CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS

Parricide(ART.246)

Parricide. - Any person who shall kill his father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or
illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse, shall be guilty of
parricide and shall be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death.

ELEMENTS of Parricide
1. That a person is killed;
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused;
3. That the deceased is the
a. father, mother, or
b. child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or
c. legitimate other ascendant or other descendant, or
d. legitimate spouse of the accused.

* The relationship of the offender with the victim is the essential element of parricide.

* Essential element: relationship of offender with the victim; except for spouses, only
relatives by blood and in direct line (adopted are not included)

* Parents and children are not included in the term “ascendants” or “descendants”.

* The other ascendant or descendant must be legitimate. On the other hand, the father,
mother or child may be legitimate or illegitimate.

* The child should not be less than 3 days old. Otherwise, the offense is infanticide.

* Supreme Court ruled that Muslim husbands with several wives can be convicted of
parricide only in case the first wife is killed.

* Relationship must be alleged and proved. If not,relationship would only be considered

as aggravating circumstance.

* A stranger who cooperates in committing parricide is liable for murder or homicide.

* Even if the offender did not know that the person he had killed is his son, he is still
liable for parricide because the law does not require knowledge of the relationship.

* Cases of parricide when the penalty shall not be reclusion perpetua to death:
 1. parricide through negligence (Art.365)
2. parricide by mistake (Art. 49)
3. parricide under exceptional circumstances (Art. 247)

Death Or Physical Injuries Under Exceptional Circumstances

(ART.247)

Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances. - Any legally

married person who having surprised his spouse in the act of committing sexual
intercourse with another person, shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or
immediately thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury, shall suffer
the penalty of destierro.

If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries of any other kind, he shall be exempt from
punishment.

These rules shall be applicable, under the same circumstances, to parents with respect
to their daughters under eighteen years of age, and their seducer, while the daughters
are living with their parents.

Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution of his wife or daughter, or
shall otherwise have consented to the infidelity of the other spouse shall not be entitled
to the benefits of this article.

ELEMENTS:
1. A legally married person or parent surprises his spouse or daughter (the latter must
be under 18 and living with them) in the act of committing sexual intercourse with
another person;
2. He/she kills any or both of them or inflicts upon any or both of them any serious
physical injury in the act or immediately thereafter; and
3. He has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that he
has not consented to the infidelity of the other spouse.

* This article does not define or penalize a felony, the penalty is destierro.

* Penalty of destierro for killer spouse is meant to protect him from acts of reprisal by
relatives of dead spouse.

* It is not necessary that the parent be legitimate for the application of this article.

* This article applies only when the daughter is single.

* Surprise means to come upon suddenly or unexpectedly.

* Art. 247 is applicable even when the accused did not see his spouse in the act sexual
intercourse with another person. It is enough that circumstances reasonably show that
the carnal act is being committed or has been committed.

* Sexual intercourse does not include preparatory acts.

* Article does not apply: If the surprising took place before any actual sexual intercourse
could be done or after the actual sexual intercourse was finished.

* “Immediately thereafter” means that the discovery, escape, pursuit and the killing
must all form parts of one continuous act.

* Immediately thereafter – may be an hour after proximate result of outrage

overwhelming accused  after chancing upon spouse in basest act of infidelity.

* The killing must be the direct by-product of the rage of the accused.

* No criminal liability is incurred when less serious or slight physical injuries are inflicted.
Moreover, in case third persons caught in the crossfire suffer physical injuries, the
accused is not liable for physical injuries. The principle that one is liable for the
consequences of his felonious act is not applicable, because his act under Art.247 does
not amount to a felony.

* Requisites must be established by evidence of the defense

living with parent - is understood to be in their own dwelling because of the

embarrassment and humiliation done to the parent and parental abode
- If done in a motel, article does not apply.

Murder
(ART.248)

Murder. - Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246 shall kill
another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its
maximum period to death, if committed with any of the following attendant
circumstances:

1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense or of means or persons to insure or afford
impunity.
2. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a street car or locomotive, fall of an airship, by means of
motor vehicles, or with the use of any other means involving great waste and ruin.
4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of an
earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic or other public
calamity.
5. With evident premeditation.
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim, or
outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse.

