate the liability of the offender. Art. 49 will not apply. PRATER INTENTIONEM Praeter intentionem occurs when the consequence went beyond the intention or when the injurious result is greater than that intended. Praeter Intetionem is a situation wherein the offender directed the blow at his actual victim, the victim received the blow. However, the injurious result is far greater than what is intended by the victim. Effect Praeter Interionem it is always a mitigating circumstance because of Art. 13 of the Revised Penal Code;

14 A: YES. because no one could have foreseen that the mere act of elbowing the W, death would result. There was a notable disparity between the means employed, the act of elbowing the W, and the resulting felony which is death or parricide. Therefore, he should be given the benefit of mitigating circumstance. Garcia vs. People (G.R. No. 171951) Accused Garcia was having a karaoke with his friends late at night when deceased Chy requested the accused to quiet down. Thereafter, accused vowed to kill Chy one day. On one instance, the accused saw the deceased in a sari-sari store. Suddenly, the accused hit the victim in the nape with a bottle of beer and thereafter mauled him. The deceased was able to escape and called his wife to call for police. When his wife returned, the Chy was already lying in the floor lifeless. Autopsy report concludes that Chy died from a heart attack brought about by emotional stress. The accused was charged with the crime of homicide. Q: Should the accused be convicted for the crime of homicide? A: YES. His act of mauling him was the proximate cause of his heart attack. However, he was given the benefit of Praeter intentionem. Who would have anticipated that the mere act of mauling or boxing him, death would result. Therefore, there was Praeter intentionem. People vs. Noel Sales (G.R. No. 177218). The accused Noel Sales beat his sons because they went out of the house for two days without permission. The accused tied one of his sons to a coconut tree and thereafter hit him with a thick piece of wood. Thereafter, the son experienced a difficulty in breathing, and his eyes were moving up and down. The son collapsed, and died.























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] The offender is being punished because of his criminality and dangerousness. So although objectively, no crime is committed, still the offender shall be punished that is why he is convicted only of Impossible Crime. The penalty of IC is only arresto mayor or a fine of P200-P500 depending on the criminality or dangerousness of the offender. Elements; For a person to be liable of Imposs ible Crime, the following requisites must concur; 1. That the act done would have been an offense against persons or property ; 2. That the act was done with evil intent; 3. That the act was not accomplished because of its inherent impossibility or the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means; 4. That the act done should not constitute any other violation of the Revised Penal Code; CRIMES AGAINST PERSON OR PROPERTY Under the Revised Penal Code, crimes against person includes the following; 1. Parricide; 2. Murder; 3. Homicide; 4. Abortion; 5. Infanticide; 6. Duel; 7. Physical injuries;

15 KINDS OF INHERENTLY IMPOSSIBILITY According to jurisprudence, there are two kinds of inherent impossibility; 1. Legal Impossibility; 2. Physical Impossibility; Legal Impossibility There is legal impossibility when all the intended acts even if committed would not have amounted to a crime. Example; X saw his enemy Y lying on a bench. He went to Y and stabbed Y 10 times not knowing that Y had already long been dead for 2 hours due to a heart attack. Even if X performed all the acts amounting to murder, still murder would not arise which is a crime a gainst persons because the victim is already deceased. He is no longer a person in the eyes of criminal law. Therefore there is I mpossible Cime and what we have is legal impossibility. Physical Impossibility Physical or Factual Impossibility exist when an extraneous circumstance unknown to the offender prevented the consignation of the crime. Here, there are circumstances unknown to the offender, the inadequate control of the offender which prevented the consignation of the crime. Example; A person placed his hands inside the pocket of the polo of another, intended to get the wallet of the said person but the pocket was empty. It is an IC. Extraneous Circumstances unknown to the offender























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Jacinto vs. People (G.R. No. 162540. July 13, 2009) A check which was supposed to b e remitted was not remitted by the offender to Megafoam. Instead the check was depositedto her own account. Since the check was not remitted, Megafoam filed a case of qualified theft against the employee. She was convicted before the lower court up to the CA. Q: Should the accused be convicted of theft if the check she stole was dishonored due to lack of funds? A: NO. The Supreme Court held that the crime committed was an Impossible Crime citing the case of Intod vs. CA. The act amounted to qualified theft. However, unknown to the said offender the check was not funded. Therefore, she was not able to get the face value of the said check. Hence, physical circumstances unknown to the offender prevented the consummation of the crime. We have physical or factual impossibility. Q: What about the fact that the check was taken and was not remitted to Megafoam? A: According to the Supreme Court, theft has been defined under Art. 308 as the taking of a property with intent to gain the personal property of another. Therefore it is necessary that the property taken must have value because the taking must be with intent to gain. The mere taking of a check without value would not amount to theft because the check without value is a worthless check. Hence, the SC said that the crime committed is only a n IC. --xXx-Art. 5. Duty of the court in connection with acts which

16 of some cause or accident other than this own spontaneous desistance. 2 Phases in the Commission of the crime There are always 2 phases in the commission of the crime; 1. Subjective phase; 2. Objective phase; Subjective Phase The subjective phase is the portion in the commission of the act wherein the offender commences the commission of the crime after the time that he still has control over his acts.

He may or may not proceed in the commission of the crime. He still has control over his acts Objective Phase From the moment the offender loses control over his acts, it is already in the objective phase of the commission of the crime. Stages in the Development of the Crime The following are the stages in the development of a crime; 1. Internal Acts; 2. External Act; Internal Acts Internal acts are not punishable. Mere criminal thoughts will never give rise to criminal liability. There must be an external act. External Act

























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] 2.

17

That he does not perform all acts of execution that would have produced the felony; That his act was not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance; That he was not able to perform all acts of execution by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance;

Baleros vs. People (G.R. No. 138033, February 22, 2006) The woman was awakened by a man pressing a cloth soaked with chemical on her face. The man was on top of her, she struggled, she was able to kick the man, the man jumped out of the window. She called on the guard and then everyone came up to her. The case filed against the man was attempted rape. The man was convicted up to the CA of attempted rape.

Overt Act refers to any external act which if allowed to continue will Overt Act refers naturally and logically ripen into a crime.

Q: Was there attempted rape? A: NO. The Supreme Court held that the overt act of pressing a cloth soaked with chemical on the face of a woman is not an overt act directly connected to rape. The obvious intent was to make the woman unconscious but once the woman is made unconscious, the man may rape, may touch the private parts of the woman, or he may injure the woman, or may rob the property of the woman. Therefore he cannot be held liable for attempted rape.

3. 4.

What the law requires is that the overt act must be directly connected to the intended felony. The offender commences the commission of the crime directly by overt act. Directly By Overt Acts Directly by Overt Acts means that the Overt Acts performed by the

When the overt act of a p erson is ambiguous in so far as the intended























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Q: Is X liable for any crime? A: YES. The crime committed was attempted homicide or murder as the case may be. Even if the victim was not hit, since the act of discharging the firearm was with intent to kill the victim, it was already in the attempted stage. Such act of firing the fire arm was already an OA directly connected to the act of ho micide or murder as the case may be. Example; In the same problem, X aimed the gun towards Y and pulled the trigger. Y was hit in the right shoulder. Y safely got away. Upon medical examination, the doctor said that Y’s wound will heal within 5 days. Q: What crime was committed by X against Y? A: X is liable for attempted homicide or murder as the case may be. The wound sustained was not fatal or not mortal. It requires another act for the crime to be consummated. No one would die by a non-

