CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW Although Congress has the power to enact penal laws,
there are certain limitations on their power to enact
Criminal law is the branch of a public law that deals penal laws:
with crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for 1. Penal laws enacted by Congress must be general
their penalties. in application.
NOTE: Otherwise, it will be violative of
It is a virtue of public law because it deals with the the equal protection clause of the
relation of the individual with the State. For every Constitution.
violation of public law, the offender commits injury 2. Penal laws enacted by Congress must not partake
and damages, not only to the private offended party of the nature of ex-post facto law.
but also against the State. 3. Penal laws enacted by Congress must not partake
of the nature of the bill of attainder.
In the case of Guy v. Tulfo, the Supreme Court said that 4. Penal laws enacted by Congress cannot impose
a criminal case has two aspects - the civil and the cruel or unusual punishment, or excessive fine.
criminal. This is rooted on the fundamental theory that
whenever a criminal act committed, there are two BAR Q: Distinguish an ex post facto law and a bill
entities offended: of attainder.
a. The State, whose law has been violated and
b. The private offended party, the person who is A: An ex post facto law is a law which an act criminal
directly injured by the criminal act. although at the time it was committed, it was not yet
so. Whereas a bill of attainder is a law which punishes
In any criminal prosecution, the participation of the the offender without giving him the opportunity to be
private offended party is only to serve as a witness of heard, without giving him the opportunity to state his
the State. He will be presented to the court only to side of the story, without due process of law.
testify as to the acts committed against him by the
offender. And after the trial of the case, the judge will CHARACTERISTICS OF PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL
always rule for a penalty and civil indemnity. The LAW
penalty is an act of remedy in favor of the State, and
the civil indemnity is a remedy in favor of the offended 1. GENERALITY PRINCIPLE OF CRIMINAL LAW
party.
General rule: Our penal laws shall be binding on all
Crime refers to an act committed or omitted in persons who live or sojourn in the Philippines.
violation of the public law forbidding or compelling it. Whether he is a Filipino, a foreigner, for as long as he
It is an encompassing word. It includes felony, offense is here in the Philippines, though temporary, he is
and infraction of a law. obligated to comply and follow Philippine penal laws.
Everyone regardless of creed, color, region, race or
a. Felony - refers to an act or omission punished by other personal circumstances, must comply with the
the Revised Penal Code Philippine penal laws. Otherwise, that person who
b. Offense - refers to an act or omission punished by violated the law may be arrested, prosecuted and
a special penal law punished.
c. Infraction of law - refers to an act or omission
prohibited by the ordinances enacted by the local Exceptions to Generality Principle:
sanggunian. a. General accepted principles of public
international law
Whether it is a felony, an offense or an infraction of the b. Laws of preferential application
law, they are all called crimes.
Generally accepted principles of Public
SOURCES OF PHILIPPINE PENAL LAWS International Law

1. Revised Penal Code Chiefs of state, sovereigns, and other diplomatic

2. Special Penal Laws representatives such as public ministers and
3. Penal Executive Orders/Penal Presidential ambassadors are immune from the criminal
Decrees jurisdiction of the country where they are assigned.
While they are in the host country, they cannot be
It is Congress that has the power to enact penal laws. arrested, prosecuted, nor punished for having violated
There are however instances wherein Congress would the laws of the said country because they enjoy
enact the law that would delegate to the President the diplomatic immunity from suit.
power to issue Penal Executive Orders. This is not
inherent to the powers of the President. Without the It is also settled that although the consul is also a
enacted law delegating the same, the President cannot diplomatic representative, diplomatic agent, a consul
exercise such powers. does not enjoy blanket diplomatic immunity from suit.