ELEMENTS:
1. That a person was killed;
2. That the accused killed him;
3. That the killing was attended by any of the following qualifying circumstances:
a. with treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men,
or employing means to weaken the defense or of means or persons to insure or
afford impunity,
b. in consideration of price, reward or promise,
c. by means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of vessel,
derailment or assault upon a street car or locomotive, fall of airship, by means of
motor vehicles or with the use of any other means involving great waste or ruin,
d. on occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of
an earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic or any other
public calamity,
e. with evident premeditation, or
f. with cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanely augmenting the suffering of the victim
or outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse; and
4. The killing is not parricide or infanticide.

* The victim must be killed in order to consummate the offense. Otherwise, it would be
attempted or frustrated murder.

* When the victim is already dead, intent to kill becomes irrelevant. It is important only if
the victim did not die to determine if the felony is physical injury or attempted or
frustrated homicide.

* That murder will exist with only one of the circumstances described in Article 248.
When more than one of said circumstances are present, the others must be considered
as generic aggravating.

* That when the other circumstances are absorbed or included in one qualifying

circumstance, they cannot be considered as generic aggravating.

* Any of the qualifying circumstances must be alleged in the information. Otherwise,

they will only be considered as generic aggravating circumstances.

* Treachery and premeditation are inherent in murder with the use of poison.
 Homicide
(ART.249)

Homicide. - Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill
another without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in the next
preceding article, shall be deemed guilty of homicide and be punished by reclusion
temporal.

ELEMENTS of Homicide:
1. That a person was killed;
2. That the accused killed him without any justifying circumstances;
3. That the accused had the intention to kill, which is presumed; and
4. That the killing was not attended by any of the qualifying circumstances of murder, or
by that of parricide or infanticide.

* Intent to kill is conclusively presumed when death resulted. Hence, evidence of intent
to kill is required only in attempted or frustrated homicide.

* There is no crime of frustrated homicide through negligence/imprudence.

* Physical injuries are one of the essential elements of frustrated homicide.

* Use of unlicensed firearm is an aggravating circumstance in homicide.

* In accidental homicide wherein death of a person is brought about by a lawful act

performed with proper care and skill and without homicidal intent, there is no liability.

* When the wounds that caused death were inflicted by 2 different persons, even if they
were not in conspiracy, each one of them is guilty of homicide.

* In all crimes against persons in which the death of the victim is an element, there must
be satisfactory evidence of
(1) the fact of death and
(2) the identity of the victim.

* Penalty shall be one degree higher than that imposed by law when the victim is under
12 years of age

* When several assailants not acting in conspiracy inflicted wounds on a victim but it
cannot be determined who inflicted which would which caused the death of the victim,
all are liable for the victim’s death.

* In attempted or frustrated homicide, there is intent to kill. In physical injuries, there is

none. However, if as a result of the physical injuries inflicted, the victim died, the crime
will be homicide because the law punishes the result, and not the intent of the act.
Corpus delicti – actual commission of crime charged

Penalty For Frustrated Parricide, Murder or Homicide

(ART.250)

Courts may impose a penalty:

a. 2 degrees lower for frustrated parricide, murder, or homicide
b. 3 degrees lower for attempted parricide, murder, or homicide

Death Caused In A Tumultuous Affray(ART.251)

Death caused in a tumultuous affray. - When, while several persons, not composing
groups organized for the common purpose of assaulting and attacking each other
reciprocally, quarrel and assault each other in a confused and tumultuous manner, and
in the course of the affray someone is killed, and it cannot be ascertained who actually
killed the deceased, but the person or persons who inflicted serious physical injuries
can be identified, such person or persons shall be punished by prision mayor.

If it cannot be determined who inflicted the serious physical injuries on the deceased,
the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed
upon all those who shall have used violence upon the person of the victim.

ELEMENTS:
1. That there be several persons;
2. That they did not compose groups organized for the common purpose of assaulting
and attacking each other reciprocally;
3. That these several persons quarreled and assaulted one another in a confused and
tumultuous manner;
4. That someone was killed in the course of the affray;
5. That it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the deceased; and
6. That the person or persons who inflicted serious physical injuries or who used
violence can be identified.

PERSONS LIABLE:
1. person/s who inflicted serious physical injuries
2. if it is not known who inflicted serious physical injuries on the deceased, all persons
who used violence upon the person of the victim.