18 Example; X and Y are enemies. In one instance, X saw Y walking in the streets. X took out his gun from his house with the purpose of killing Y. X aimed the gun at Y. At that very moment, Y’s son ran towards Y. Upon seeing the son, X did not shoot Y. Q: What crime did X commit, if any? A: Nothing. Although X commenced the commission of killing Y through overt acts, X did not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony. Upon seeing the son of Y ran towards him, he voluntary and spontaneously desisted. Attempted Felony v. Impossible Crime ATTEMPTED FELONY IMPOSSIBLE CRIME In attempted felony, the crime In impossible crime, the felony may be accomplished; cannot be accomplishment; It is inherently impossible, or It is not accomplished by the means employed is spontaneous desistance;























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Q: Is A liable of attempted parricide? A: NO. He is not yet liable of attempted parricide. The act of buying poison, taking out of the plastic are only pre paratory act. It is not yet an overt act directly connected to parricide. He may use the poison not really to kill the father, he may use it to kill insects or pests. Therefore, he cannot be liable of attempted parricide. Example; A mixed the poison to the juice of the father and then he gave it to his father. The father was about to drink the juice with poison. However, since the father was clumsy, the glass fell from the hands of the father. Q: Is A liable of attempted parricide? A: YES. He already liable. The moment he poured the poison in the juice of the fa ther and he gave it to the fa ther for him to drink, he already performed an overt act directly connected to parricide. However, parricide was not consummated and he was not able to

19 A: The son is liable of physical injuries depending on the required medical intervention. 1-9 days slight physical injuries. 10 -30 days less serious physical injuries, more than 30 days serious physical injuries. NO FRSUTRATED THEFT In the case of People vs. Valenzuela (G.R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007) the Supreme Court held that there is no such thing as frustrated theft. Under Art. 308, theft is committed when the person takes the personal property of another with intent to gain without violence, force or intimidation upon persons or things without the consent of the owner.

Theft can admit only either an attempted and consummated stage because the moment the offender gains possession of the personal property of another, unlawful taking is a lready committed. Even if he has no opportunity to dispose of the property and the moment the unlawful taking is complete, theft is already























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Q: Is the woman liable of any crime? A: Yes. She is already liable of attempted theft. A note was posted on the glass shelf saying, do not open, ask for assistance. The moment she opened it with use of the key, it shows her intent to gain. It is on the attempted stage because she has not yet taken possession of the personal property of another. NO FRUSTRATED RAPE In the case of People v. Pareja (G.R. No. 188979, September 5, 2012) the Supreme Court held that rape is consummated by the slightest penile penetration of the labia majora or pudendum of the female organ. Without any showing of such penetration, there can be no consummated rape; at most, it can only be attempted rape or acts of lasciviousness.” Example; A woman was raped. She filed a case of rape against the man. In her open court testimony, she said she was not sure if the penetration

20 There is no intent to have carnal knowledge of the girl;

Intent to have carnal knowledge with the girl is evident;

MATERIAL CRIMES Material crimes are crimes which admits stages of attempted, frustrated, and consummated. FORMAL CRIMES Formal crimes are crimes which does not admit any stages. It only punishes a consummated stage.

The following are considered formal crimes; 1. Physical injuries; 2. Slander; 3. Adultery; --xXx--























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] General Rule – Rule – not punishable as an act; Exception – Exception – unless the law especially provides for their penalty; CONSPIRACY AS A CRIME If conspiracy or proposal to commit a crime are provided in penalties by law, it is not necessary that there be an overt act committed. The mere act of conspiring or proposing will already give rise to a crime.

The following are conspiracies as a crime; 1. Conspiracy to commit treason; 2. Conspiracy to commit rebellion; 3. Conspiracy to commit sedition; 4. Conspiracy to commit terrorism; (Special Penal Laws) It is not necessary that there be overt acts. They are punishable acts by themselves. Example;

21 Direct or Express Conspiracy There is direct or express conspiracy when the offenders or conspirators met, planned, agreed, decided to commit a crime. There is a preconceived plan prior to the commission of the crime.

For one to be criminally liable of direct or express conspiracy, the following elements must be present; 1. There is a prior agreement or or preconceived plan; 2. Presence at the time of the commission of the crime; Even if he is pa rt of the agreement if at the time of the commission of the crime he failed to appear, su ch failure on h is part to appear at the scene of the crime would be construed by law as a desistance. Therefore, even if he part of the agreement he will not be liable as a conspirator. Example; A, B and C decided to kill X on a particular date and time. On the said

























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Also, theft was committed in the absence of A and B. There was no opportunity for A and B to stop C in theft. Therefore, only C will be held liable for theft. Example; In the same problem, C took the valuables of X in the presence of A and B. While he was taking them, A said what about the cellphone, B

22 In People vs. Garchitorena (G.R. No. 131357, August 28, 2009) , the Supreme Court held that direct proof is not necessary for one to become a conspirator because conspiracy can be proven from the acts done or performed prior, during or subsequent to the commission of the crime. Example;























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Example; X was trying to stab Y. When Z saw that X was s tabbing Y he shouted "sige tirahin mo pa, sa kaliwa sa kanan..." X kept on stabbing Y. Q: Was there conspiracy between Z and X? A: NO. Absent any active participation, mere approval, mere acquiescence, mere knowledge of the commission of the crime will

23 2 KINDS OF MULTIPLE CONSPIRACY There are two kinds of multiple conspiracy; 1. Wheel or Circle Conspiracy; 2. Chain Conspiracy; Wheel or Circle Conspiracy Wheel or Circle Conspiracy exist when a single person or group of























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] A: YES. R.A. 9262 allows suppletory application of the Revised Penal Code. Hence. The i-laws may likewise be charged of violation of R.A. 9262 if they acted in conspiracy with the husband or the man. --xXx-Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave fe lonies and light felonies.

24 --xXx-Art. 11. Justifying circumstances. — The following do not incur any criminal liability: 1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that the following circumstances concur; First. Unlawful First. Unlawful aggression.
























25

Inverted Trial As a rule it is the prosecution that must first present evidence, it is only after the prosecution has presented evidence that the defense would present evidence.

Imminent unlawful aggression means an attack that is impending or at the point of happening; it must not consist in a mere threatening attitude, nor must it be merely imaginary, but must be offensive and positively strong

If however the defense invoke any of the justif ying circumstances, the trial will be inverted. It is the defense that must first present evidence.

Test for unlawful aggression In the same case of People v. Dulin, the Supreme Court held that that























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Sufficient Provocation Sufficient Provocation refers to an act which is adequate to stir a person to do the wrongful act and when it is proportionate to the gravity of the act. No Sufficient Provocation The following circumstances show that there is no sufficient

26 A: NO. There was no self-defense. The unlawful aggression already ceased to exist because the sexual congress was already finished. There was no more honor to protect. Q: If you were the judge, would you convict or acquit the accused? A: YES, I would convict the accused for the crime of homicide, but I will give the said victim the mitigating circumstances of immediate







































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Estafa through falsification of private document There is no estafa by falsification of private document. In estafa and falsification of private document, there is only an d the same damage contemplated by both felonies. Thus, only charge can be made, either falsification or estafa, otherwise the prohibition against the twice recovery for damages will be violated.

If estafa cannot be committed without falsification, the correct charge is falsification. Estafa is merely a consequence. If estafa can be committed without falsifying, the proper charge is estafa. Falsification is merely an incident of estafa. On the other hand, in falsification of public document, damage is not an element of the offense. Thus, the char ge of estafa thru falsification of public document may exist. SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME Special complex crimes exist when, in reality, two or more crimes are committed but in the eyes of law only one.