Giving Assistance to Suicide(ART.253)

ACTS PUNISHABLE:
1. Assisting another to commit suicide, whether the suicide is consummated or not.
2. Lending his assistance to another to commit suicide to the extent of doing the killing
himself.

* A person who attempts to commit suicide is not criminally liable.

* Giving assistance to suicide means giving means (arms, poison, etc.) or whatever
manner of positive and direct cooperation (intellectual aid, suggestions regarding the
mode of committing suicide, etc.).

* A pregnant woman who tried to commit suicide by means of poison but instead of
dying, the fetus in her womb was expelled, is not liable for abortion.

* If the person does the killing himself, the penalty is similar to that of homicide, which is
reclusion temporal. There can be no qualifying circumstance because the determination
to die must come from the victim. This does not contemplate euthanasia or mercy killing
where the crime is homicide (if without consent; with consent, covered by Article 253).

* Assistance to suicide is different from mercy- killing. Euthanasia or mercy-killing is the

practice of painlessly putting to death a person suffering from some incurable disease.
In this case, the person does not want to die. A doctor who resorts to euthanasia may
be held liable for murder.

* Penalty is mitigated if suicide is not successful.

* The person attempting to commit suicide is not liable if he survives.

* Euthanasia is not lending assistance to suicide. In euthanasia, the victim is not in a

position to commit suicide. A doctor who resorts to euthanasia of his patient may be
liable for murder.

Infanticide(ART.255)
Infanticide. - The penalty provided for parricide in Article 246 and for murder in Article
248 shall be imposed upon any person who shall kill any child less than three days of
age.

* If the crime penalized in this article be committed by the mother of the child for the
purpose of concealing her dishonor, she shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional
in its medium and maximum periods, and if said crime be committed for the same
purpose by the maternal grandparents or either of them, the penalty shall be prision
mayor.

ELEMENTS:
1. That a child was killed;
2. That the deceased child was less than three days (72 hours) of age; and
3. That the accused killed the said child.

* When the offender is the father, mother, or legitimate ascendant, he shall suffer the
penalty prescribed for parricide. If the offender is any other person, the penalty is that
for murder. In either case, the proper qualification for the offense is infanticide.

* If the offender is the parent and the victim is less than three days old, the crime is
infanticide and not parricide. The fact that the killing was done to conceal her dishonor
will not mitigate the criminal liability anymore because concealment of dishonor in killing
the child is not mitigating in parricide.

* Only the mother and maternal grandparents of the child are entitled to the mitigating
circumstance of concealing the dishonor.

* When infanticide is committed by the mother or maternal grandmother of the victim in

order to conceal the mother’s dishonor, such fact is only mitigating.

* The delinquent mother who claims that she committed the offense to conceal the
dishonor must be of good reputation. Hence, if she is a prostitute, she is not entitled to a
lesser penalty because she has no honor to protect.

* There is no infanticide when the child was born dead, or although born alive it could
not sustain an independent life when it was killed.

* A stranger who cooperates in the perpetration of infanticide committed by the mother

or grandparent on the mother’s side is liable for infanticide, but he must suffer the
penalty prescribed for murder.
* Concealment of dishonor is not an element of infanticide. It merely lowers the penalty.
If the child is abandoned without any intent to kill and death results as a consequence,
the crime committed is not infanticide but abandonment under Article 276

Intentional Abortion(ART.256)

ELEMENTS:
1. That there is a pregnant woman;
2. That violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages administered, or that the
accused otherwise acts upon such pregnant woman;
3. That as a result of the use of violence or drugs or beverages upon her, or any
other act of the accused, the fetus dies,
   either in the womb or after having been expelled therefrom.
4. That the abortion is intended.

* A fetus about six months old cannot subsist by itself, outside the maternal
womb. Abortion usually means expulsion before 6 th month or before term of its
viability

* Viada: Abortion, as long as fetus dies as a result of violence

used or drugs administered

Infanticide, if: (1) Fetus could sustain independent life after

                             its separation from maternal womb, and
                       (2) it is killed

Fetus survives in spite of attempt to kill it or use of violence:

a. Abortion intended, all acts of execution performed – frustrated intentional
abortion
b. Abortion not intended, fetus does not die – physical injuries

* No frustrated unintentional abortion

Ways of committing intentional abortion

1. Using any violence upon the person of the pregnant woman;
2. Acting, but without using violence, without the consent of the woman. (By
administering drugs or beverages upon such pregnant woman without her
 consent.)
3. Acting (by administering drugs or beverages), with the consent of the pregnant
woman.