It is the law which provides what crimes would be complexed and what crimes go together; 1. Robbery with homicide; (Article 294) 2. Kidnapping with homicide; (Article 267 as amended by R.A. 7659) 3. Rape with homicide; (Article 266-B) Special Complex Crime v. Compound Crime SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME COMPOUND CRIME The law specifies the crimes Crimes are general; which are combined; Law provides for the penalty; The penalty for the most serious crime is imposed in the maximum period; Light felonies are absorbed; Light felonies committed is a separate and distinct charge; DELITO CONTINUADO. Delicto continuado or continuous crime is present when the offender is impelled by a single criminal impulse commits a series of o vert acts in about the same time and about the same place violating one and the same provision of law. Basis is singularity of impulse. Basis The basis is the singularity of impulse of the offender. Elements In the case of Santiago v. Garchtorena (G.R. No. 109266, December 2, 1993) the Supreme Court established the elements of delito continuado; 1. Plurality of acts performed during a period of time; 2. Unity of penal provisions violated; 3. Unity of criminal purpose or aim;

62 A: Crime committed is one charge of theft. X impelled by a single impulse committed overt acts leading to theft. Santiago v. Garchtorena (G.R. No. 109266, December 2, 1993) Petitioner Miriam Defensor-Santiago was charged in the Sandiganbayan with the Anti-Graft & Corrupt Practices Act for favoring 32 “unqualified” aliens with the benefits of the Alien Legalization Program. Defender-Santiago moved for a bill of particulars, contending that unless she be provided with the names and identities of the “aliens” she would not be able to adequately prepare for trial. Initially, the public prosecutors stated that they would file only one amended complaint, but they later filed 32 amended informations, separately naming each of the aliens in each of the informations. The Sandiganbayan admitted the 32 amended informations. Q: Was it correct to admit the 32 amended informations? A: NO. For delito continuado to exist there should be a plurality of acts performed during a period of time; unity of penal provision violated; and unity of criminal intent or purpose, which means that two or more violations of the same penal provisions are united in one and same instant or resolution leading to the perpetration of the same criminal purpose or aim. In this case, the 32 Amended Informations aver that the offenses were committed on the same period of time, i.e., on or about October 17, 1988. The strong probability even exists that the approval of the application or the legalization of the stay of the 32 aliens was done by a single stroke of the pen, as when the approval was embodied in the same document. CONTINUING CRIME OR TRANSITORY OFFENSE. In Continuing crime, the offender may be prosecuted in any courts of the place where any of the crime has been committed. This is more on remedial law not in criminal law. Example; X in payment of his obligation, issued a postdated check to Y in Manila, on the maturity date, Y deposited the check to his depositary bank in Quezon City. The check however was dishonored by the drawee bank in Caloocan City. Notice of dishonor was sent. X failed to make good the check. A complaint was filed against X for violation of B.P. 22. Q: Where may Y file the case for violation of BP 22? A: The complaint may be filed in any of the court where the elements of the crime occurred.

If the BP 22 case has already been filed in the MTC of Manila, the said case can no longer be filed before the MTC of Quezon City or Caloocan City. --xXx-Art. 46. Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general. — The penalty prescribed by law for the commission of a felony shall























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Penalty Imposed Under Article 46, when the law prescribes a penalty for a felony, it shall be understood to mean that such penalty shall be imposed upon principals of a consummated felony . --xXx-PENALTY IMPOSED UPON ACCESSORIES AND ACCOMPLICES (Articles 50-57) Articles 50-57 provides for penalties if the offender is a principal, accomplice or accessory whether or not the felony is consummated, frustrated, attempted. CONSUMMATED Penalty prescribed by law for the offense; PRINCIPALS

ACCOMPLICES

ACCESSORIES

A penalty lower by one degree than that prescribed by law for principal of a consummated felony; (Art. 52) A penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for principal of a consummated felony; (Art. 53)

FRUSTRATED The penalty lower by one degree than that prescribed by law for the principal of a consummate d felony; (Art. 50) The penalty lower by one degree than prescribed by law for the principal of a frustrated felony; (Art. 54) The penalty lower by two degrees than prescribed by law for the principals of a frustrated felony; (Art. 55

ATTEMPTED A penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for principal of a consummated felony; (Art. 51)

shall not be taken into account for the purpose of increasing the penalty. 2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof. 3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the moral attributes of the offender, or from his private relations with the offended party, or from any other personal cause, shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant. 4. The circumstances which consist in the material execution of the act, or in the means employed to accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of those persons only who had knowledge of them at the time of the ex ecution of the act or their cooperation therein. 5. Habitual delinquency shall have the following effects: (a) Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided by law for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision corr eccional in in its medium and maximum periods;

A penalty lower by one degree than that prescribed by law for principals of an attempted felony; (Art. 56)

(b) Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision mayor in in its minimum and medium periods; and

The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for principals of an attempted felony; (Art. 57)

Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the total of the two penalties to be imposed upon the offender, in conformity herewith, shall in no case exceed 30 years.

Exception Under Article 60, the provisions contained in Articles 50 to 57, inclusive, of this Code shall not be ap plicable to cases in which the law expressly prescribes the penalty provided for a frustrated or attempted felony, or to be imposed upon accomplices or accessories. --xXx--

63

(c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision mayor in in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in in its minimum period.

PARAGRAPH 1. The following aggravating circumstance shall not be taken into account for the purpose of increasing penalty; 1. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime specially punishable by law; or 2. Aggravating circumstances which are included by the law in in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor; 3. Aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof (Par. 2); Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime especially punishable by law.























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Aggravating circumstances which are included are included by the law in in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor; Example; 1. The crime be committed in the dwelling of the offended party is not aggravating in robbery with force upon things; (Art. 299) 2. Abuse of confidence is not qualified theft committed with grave abuse of confidence; (Art. 310) PARAGRAPH 2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of necessity accompany the commission thereof. Example; Evident premeditation is inherent in robbery and theft;

64 Example; A, as principal by induction, B, and C agreed to kill D. B and C killed D with treachery, which mode of co mmitting the offense had not been previously agreed upon by them with A. A was not present when B and C killed D with treachery. Q: How should the aggravating circumstance in this case be appreciated? A: The aggravating circumstance of treachery should not be taken into account against A, but against B and C only. But if A was present and had knowledge of the treachery with which the crime was committed by B and C, he is also liable for murder, qualified by treachery. In the means employed to accomplish it A ordered B to kill C. B invited C to eat with him. B mixed poison with the food of C, who died after he had eaten the food. A did not know that B used poison to kill C.

PARAGRAPH 3. The following aggravating or mitigating circumstance shall serve to aggravate for mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices, and accessories; 1. Those which arise from the moral attributes of the offender; or 2. From his private relations with the offended party; or 3. From any other personal cause;

Q: Is the aggravating circumstance that the crime that the crime be committed by means of poison applicable to A? A: NO. The aggravating circumstance that the crime be committed by means of poison is not applicable to A.

Those which arise from the moral attributes of attributes of the offender

The maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was committed by any person who belongs to an organized/syndicated crime group.

Example; A and B killed C. A acted with evident premeditation, and B with passion and obfuscation. Q: How should the aggravating circumstance be appreciated? A: Evident premeditation should affect and aggravate only the penalty for A, while passion and obfuscation will benefit B only mitigate his liability. From his private relations with the offended party. A and C inflicted slight physical injuries on B. A is the son of B. C is the father of B. Q: How does A and C’s relationship with B affect their criminal liability? A: The alternative circumstance of relationship, as aggravating shall be taken into account against A only, because he is a relative of a lower degree than the offended party, B. From any other personal cause In the material execution of the act A and B committed a crime. A was under 16 years of age and B was a recidivist. PARAGRAPH 4

ORGANIZED OR SYNDICATED CRIME GROUP. An organized or syndicate crime group consists of two or more persons collaborating, confederating and mutually helping another for purposes of gain in the commission of the crime.

The information charges A, B, C, D a s collaborating, confederating and mutually helping another for purposes of gain in the commission of the crime. This is what the information alleges. Trial found this so. The judge considered conspiracy and considered this special aggravating circumstance. Q: Is the court correct? A: NO. Before the special aggravating circumstance be considered the court, evidence must show was held to commit crimes involving gain. HABITUAL DELINQUENCY A person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent , is within a period of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries , , robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. Elements; 1. The crime is specified should be serious physical injuries, less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa; 2. There should be at least three convictions; 3. Each convictions must come within ten year from date of























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] NUMBER OF CONVICTION

Third Conviction;

PENALTY PRESCRIBED The penalty for the last crime of which he be found guilty.

65 No prescriptive period on the commission of the offense; No additional penalty;

Prescribes in ten years; Provides additional penalty;

ADDITIONAL PENALTY; in its prision correccional in medium and maximum periods; The penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty.

QUASI RECIDIVISM Under Article 160, a person is said to be a quasi-recidivist if after having been convicted by a final judgment, he shall commit a felony before serving out his sentence or while service of sentence. The maximum period shall be imposed.

ADDITIONAL PENALTY; in its minimum Prision mayor in and medium periods; The culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty.

* The first crime may be any crime. The second crime must be a felony.

Again it is a sp ecial aggravating circumstance.

Fourth Conviction;

Fifth Conviction;

ADDITIONAL PENALTY; prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in in its minimum period.

Limitation The penalty committed for the crime plus additional penalty should not exceed thirty years.

Example; A, while serving a final judgment, he was found in possession of illegal drugs. Q: Is A a quasi-recidivist? A: NO. The second crime is not a felony, it is a special law. Example; If A was was serving sentence for possession of illegal dru gs and then inside a crime he killed a co-inmate. Q: Is A a quasi-recidivist? A: YES. Maximum period prescribed by law shall be imposed. --xXx--

Recidivism and Habitual Delinquency Recidivism and Habitual Delinquency may be simultaneously considered because they have different effects on criminal liability of the offender. Recidivism effect is on the theft committed. It may be offset by mitigating circumstances. Habitual delinquency will give him additional penalty. Example; A was charged and convicted of robbery he served his sentence. Within 10 years from date of release he committed theft. He served sentence and again released. Within 10 years he committed another theft. The judgment become final and executory. He served again and out of prison. Within 10 years against he committed another theft. He is now in trial. Q: Can the judge impose both recidivism and habitual delinquency? A: YES. He is recidivist because at the time he served theft he was previously convicted of a final judgment of robbery embraced within the same title of the code. He is also habitual delinquent, because within the ten years from the date of his las t release he committed a theft the third time. RECIDIVISM

HABITUAL DELINQUENCY Cannot be offset by ordinary

Article 63. Rules for the application of indivisible penalties. - In all cases in which the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty, it shall be applied by the courts regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances that may have attended the commission of the deed. In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of two indivisible penalties, the following rules shall be observed in the application thereof; 1. When in the commission of the deed there is present only one aggravating circumstance, the greater penalty shall be applied. 2. When there are neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be applied; 3. When the commission of the act is attended by some mitigating circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be applied; 4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances attended the commission of the act, the court shall reasonably allow them to offset one another in consideration of their number and importance, for the purpose of applying the penalty in accordance with the preceding rules, according to the result of such compensation;























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] a.

b.

c.

d.

When there is only one aggravating circumstance, the greater penalty shall be imposed; When there is neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances, the lesser penalty shall be imposed; When there is a mitigating circumstance and no aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be imposed. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall allow them to offset one another;

Example; The penalty for Rape is reclusion perpetua. If the penalty is single and indivisible, it shall be imposed as is, without consideration of any Aggravating or Mitigating circumstance Example; The penalty for the crime of murder is reclusion perpetua to death two indivisible penalties. Only one aggravating circumstance. If the murder was committed with the aggravating circumstance of trespass to dwelling, the greater penalty of death shall be applied;

66 circumstance. Since only one mitigating circumstance is left, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua shall apply; PRIVELEGE MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE When there is a privileged mitigating circumstance, apply it first before computing the penalties. Example; A was charged with the information of Rape. At the time of the commission of the offense, A was only 16 years old. After trial, he was sentenced to the indivisible penalty of reclusion perpetua. In his motion for reconsideration, A argues that his penalty should be lowered by one degree because he is a minor. The judge denied the motion on the ground that reclusion perpetua is an indivisible penalty and cannot be offset b y mitigating circumstance. Q: Is the judge correct? A: NO. Minority is a privilege mitigating circumstance which lowers the penalty by one degree. Indivisible penalties shall be imposed as is regardless of mitigating or aggravating circumstance. However, privilege mitigating circumstance takes preference over prior to the computation of penalties. In this case, since A was a minor at the time of the commission of the offense, his penalty should be lowered by one degree to reclusion temporal . --xXx--

Two or more aggravating circumstance and no mitigating circumstance If the murder was committed with the aggravating circumstances of trespass to dwelling and recidivism, the greater penalty of death shall be applied; No mitigating nor aggravating circumstance If there is no mitigating or aggravating circumstance in attendant, apply the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua; One mitigating and no aggravating circumstance If the murder was committed with the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua shall apply; Two or more mitigating circumstance and no aggravating circumstance If the murder was committed with the mitigating circumstances of passion and obfuscation and sufficient provocation on the part of the offended party, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua shall apply; If there are two aggravating circumstance and one mitigating circumstance If the murder was committed with the aggravating circumstances of trespass to dwelling and recidivism, and the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation, one mitigating circumstance will offset one aggravating circumstance. Since only one aggravating circumstance is left, the greater penalty of death shall apply;

Article 64. Rules for the application of penalties which contain three periods. - In cases in which the penalties prescribed by law contain three periods, whether it be a single divisi ble penalty or composed of three different penalties, each one of which forms a period in accordance with the provisions of Articles 76 and 77, the court shall observe for the application of the penalty the following rules, according to whether there are or are not mitigating or aggravating circumstances: 1. When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances, they shall impose the penalty prescribed by law in its medium period. 2. When only a mitigating circumstances is present in the commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its minimum period. 3. When an aggravating circumstance is present in the commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its maximum period. 4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall reasonably offset those of one class against the other according to their relative weight. 5. When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall impose the penalty next lower to that prescribed by law, in the period that it may deem applicable, according to the number and nature of such circumstances. 6. Whatever may be the number and nature of the aggravating circumstances, the courts shall not impose a greater

























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Degree of penalty Degree of penalty is a penalty prescribed by law for every crime committed whether divisible or indivisible. Period of penalty A period of penalty refers to the subdivision of every said divisible penalty into three portion, the first portion is minimum, second is medium, third is maximum Indivisible penalty Indivisible penalties are penalties without fixed duration, death, reclusion perpetua, perpetual absolute disqualification, perpetual special disqualification, public censure, fine. Divisible penalty Divisible Penalties are penalties with fixed duration and therefore can be divided into three period. the first portion is minimum, second is medium, third is maximum

*Memorize the rules under Article 64. Example; X and Y had a fight. In the course of the fight, X killed Y. X was charged and convicted of homicide. The penalty for homicide is Reclusion temporal . No aggravating and no mitigating. shall be imposed in its medium period. Reclusion temporal shall One mitigating and no aggravating. If there is voluntary surrender in the part of X, reclusion temporal shall shall be imposed in its minimum period. One aggravating and no mitigating. If X was a recidivist, reclusion temporal shall be imposed in its maximum period. Both mitigating and aggravating are present. If the homicide was committed in the dwelling of Y and X acted on passion and obfuscation, the aggravating and mitigating circumstance will offset one another and reclusion temporal shall shall be imposed in its medium period.