* If the mother as a consequence of abortion suffers death or physical injuries,

you have a complex crime of murder or physical injuries and abortion.

* In intentional abortion, the offender must know of the pregnancy because the
particular criminal intention is to cause an abortion.

*If the woman turns out not to be pregnant and someone performs an abortion
upon her, he is liable for an impossible crime if the woman suffers no physical
injury. If she does, the crime will be homicide, serious physical injuries, etc.

*Frustrated abortion is committed if the fetus that is expelled is viable and,

therefore, not dead as abortion did not result despite the employment of
adequate and sufficient means to make the pregnant woman abort.

Unintentional Abortion(ART.257)

ELEMENTS:
1. That there is a pregnant woman;
2. That violence is used upon such pregnant woman without intending an abortion;
3. That the violence is intentionally exerted; and
4. That as a result of the violence the fetus dies, either in the womb or after having been
expelled therefrom.

* Committed only by violence(giving of bitter substance with no intention to cause

abortion is not unintentional abortion)

* Violence must be intentionally exerted

* Unintentional abortion may be complexed with other crimes such as parricide or

homicide

* The accused can only be held liable if he knew that the woman was pregnant. If there
is no intention to cause abortion and neither was violence exerted, Arts. 256 and 257
does not apply.
* Unintentional abortion requires physical violence inflicted deliberately and voluntarily
by a third person upon the pregnant woman.

* If the pregnant woman aborted because of intimidation, the crime committed is not
unintentional abortion because there is no violence; the crime committed is light threats.

* If the pregnant woman was killed by violence by her husband, the crime committed is
the complex crime of parricide with unlawful abortion.

* Unintentional abortion may be committed through negligence as it is enough that the

use of violence be voluntary.

* If the act of violence is not felonious, that is, act of self-defense, and there is no
knowledge of the woman’s pregnancy, there is no liability. If the act of violence is not
felonious, but there is knowledge of the woman’s pregnancy, the offender is liable for
unintentional abortion.

Rape(ART.266A-266-B)

The Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (RA 8353) now classified the crime of rape as a Crime
Against Persons. It incorporated rape into Title 8 of the RPC.

ELEMENTS:
Rape is committed -
1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following
circumstances:
a. through force, threat or intimidation;
b. when the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;
c. by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; or
d. when the offended party is under 12 years of age or is demented,  even though
none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.

2. By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1

hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting
a. his penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice; or
b. any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.

Rape committed under paragraph 1 is punishable by:

1. reclusion perpetua
2. reclusion perpetua to DEATH when:
 a. victim became insane by reason or on the occasion of rape; or
b. the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion
thereof.
3. DEATH when:
a. homicide is committed;
b. victim is under 18 years old and offender is:
     (1) parent,
       (2) ascendant,
     (3) step-parent,
        (4) guardian,
     (5) relative by consanguinity or affinity within the 3rd civil degree,
     (6) common law spouse of victim’s parent;
c. under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law enforcement or
penal institution;
d. committed in full view of the spouse, parent or any of the children or other relatives
within the 3rd degree of consanguinity;

e, victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation or calling and is

personally known to be such by the offender before or at the time of the commission of
the crime;
f. a child below 7 years old;

g. offender knows he is afflicted with HIV or AIDS or any other sexually transmissible
disease and the virus is transmitted to the victim;

h. offender is a member of the AFP, or para-military units thereof, or the PNP, or any
law enforcement agency or penal institution, when the offender took advantage of his
position to facilitate the commission of the crime;

i. the victim suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability;

j. the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party at the time of the
commission of the crime; and

k. when the offender knew of the mental disability, emotional disorder and/or physical
handicap of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime.