67 previous rules. Thus, X will suffer the penalty of prision mayor in in its minimum period. Four mitigating circumstance. X committed homicide with passion and obfuscation when he was suffering from an illness which would diminish the exercise of his willpower, and thereafter voluntary surrendered and there is a voluntary plea of guilt. The penalty imposed upon him cannot be lowered by two degrees. Thus, X will suffer the penalty of prision mayor in its minimum period.

* In order that the penalty will be lowered by 1 degree, it is necessary that there absolutely is NO aggravating circumstance. Even if there are many Mitigating circumstances, as long as there is 1 aggravating circumstance, you will cannot lower the penalty by degrees, it is only by periods. Privilege Mitigating Circumstance If present, Privilege Mitigating Circumstance must be applied first prior to the application of penalties under the Rules of Articles 63 and 64. Example; X committed the crime of homicide. The penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal . One privilege mitigating circumstance. X was a minor at the time he committed homicide. Minority is a privilege mitigating circumstance which will lower the imposable penalty by one degree. Thus, X will su ffer the penalty of prision mayor in its medium period. Two privilege mitigating circumstances. X was a minor at the time he committed the homicide. He argues incomplete self-defense. Minority and Incomplete self-defense are both privilege mitigating circumstance which will lower the imposable penalty by two degrees. Thus, X will suffer the penalty of prision in its medium period. correccional in Two privilege mitigating circumstance and one ordinary mitigating circumstance.























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] period. Thus, X will suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in in its minimum period. --xXx-INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW (R.A. 4103) modifies the imposition of penalty. It is Indeterminate Sentence Law modifies applied both to the Revised Penal Code and Special Penal Laws. It provides for a minimum and max term, such that the moment the offender serves the minimum of the sentence, he shall be eligible for parole. If granted, he will serve the remainder of the sentence out of prison, but subject to the supervision of the parole officer OBJECTIVES The following are the objectives of the Indeterminate Sentence Law; 1. Uplift and redeem valuable hu man material; 2. Avoid unnecessary and excessive deprivation of liberty;

These objectives are achieved when the moment the offender becomes eligible to apply for parole and he may be able to serve sentence out of jail. PAROLE Parole is the conditional release of the offender form the correctional institution after serving minimum sentence after showing that he has reformed. Note it does not extinguish criminal and civil liability.

Requisites; 1. He must be placed in prison jail to serve an indeterminate sentence penalty which exceeds 1 year; 2. Served minimum term of sentence; 3. Board of pardons and parole found that his released is for greater interest of society DISQUALIFICATIONS UNDER THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW. The general rule is that everyone is entitled to the Indeterminate Sentence law. However, this act shall not apply to the following persons; 1. Convicted crime punished by death or life imprisonment ; (Reclusion perpetua ias held by the Supreme Court in People v. Enriquez G.R. No.158797, July 29, 2005 ) 2. Those convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to

68 Indeterminate Sentence Law, it is is after 'any pris oner shall have served the minimum penalty imposed on him, that the Board of Indeterminate Sentence may consider whether such prisoner may be granted parole. There being no 'minimum penalty imposable on those convicted to reclusion perpetua, it follows that persons sentenced by final judgment to reclusion perpetua could not have availed of parole under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. Q: is the indeterminate sentence law applicable if the penalty imposed is destierro? A: NO. Destierro does not involve imprisonment. Effect of disqualification If the offender is disqualified for the application of the indeterminate sentence law, he shall be given a straight penalty . The offender must serve the entire term of his sentence and he is not eligible for parole. Example; A final judgment was rendered against X. He was granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive. He violated the terms and conditions of the said pardon. He was charged with evasion of service of sentence. He was found guilty by the court. Q: Can the court impose upon him an indeterminate sentence? A: NO. X is among those disqualified under the law. By violating the condition of his pardon h e cannot avail of an indeterminate sentence law. Example; X has been convicted of final judgment of serious physical injuries, thereafter he committed homicide and the judge found him guilty of homicide. Q: Can the judge impose upon him an indeterminate sentence? A: YES. X is a recidivist. Under the Indeterminate Sentence Law, only habitual delinquents are disqualified from availing indeterminate sentence. A recidivist is qualified under the law from availing the Indeterminate Sentence Law. Example; X is a minor who was charged and convicted for kidnapping with ransom, the penalty of which is reclusion perpetua to death. Since























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] VIOLATION OF SPECIAL PENAL LAWS If the offense is pun ished by special laws, the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence, the maximum term of which shall not exceed the maximum fixed by said law and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum term prescribed by the same. Example; X committed was charged and convicted of the anti-carnapping law. Section 14 of R.A. 6539 (Anti-Carnapping law) provides a penalty for 17 years and 4 months to 30 years if a person committed carnapping by means of violence against or intimidation of any person, or force upon things. Q: Under the indeterminate sentence law, what is the duration of the penalty for the violation of the anti-carnapping law? A: Under the indeterminate sentence law, if a special law is violated, the courts may sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence provided that it shall not be less than the minimum or more than the maximum according to the sound discretion of the judge. Thus, anywhere from 17 years and 4 months to 30 years may be imposed upon X. Argoncillo v. CA, G.R. No. 118816, 118816, July 10, 1998 The crime committed is illegal fishing with the use of explosives. The penalty prescribed by law is 20 years to life imprison ment. The judge imposed him the penalty of s traight 30 years. Q: Is the judge correct? A: NO. The Indeterminate sentence law states that a violation of special penal law and the said special penal law does not use the enumeration of penalties in the RPC, the maximum term of the sentence shall not exceed the maximum penalty prescribed by law and the minimum term of sentence shall not be less than the minimum penalty penalty prescribed by law. In In this case, since the penalty prescribed by law is 20 years to life imprisonment, it means that the penalty to be imposed upon the convict must be an indeterminate sentence. SC said the penalty must be 20 years (minimum term) to 25 years (maximum term) Article 64 and Indeterminate Sentence law The indeterminate sentence law did not repeal Article 34 of the Revised Penal Code. On the contrary, they are related.

69 Q: What if there is only one aggravating circumstance is present? A: The maximum term will be reclusion temporal in its maximum period and the minimum term is Prision mayor in in any of its period according to the sound discretion of the court. Q: What if both aggravating and mitigating circumstance are present? A: The maximum term shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period because under article 64 you should offset the circumstances. The minimum term will be one degree lower than reclusion temporal which is Prision mayor in any of its period according to the sound discretion of the court. Q: What if there are 2 aggravating circumstance and 1 ordinary mitigating circumstance present? A: The maximum term shall be reclusion temporal in its maximum period applying the las t aggravating circumstance after offsetting the aggravating circumstance and mitigating circumstance. The minimum term is Prision mayor in any of its period according to the sound discretion of the court. Q: What if there are two mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstance present? in its medium period. A: The maximum term shall be prision mayor in Since there are two ordinary mitigating circumstances, we lower the imposable penalty by one degree. The minimum term is prision correccional in in any of its periods according to the sound discretion of the court. Q: What if there are three mitigating circumstance with no aggravating circumstance present? A: The maximum term shall be prision mayor in in its minimum period. The two ordinary mitigating circumstances shall operate to lower the imposable penalty by one degree, the remaining ordinary mitigating circumstance shall operate to make the penalty in its minimum period. The minimum term is prision correccional in any of its periods according to the sound discretion of the court. Q: What if there are four mitigating circumstances and no aggravating circumstance? A: The maximum term shall still be prision mayor in its minimum period. In case of ordinary mitigating circumstance, you can only























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] Q: since there are two mitigating circumstance, should the judge lower his penalty by one degree? A: NO. Reclusion perpetua is an indivisible penalty. Under Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code, if the penalty prescribe by law is a single invisible penalty you shall impose it as it is regardless of any aggravating or mitigating circumstance. Q: What is the penalty of A if, in a addition to the 2 mitigating circumstances above mentioned, A is a minor at the time of the offense? A: privilege mitigating circumstance must first be applied prior to the ordinary mitigating circumstance. Since minority is a privilege mitigating circumstance which lowers the penalty by one degree, the maximum term is prision mayor in its medium period and the minimum term prision correccional in any of its ran ge according to the correccional in sound discretion of the court.

*Only circumstance that can defeat an indivisible penalty is a privilege mitigating circumstance. Example; X was charged with the crime of frustrated homicide. X voluntarily surrendered to the authorities. In the trial, the mitigating circumstance of immediate vindication to a grave offense was in attendant. Q: What should be the penalty imposed to X? A: Since the penalty for frustrated homicide is prision mayor and there are two other ordinary mitigating circumstance present, the maxium term of sentence is Prision correccional in in its medium period while the mimimum term of sentence. Arresto mayor within the range or. Q: What is the penalty if, in addition to the facts above mentioned, X is minor committing without discernment? A: Since the penalty already imposed upon X is prision correccional , we lower it by one degree more because minority is a privilege mitigating circumstance. Thus, according to Article 64, the maximum term is Arresto mayor in in its medium period. Indeterminate sentence law is not applicable if the penalty imposed upon the offender does not exceed one year. In this instance we cannot give him an indeterminate sentence because the duration of arresto mayor is is 1

70 3. 4. 5.

To prevent further commission of crimes because the offender is placed under an individualized treatment; To decongest cases; To save the Government from spending much-needed funds when the offender will be placed behind bars

The first three objectives are bas ed on P.D. 968. The last two purposes are jurisprudential. Probation as a Privilege Probation is not a right but but a privilege. Thus, even if a convict is not among those disqualified of probation, the judge can still deny the application. This denial is not appealable. The grant or denial of application is dependent solely on the sound discretion of the judge. DISQUALIFICATIONS The following are disqualified to avail probation; 1. Those whose maximum term of imprisonment is more than 6 years; 2. Those who have been convicted of subversion and crimes against national security ; 3. Those who have previously been convicted by final judgment of an offense punished by imprisonment of more more than six (6) months and one (1) day and/or a fine of more than one thousand pesos (P1,000.00); 4. Those who have already availed the the benefit of probation; 5. Those who have perfected an appeal from judgment of conviction; 6. Those convicted of an election offense under the Omnibus Election Code; 7. Those convicted of drug trafficking or drug pushing; 8. Those who filed a malicious report that a person is committing a violation of Anti-money laundering law and was convicted because of such malicious filing Example; X was charged and convicted for alarms and scandals. He was sentenced to 30 days of arresto menor . Q: Can X avail probation? A: If the felony was committed prior to the amendment of the probation law, X cannot avail probation. Under P.D. 968, a person
























71

applies for probation, it means that he is accepting the judgment of the court. He, however, does not want to serve his sentence behind bars.

A: A grant of probation is applied before the Trial Court which heard the case within the period of perfecting an appeal or within 15 days from promulgation of judgment.

Exceptions; 1. However, Section 4 of R.A. 10707 which amended the probation law, states that when a judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty is appealed or reviewed, and such judgment is modified through the imposition of a probationable penalty, the defendant shall be allowed to apply for probation based on the modified decision before such decision becomes final . The application for probation based on the modified decision shall be filed in the trial court where the judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty was rendered, or in the trial court where such case has since been re-raffled.

CONDITIONS IMPOSED UPON OFFENDER UNDER PROBATION There are two conditions imposed upon a person seeking probation; 1. Mandatory/ Ordinary; 2. Discretionary/ Special;

2.

This notwithstanding, the accused shall lose the benefit of probation should he seek a review of the modified decision which already imposes a probationable penalty. Section 42 of the Juvenile Justice and Welfare act provides that the court may, after it shall have convicted and sentenced a child in conflict with the law, and upon application at any time, place the child on probation in lieu of service of his/her sentence taking into account the best interest of the child. For this purpose, Section 4 of Presidential Decree No. 968, otherwise known as the "Probation Law of 1976", is hereby amended accordingly.

Colinares v. People (G.R. No. 182748, December 13, 2011) Colinares hit Rufino twice in the head with a stone. Thereafter, Colinares was charged and convicted for frustrated homicide in the regional trial court. He was sentenced to 2 years and 4 months of prision correcional to 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor . Colinares appealed to the Court of Appeals for the purpose of modifying his conviction from frustrated homicide to attempted homicide thereby lowering the penalty so that he can avail probation. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the RTC. Thus, Colinares elevated the case to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that Colinares is only liable for attempted homicide because the prosecution failed to prove that the wound wound of Rufino is fatal. Thus the penalty imposed on him should be lowered to imprisonment of four months of arresto

Mandatory The following are mandatory conditions imposed by the court to the probationer; 1. Appear before the probationary officer within 72 hours from the receipt of the order; 2. Report once a month; Discretionary Discretionary or special conditions are dependent upon the sound discretion of the court. Usually involves engaging in a vocation, not drinking alcohol, not going to house of ill-reputes.

The only limitation on the discretionary conditions is that they must not be so restrictive to the rights of the accused such that they will no longer be in consonance with his freedom. Example; In the case of Baclayon v. Mutia (G.R. No. L-59298, April 30, 1984) the trial court prohibited the offender, who is a teacher by prof ession, to teach as a condition during the period of probation. This is a restrictive condition. It deprives the offender his means of livelihood. PERIOD OF PROBATION: SENTENCE Imprisonment of not more than 1 year; All other cases of imprisonment;

Fine subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency;

PERIOD OF PROBATION

Will not exceed two years; Will not exceed 6 years; Not less than nor be more than 2x than the total number of days of subsidiary imprisonment, taking into account the highest minimum


























72

have served sentence for more than 1 year. Since Moreno applied and was granted of probation, he did not serve his sentence because probation suspends the service of the offender.

Factors to consider in imposing fines; 1. Aggravating and mitigating circumstance; 2. Wealth and means of the offender

Q: Can a person who was convicted by final judgment but was granted probation run for public office? A: YES. The phrase service of sentence, understood in its general and common sense, means the confinement of a convicted person in a penal facility for the period adjudged by the court. During the period of probation, the probationer does not serve the penalty imposed upon him by the court but is merely required to comply with all the conditions prescribed in the probation order. Furthermore, he accessory penalties of suspension from public office, from the right to follow a profession or calling, and that of perpetual special disqualification from the right of suffrage, attendant to the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period imposed upon Moreno were similarly suspended upon the grant of probation.

Scale of Penalty in case of Fine Article 26 of the Revised Penal determines whether a fin e is afflictive, correctional, or light penalty. SCALE OF PENALTY AMOUNT OF FINE Afflictive Penalty; Exceeds P6,000.00 Correctional Penalty From P200.00 to P6,000.00 Light Penalty; Less than P200.00

Example; Lindsay Lohan, after conviction, applied for probation and was granted the same. Thereafter, she filed an appeal questioning the civil indemnity imposed upon her. The judge denied the appeal on the ground that Lindsay already applied for probation. Therefore, the appeal cannot be granted. Q: Is the judge correct? A: NO. The only effect of probation is to suspend the execution of the sentence. It has nothing to do with the civil aspect of the case. Insofar as the civil aspect is concerned, the convict can still appeal it.