Rape committed under paragraph 2 is punishable by:

1. prision mayor
2. prision mayor to reclusion temporal when:
    a. there was use of deadly weapon, or
    b. when committed by two or more persons.
3. reclusion temporal – when the victim has become insane
4. reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua – rape is attempted and homicide is
committed
5. reclusion perpetua – homicide is committed by reason or on occasion of rape
6. reclusion temporal – committed with any of the 10 aggravating circumstances
mentioned above

CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY

Who Are Guilty Of Robbery(ART.293)

ELEMENTS of robbery IN GENERAL:

1. That there be personal property belonging to another (bienes muebles)
2. That there is unlawful taking of that property (apoderamiento or asportacion)
3. That the taking must be with intent to gain; (animus lucrandi)
4. That there is violence against or intimidation of any person, or force upon anything.

* Person from whom property was taken need not be the owner. Legal possession is
sufficient.

General rule: The identity of the real owner is not essential so long as the personal
property taken does not belong to the accused. Exception: If the crime is robbery with
homicide

* The taking of personal property must be unlawful in order to constitute robbery. If the
property is in the possession of the offender because it was given to him in trust by the
owner, the crime is estafa.

* If taking was lawful, then misappropriated after possession crime may be

malversation, (estafa)

* As to robbery w/ violence or intimidation, from the moment the offender gains

possession of the thing even if offender has had no opportunity to dispose of the same,
the unlawful taking is complete.

* As to robbery w/ force upon things, thing must be taken out of the building in order to
consummate robbery.

* Intent to gain is presumed from unlawful taking of personal property.

* The unlawful taking must not be under the claim of title or ownership.

* When there is no intent to gain but there is violence in the taking, the crime is grave
coercion.
* The violence or intimidation must be committed against the person of the offended
party, not upon the thing taken.

General rule: Violence or intimidation must be present before the “taking” is complete.

Exception: When violence results in homicide, rape, intentional mutilation or any of the
serious physical injuries in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Art. 263 (Serious Physical injuries),
the taking of the property is robbery complexed w/ any of these crimes under Art. 294,
even if the taking is already complete when violence was used by the offender.

* Use of force upon things is entrance to the building by means described in Arts. 299
and 302.

* When both violence or intimidation and force upon things concur in committing the
crime, it is robbery w/ violence against persons.

* If not personal property but real property or rights crime may be usurpation.

* Theft, not robbery, where accused cut with bolo the strings tying opening of a sack and
then took the palay.

* RA 6539 is applicable when property taken in robbery is a motor vehicle (Carnapping:

taking with intent to gain of motor vehicle belonging to another without the latter’s
consent, or by means of violence against or intimidation of persons or by using force
upon things; Unqualified -14years and 8 months to 17 years and 4 months;
violence/force upon things -17 years and 4 months to 30 years; occupant killed or raped
– reclusion perpetua to death)

Robbery With Violence Against Or Intimidation Of

Persons(ART.294)

ACTS PUNISHED AS ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF

PERSONS:

1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery, homicide is committed;

2. When the robbery is accompanied w/ rape or intentional mutilation or arson;
3. When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any of the physical injuries resulting in
insanity, imbecility, impotency, or blindness is inflicted;
4. When by reason of or on occasion of the robbery, serious physical injuries resulting in
the loss of the use of speech, or the power to hear or to smell, or the loss of an eye,
hand, foot, arm, leg, or the loss of the use of any such member or incapacity for work in
w/c victim is habitually engaged is inflicted;
5. If the violence / intimidation employed in committing the robbery shall have been
carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the crime;
6. When in the course of its execution, offender inflicts upon any person not responsible
for the commission of robbery any of the physical injuries resulting to deformity, loss of
any part of the body or the use thereof, or illness or incapacity for the performance of
the work for > 90 days or > 30 days;
7. If the violence employed does not cause any serious physical injuries defined in Art.
263, or if offender employs intimidation only

SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIMES WITH SPECIFIC PENALTIES PRESCRIBED:

1. Robbery with homicide is committed if original design is robbery and homicide was
committed although homicide precedes the robbery by an appreciable time. If original
design is not robbery  but robbery was committed after homicide as an afterthought,
offender committed 2 separate offenses of robbery and homicide. The crime is still
robbery with homicide if the person killed was an innocent bystander and not the person
robbed and even if the death supervened by mere accident.

2. In robbery with rape, the intent to commit robbery must precede rape. Prosecution of
the crime need not be by the offended party and the fiscal can sign the information.
When rape and homicide co-exist in a robbery, rape should be considered
as aggravating only and the crime is still robbery with homicide.