--xXx-Art. 75. Increasing or reducing the penalty of fine by one or more degrees. — Whenever it may be necessary to increase or reduce the penalty of fine by one or more degrees, it shall be increased or reduced, respectively, for each degree, by one-fourth of the maximum amount prescribed by law, without however, changing the minimum.

If a fine is imposed to an accomplice or an accessory, the fine shall be reduced or increased, respectively for e each degree, by one fourth of the maximum amount prescribed by law. Example; If A prevented the meetings of congress by means of fraud, the penalty imposed upon him is P200 – P2000. If he is merely an accomplice, the fine will be lowered by one degree and a decrease of ¼ of the maximum amount prescribed by law. Since ¼ of P2,000.00 is























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next preceding paragraph the respective severity of the penalties shall be determined in accordance with the following scale:

73 Order of Severity. In the imposition of penalties, the convict shall first serve the most severe penalty imposed upon him in accordance with the scale provided for in Article 70.

1. Death, 2. Reclusion perpetua, perpetua, 3. Reclusion temporal , 4. Prision mayor ,

THREE-FOLD RULE The three-fold rule provides that when multiple successive penalties are imposed upon the offender, the maximum duration of the convict's sentence shall not be more than three-fold the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him. However, such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years.

5. Prision correccional , 6. Arresto 6. Arresto mayor ,

Example; X raped her daughter 5 times. He was charged and convicted of 5 counts of rape. The penalty for 1 count of rape is reclusion perpetua.

7. Arresto 7. Arresto menor , 8. Destierro, 9. Perpetual absolute disqualification, 10 Temporal absolute disqualification. 11. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, the right to follow a profession or calling, and 12. Public censure. Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, the maximum duration of the convict's sentence shall not be more

Q: What penalty shall the court impose on him? A: 5 counts of reclusion perpetua. Q: Since reclusion perpetua is 20-40 years, does that mean X will serve 200 years in prison? A: NO. Under the three-fold rule the when the offender is serving multiple successive sentences, the maximum duration of the offender’s sentence shall not exceed three folds of the length of the most severe penalty, provided that such penalty will not be more than 40 years. In this case, since the penalty imposed upon X is 5 reclusion perpetua, his service of sentence will not be more than three-folds of the length of reclusion perpetua which is the most severe penalty imposed upon him. However, since three counts of reclusion perpetua is 120 years which exceeds the maximum penalty of 40 years, X will























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] In answering questions regarding penalties, you need not state the equivalent duration. It suffices that you state the designation, i.e. prision mayor , prision correcional, etc. --xXx-Article 71. Graduated scales. - In the case in which the law prescribed a penalty lower or higher by one or more degrees than another given penalty, the rules prescribed in Article 61 shall be observed in graduating such penalty. The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale in which is comprised the given penalty. The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty, shall observe the following graduated scales:

74 SUBSIDIARY PENALTIES Subsidiary penalties are deemed imposed . SUBSIDIARY IMPRISONMENT Unlike subsidiary penalties, the subsidiary imprisonment must be stated in the decision. expressly stated --xXx-Art. 74. Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua in perpetua in certain cases. — In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty higher than another given penalty, without specially designating the name of the former, if such higher penalty should be t hat of death, the same penalty and the accessory penalties of Article 40, shall be considered as the next higher penalty.

SCALE NO. 1 1. Death, 2. Reclusion perpetua, perpetua, 3. Reclusion temporal , 4. Prision mayor , 5. Prision correccional , 6. Arresto 6. Arresto mayor , 7. Destierro, 8. Arresto 8. Arresto menor , 9. Public censure, 10. Fine.

If the decision or law says higher than Reclusion perpetua or 2 degrees than Reclusion temporal , then the penalty imposed is Reclusion perpetua or Reclusion temporal as the case may be. Death must be designated by name. However, for the other pena lties, this does not apply. Example; The penalty for crime X is 2 degrees lower than RP. The penalty imposed is prision mayor . --xXx--

SCALE NO. 2 Art. 75. Increasing or reducing the penalty of fine by one 1. Perpetual absolute disqualification,
























75

EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES --xXx-Art. 78. When and how a penalty is to be executed. — No penalty shall be executed except by virtue of a final judgment. A penalty shall not be executed in any other form than that prescribed by law, nor with any other circumstances or incidents than those expressly authorized thereby. In addition to the provisions of the law, the special regulations prescribed for the government of the institutions in which the penalties are to be suffered shall be observed with regard to the character of the work to be performed, the time of its performance, and other incidents connected therewith, the relations of the convicts among themselves and other persons, the relief which they may receive, and their diet. The regulations shall make provision for the separation of the sexes in different institutions, or at least into different departments and also for the correction and reform of the convicts. --xXx-Art. 79. Suspension of the execution and service of the penalties in case of insanity. — When a convict shall become insane or an imbecile after final sentence has been pronounced, the execution of said sentence shall be suspended only with regard to the personal penalty, the provisions of the second paragraph of circumstance number 1 of article 12 being observed in the corresponding cases. If at any time the convict shall recover his reason, his sentence shall be executed, unless the penalty shall have prescribed in accordance with the provisions of this Code. The respective provisions of this section shall also be

Art. 86. Reclusion perpetua, perpetua , reclusion temporal , prision mayor , prision corr eccional and and arresto mayor . — The penalties of reclusion perpetua, perpetua, reclusion temporal , prision mayor , prision correccional and and arresto mayor , shall be executed and served in the places and penal establishments provided by the Administrative Code in force or which may be provided by law in the future. --xXx-Art. 87. Destierro. — Any person sentenced to destierro shall not be permitted to enter the place or places designated in the sentence, nor within the radius therein specified, which shall be not more than 250 and not less than 25 kilometers from the place designated. DESTIERRO Destierro is considered as a principal correctional and divisible penalty. Therefore, jurisdiction over crimes punishable with destierro lies with the Metropolitan Trial Court.

Destierro shall be imposed in the following cases; 1. Death or serious physical injuries is caused or are inflicted under exceptional circumstance; 2. Person fails to give bond for good behavior in grave and light threats; 3. Concubine’s penalty for the crime of concubinage; 4. When after reducing the penalty by one or more degree,
























CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

76 1.

BY: ATTY. VICTORIA GARCIA

PART II

2.

EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Transcribed by: Maria Aurora Mon, Carmel Liria, Gretchen Sy, Anne Rose De Guia, Ma. Althea Raypon, J-ann Javillonar & Maria Maica Angelika Roman. Updated by: Anonymous Lawyer (https://www.facebook.com/Ano (https://www.facebook.com/Anonymouslawer/) nymouslawer/)

Art. 89. How criminal liability is totally extinguished. — Criminal liability is totally extinguished; 1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal pe nalties and as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment; 2. By service of the sentence; 3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects; 4. By absolute pardon; 5. By prescription of the crime;

3.

4.

Death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well as the civil liability based solely thereon; 2. Corollarily, the claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may also be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict. Article 1157 of the Civil Code enumerates these other sources of obligation from which the civil liability may arise as a result of the same act or omission: a. Law; b. Contracts; c. Quasi-contracts; d. (delict); e. Quasi-delicts; Where the civil liability survives, as explained in Number 2 above, an action for recovery therefor may be pursued but only by way of filing a separate civil action and subject to Section 1, Rule 111 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure as amended. This separate civil action may be enforced either against the executor/administrator or the estate of the accused, depending on the source of obligation upon which the same is based as explained above. Finally, the private offended party need not fear a forfeiture of his right to file this separate civil action by prescription, in cases where during the prosecution of the criminal action and prior to its extinction, the private-offended party instituted together therewith the civil action. In such case, the statute of limitations on the civil liability is deemed interrupted during the pendency of the criminal case, conformably with provisions of Article 1155 of the Civil

























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] must plead and prove it before the courts. No judicial notice of Pardon; May be given to all kinds of offenders;

Congress. Courts take judicial notice of it; Generally granted to a class or group of persons who have committed political offenses;

VALID MARRIAGE A valid marriage between the offender and the offended party extinguishes criminal liability only in relation to private crimes; i.e. seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and one public crime which is rape.