3. Robbery with intimidation is committed when the acts done by the accused, by their
own nature or by reason of the circumstances, inspire fear in the person against whom
the acts are directed.

* The crime defined in this article is a special complex crime.

* The violence must be against the person of the offended party, not upon the thing
taken. It must be present before the taking of personal property is complete.

Exception: When the violence results in:

   (1) homicide,
   (2) rape,
   (3) intentional mutilation, or
   (4) any of the serious physical injuries penalized in paragraphs 1 & 2 of Art. 263,

- the taking of personal property is robbery complexed with any of those crimes under
Art. 294,
- even if the taking was already complete when the violence was used by the offender.

* There is no crime as robbery with murder.

* The crime is still robbery with homicide if, in the course of the robbery, a person was
killed even if it was another robber or a bystander.

* Even if the rape was committed in another place, it is still robbery with rape.
* When the taking of personal property of a woman is an independent act following
defendant’s failure to consummate the rape, there are two distinct crimes committed:
attempted rape and theft.

* Additional rapes committed on the same occasion of robbery will not increase the
penalty.

* When rape and homicide co-exist in the commission of robbery, the crime is robbery
with homicide, the rape to be considered as an aggravating circumstance only.

* Absence of intent to gain will make the taking of personal property grave coercion if
there is violence used(Art.286).

Theft(ART.308)

ELEMENTS of Theft
1. That there be taking of personal property;
2. That said property belongs to another;
3. That the taking be done with intent to gain;
4. That the taking be done without the consent of the owner; and
5. That the taking be accomplished without the use of violence against or intimidation of
persons or force upon things.

* Theft: committed by any person who, with intent to gain but without violence against or
intimidation of persons nor force upon things, shall take personal property of another
without the latter’s consent.

Taking - if bulky, must be taken away(when place surrounded by fence or wall),

otherwise, the moment he had full possession of thing, asportation is complete; does
not need a character of permanency.

Intent to Gain – taking must be accompanied by intention, at the time of taking, of

withholding the thing with character of permanency; presumed from unlawful taking of
personal property of another.

* Gain desired by the offender may not only be money. It may include satisfaction, use,
pleasure or any benefit; includes satisfaction of taking revenge.

* It is not required that the offender realized actual gain in committing theft. It is sufficient
that he took personal property of another with intent to gain.

* Trust, Commission, Administration: Juridical possession of thing transferred to another

* If only custody of object (i.e. only material possession) was given to the accused and it
is actually taken by him with no intent to return, the crime is theft. But if juridical
possession is transferred (Ex., by a contract of bailment) is given to the accused and he
takes the property with intent to gain, the crime is estafa.

* Personal property: includes electricity and gas, promissory note and check. Ex. the
inspector misreads the meter to profit thereby, or one using a jumper.

Consent: freely given and not merely lack of objection

* Allegation in the information of the lack of the owner’s consent is important.

Finder: may be a finder in law

* Theft is consummated when the offender is able to place the thing taken under his
control and in such a situation as he could dispose of it at once (although there is
actually no opportunity to dispose).

* Servant using his employer’s car without permission is guilty of qualified theft although
his use thereof was only temporary. However, Reyes says that there must be some
character of permanency in depriving owner of the use of the object and making himself
the owner. Therefore, “joyride” must be deemed as qualified theft.

* An employee taking his salary before it is actually delivered to him is guilty of theft.

* If the offender, in good faith, claims property as his own, no theft is committed
although his claim of ownership is later found to be untrue. However, if his claim is in
bad faith, he is guilty of theft.

PERSONS LIABLE FOR THEFT:

1. Those who:
a. with intent to gain,
b. but w/o violence against or intimidation of persons nor force upon things
c. take
d. personal property
e. of another
f. w/o the latter’s consent.

2. Those who:
a. having found lost property,
b. fail to deliver the same to the local authorities or its owner.

* Retention of money/property found is theft. What is punished is retention or failure to

return with intent to gain.

* The offender’s knowledge of the identity of the owner of the property is not required.
His knowledge that the property is lost is enough.

* The finder of the lost property is liable for his deliberate failure  to return the lost
property, he knowing that the property does not belong to him.

3. Those who:
a. after having maliciously damaged the property of another,
b. remove or make use of the fruits or object of the damage caused by them.

* Killing the cattle of another which destroyed his(offender’s) property and getting meat
for himself is theft.

4. Those who hunting, fishing or gathering fruits, etc. in enclosed estate

ELEMENTS(Par. 3 of Art 308):

1. That there is an enclosed estate or a field where trespass is forbidden or which
belongs to another;
2. That the offender enters the same;
3. That the offender hunts or fishes upon the same or gathers fruits, cereals or other
forest or farm products in the estate or field; and
4. That the hunting or fishing or gathering of products is without the consent of the
owner.

* The fishing in this article is not in the fishpond or fishery. If the fish is taken from a
fishpond or a fishery, the crime is qualified theft.

Valenzuela v. People (June 2007)

There is no frustrated theft because of the definition of theft in Art 308. The offender has
either complete control of the property (consummated) or without (attempted)

* There is “taking” even if the offender received the thing from the offended party.

* If juridical possession of thing was transferred as opposed to physical possession and

thing was appropriated the crime is ESTAFA not theft

* Selling share of a partner or co-owner is not theft.

* Employee is not the owner of separation pay which is not actually delivered to him.

* Actual or real gain is not necessary in theft. The consent contemplated in the  element
of theft refers to consent  freely given and not mere lack of  opposition by owner of the
property  taken.

* It is not robbery when violence is for  a reason entirely foreign to the fact of taking.

People v. Gulinao
1. Gulinao shot Dr. Chua & left. Then he went back & took Dr. Chua’s diamond ring.
2. The crime was Theft and not robbery as the taking of the ring was just an
afterthought. Violence used in killing Dr. Chua had no bearing on the taking of the ring.

* One in possession of part of recently stolen property is presumed to be thief of all.

Lost property - embraces loss by stealing or by act of he owner or by a person other

than the owner, or through some casual occurrence.

Penalties For Theft(ART.309)

The basis of the penalty in theft is:

(1) the value of the thing stolen, and in some cases,
(2) the value and also the nature of the property taken, or
(3) the circumstances or causes that impelled the culprit to commit the crime.

* If there is no evidence of the value of the property stolen, the court should impose the
minimum penalty corresponding to theft involving the value of P5.00. The court may
also take judicial notice of its value in the proper cases.

Qualified Theft(ART.310)

Theft is qualified if
1. It is committed by a domestic servant, or
2. Committed with grave abuse of confidence,or
3. The property stolen is a:
      a. motor vehicle,
      b. mail matter,
      c. large cattle,
      d. coconut from the premises of a plantation,
      e. fish from a fishpond or fishery, or
4. Committed on the occasion of calamities, vehicular accident
   and civil disturbance.

Grave abuse of confidence - necessitates a high degree of confidence between the

offender and the offended party.
(Ex. guests). Hence, when there is no confidence b/w the parties,
the crime is not qualified theft.

* Theft is qualified if it is committed by one who has access to the place where stolen
property is kept. (Ex. security guards, tellers)

* Novation theory (i.e. the victim’s acceptance of payment converted the offender’s
liability to a civil obligation) applies only if there is a contractual relationship b/w the
accused and the complainant.
* When the accused treated the deed of sale as sham and he had intent to gain, his
absconding with the object of the sale is qualified theft

*When a PUV in “boundary” system entrusted tothe offender is sold to another, the
crime is theft. On the other hand, if the motor vehicle is not used for public utility in
“boundary” system but under contract of lease, the crime is estafa.

* The penalty for qualified theft is 2 degrees higher.

*Theft by domestic servant is always qualified. There’s no need to prove grave abuse of
discretion.

* The abuse of confidence must be grave. There must be allegation in the information
and proof of a relation, by reason of dependence, guardianship or vigilance, between
the accused and the offended party, that has created a high degree of confidence
between them, which the accused abused.

* Theft of any material, spare part, product or article by employees and laborers is
heavily punished under PD 133.

* Motor vehicle: all vehicles propelled by power, other than muscular power.

* When the purpose of taking the car is to destroy by burning it, the crime is arson.

* If a private individual took a letter containing postal money order it is qualified theft. If it
was the postmaster, to whom the letter was delivered, the crime would be infidelity in
the custody of documents.