* Under Art 266, the valid marriage of the off ended with the offender extinguishes criminal liability as well as the penalty. Example; Jack raped Rose. Rose filed a case of rape against Jack. Trial on the merits ensued. During trial, Jack and Rose would often see each other

77 PRESCRIPTION OF CRIME Prescription of Crime is the loss or forfeiture of the right of State to prosecute an act prohibited by law. The moment that a crime has already prescribed, the court has to dismiss the case even if the accused has not moved for its dismissal. The courts lose their jurisdiction to try the case. Period of Prescription of Crimes PENALTY OF CRIMES Death, Reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal ; Other afflictive penalties; Correctional penalties; Arresto mayor ; Libel and other similar offenses; Oral defamation and slander by deed Light felonies;

PRESCRIPTION PERIOD 20 years;

15 years; 10 years; 5 years; 1 year 6 months; 2 month.























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] of prescription commences to run from that time. Since 20 years h ave already lapsed in this case, the crime has already prescribed. This concerns only criminal liability. But Niki can still file a civil case for damages or any civil action to recover the property. VIOLATION OF SPECIAL PENAL LAWS In the case of People v. Pangilinan (G.R. No. 152662, June 13, 2012), the Supreme Court said whether it is a violation of a special penal law like the BP 22 or a violation of the RPC, the filing of a complaint before the office of the pub lic prosecutor suspends or interrupts the running of the prescriptive period. It remains suspended until the case has been decided the accused being acquitted or convicted or the case has been dismissed for any reason not imputable to him.

Here the checks were issued, and the notice of dishonor was received by the maker in 1995. The cases were filed before the prosecutors in 1997, and they filed the information in the MTC in 2000. The MTC and RTC ruled that the crime did not prescribe. The CA held that the crime had prescribed, and that the filing of the complaint before the

78 purposes of preliminary investigation. It remains suspended until the accused is convicted or acquitted or the case is terminated without the fault of accused. The term shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippine Archipelago. Situations which do not follow Art. 91 ; 1. In continuing crimes-prescriptive period will start to run only at the termination of the intended result; 2. In crimes against false testimony, prescriptive period is reckoned from the day final judgment is rendered in the proceeding where such false testimony is utilized not when the false testimony is made; 3. In Election offenses; a. if discovery of the offense is incidental to judicial proceedings, prescription begins when such proceedings terminate; or b. From the date of the commission of the offense.























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] was only after 20 years that Garcia was located and brought behind bars. Garcia’s counsel filed a Petition for Habeas Corpus contending that the penalty prescribed and therefore, Garcia could not be imprisoned. Q: Is the counsel correct? A: YES. The penalty has prescribed. Homicide prescribes in 15 years. Here, Garcia was captured 20 years from escape. Example; Cuenca was charged with homicide. Being a bailable offense, Cuenca posted bail. During the arraignment and pre trial, Cuenca appeared before the court. However, during the trial proper, he did not appear. Trial in absentia ensued. Judgment was for conviction. Warrant of arrest was issued against Cuenca. It was only 20 years thereafter that the police were able to arrest Cuenca and bring him behind bars. Cuenca’s counsel filed a petition for habeas corpus contending that the penalty has prescribed.

79 3.

For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is serving his sentence.

MODES FOR PARTIALLY EXTINGUISHING CRIMINAL LIABILITY The following are the modes for extinguishing criminal liability; 1. Conditional Pardon; 2. Commutation of sentence; 3. Good conduct of allowance; 4. Special Time Allowance for Loyalty; 5. Parole under the Indeterminate Sentence Law; 6. Implied repeal or amendment of penal law lowering the penalty; CONDITIONAL PARDON Conditional Pardon is an act of grace received from a power entrusted with the authority to execute the law, but the par don herein is subject to strict conditions.

Because of this strict conditions, there must be acceptance on the























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] GOOD CONDUCT ALLOWANCE Good conduct allowance is awarded to the offender if he has been behaving properly in prison. The Director o f Prisons shall compute the good conduct allowance in favor of the offender so that he will be immediately released. PERIOD OF IMPRISONMENT First two years; Third to fifth year , inclusive, of his imprisonment; Sixth until the tenth year, inclusive, of his imprisonment;

Eleventh and successive years of his Imprisonment; At any time during the period of imprisonment;

DEDUCTION 20 days for each month of good behavior during detention; 23 days for each month of good behavior during detention; 25 days for each month of good behavior during detention; 30 days for each month of good behavior during detention; another deduction of 15 days, in addition to numbers one to

80

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW BY: ATTY. VICTORIA GARCIA

PART III

CIVIL LIABILITY

Transcribed by: Maria Aurora Mon, Carmel Liria, Gretchen Sy, Anne Rose De Guia, Ma. Althea Raypon, J-ann Javillonar & Maria Maica Angelika Roman. Updated by: Anonymous Lawyer (https://www.facebook.com/Ano (https://www.facebook.com/Anonymouslawer/) nymouslawer/) Art. 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. — Every
























3.

accused failed to comply with the terms of the contract. There is breach of contract; When the judgment of acquittal states that the civil liability does not arise from the crime but from other sources of obligations; --xXx--

Art. 101. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases. — The exemption from criminal liability established in subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of article 12 and in subdivision 4 of article 11 of this Code does not include exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced subject to the following rules: First. In First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of Article 12, the civil liability for acts committ ed by an imbecile or insane person, and by a person under nine years of age, or by one over nine but under fifteen years of age, who has acted without discernment, shall devolve upon those having such person under their legal authority or control, unless it appears that there was no fault or negligence on

81 is the one who acted under the compulsion of irresistible force or uncontrollable fear. --xXx-Art. 102. Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers, tavernkeepers and proprietors of establishments. — In default of the persons criminally liable, innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any other persons or corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes committed in their establishments, in all cases where a violation of municipal ordinances or some general or special police regulation shall have been committed by them or their employees. Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods taken by robbery or theft within their houses from guests lodging therein, or for the payment of the value thereof, provided that such guests shall have notified in advance the innkeeper himself, or the person representing him, of the deposit of such goods within the inn; and shall furthermore have followed the directions which such innkeeper or his representative may have

























- CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [2018] A: YES. The guest complied with the rules and regulations as to the care and vigilance of the goods. He also informed the representative of the hotel of the presence of his valuables. Example; Same situation as above. The guard of the hotel tried to fight the robbers. One of the robbers shot the guard. Prosecuted for robbery

82 Q: Is the proprietor of the establishment liable? A: YES. There was a violation of the ordinance. Any crimes committed in the establishment will make the proprietor subsidiarily liable for civil liability only, not for criminal liability. Example; Vin Diesel was a dr iver of XYZ Corporation engaged in the business o f
























83

price of the thing, whenever possible, and its special sentimental value to the injured party, and reparation shall be made accordingly.

shall have a right of action against the others for the amount of their respective shares.

Reparation In case of inability to return the property stolen, the culprit must pay the value of the property stolen. The court shall determine the value of the thing taken including its sentimental value.

Example; X, Y and Z were charged in the case of robbery. They were all charged as principals. But the judge ruled that X is a principal, Y is an accomplice and Z is a mere accessory. The judge divided the civil

[2018] Garcia Notes - Criminal Law Book 1

Recommend Documents