-1-
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

A consul can be prosecuted before the courts of the has an agreement that the ADB economist is
host country. A consul will only be exempted, immune immune from suit. The SC held that it was
from suit if the violation done by him pertains to his erroneous that there was a decision immediately to
performance of official functions, or wherever there is dismiss the case without adducing any evidence,
a particular stipulation, agreement in a treaty between without informing the fiscal.
a mother country of the consul and the host countries,
stating that he shall be immune from suit, only in those Issue: Whether or not Petitioner Liang is covered
instances may a consul be immune from suit. with immunity. – NO

Q: The president of country X arrived here in Held: He is not only covered with immunity from
Manila. The said president of country X was legal process, with respect to his official functions.
welcomed by the President and then thereafter,
they went to Malacañang, they had a breakfast Section 45 of the Agreement states that officers and
meeting and lunch. staff of the Bank shall have an immunity from legal
process with respect to acts performed by them in
Thereafter, there was a little show, ceremony in their official capacity except when the Bank
order to welcome the said President of country X. waives the immunity.
One of the guards therein went to the president of
country X, President W, and then the lady guard The immunity therein is not absolute but subject to
went and told to President W, “Mr. President, sir, the exception that the act was done in OFFICIAL
could you please put on your mask? We are very CAPACITY. Thus, the prosecution should have been
strict here. It is necessary that officials, people given the chance to rebut the DFA protocol and to
inside this palace must wear mask except, of submit controverting evidence.
course, when they are eating. Look at President
Marcos, he is wearing mask. So please sir, could Also, slandering a person could not possibly be
you please wear your mask.” covered by the immunity agreement because
our laws do not allow the commission of a crime,
However, President W of country X ignored the such as defamation, in the name of official duty.
said lady security. Still, he did not put on his face The imputation of theft is ultra vires and cannot be
mask. So here comes again the lady security. “Sir, part of official functions. It is well-settled principle
excuse me, could you please put on our face of law that a public official may be liable in his
mask?” I am already being instructed by my head personal private capacity for whatever damage he
to tell you to put on your face mask.” At this may have caused by his act done with malice or in
particular moment, President W of country X got bad faith or beyond the scope of his authority or
so mad at the said lady security guard. He stood up jurisdiction.
and slapped the face of the said security guard a
number of times. He was about to slap her more Under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
when he was prevented by other team. Relations, a diplomatic agent, assuming petitioner
is such, enjoys immunity from criminal jurisdiction
Can the said lady security guard of Country X file a of the receiving state except in the case of an action
case against the President W of Country X? Can the relating to any professional or commercial activity
said lady security guard file a case of injuries for exercised by the diplomatic agent in the receiving
the injuries she sustained when she was slapped state outside his official functions.
by the president of country X?
MINUCHER V. SCALZO
A: NO. The president of country X, president W, enjoys G.R. No. 142396 | February 11, 2013
blanket immunity from suit. He cannot be arrested,
prosecuted, punished by the receiving State that is the Issue: Whether Scalzo is entitled to diplomatic
Philippines, based on the facts of the problem. immunity as agent of the US-DEA – NO.

Under the Vienna Convention on diplomatic relations, Held: The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
a diplomatic agent enjoys immunity from criminal Relations lists the classes of heads of diplomatic
jurisdiction of the receiving state. Therefore, the said missions to include (a) ambassadors or nuncios
President W of country X cannot be charged with a accredited to the heads of state, (b) envoys,
crime of physical injuries. ministers or internuncios accredited to the heads of
states; and (c) charges d' affairs accredited to the
JEFFREY LIANG v. PEOPLE ministers of foreign affairs. Comprising the "staff of
G.R. No. 125865, January 29, 2000 the (diplomatic) mission" are the diplomatic staff,
the administrative staff and the technical and
Liang is an employee in ADB, a foreigner economist. service staff. Only the heads of missions, as well
A Filipino filed an oral defamation against the as members of the diplomatic staff, excluding the
foreigner economist. The DFA issued a letter and
protocol to the court which states that ADB and PH

-2-
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

members of the administrative, technical and service only as long as he is acting within the directives
staff of the mission, are accorded diplomatic rank. of the sending state.

Only "diplomatic agents," defined as heads of Here, the consent of the PH government to the
missions or members of the diplomatic staff, are activities of the US-DEA can be gleaned from the
vested with blanket diplomatic immunity from civil official exchanges of communication between the
and criminal suits. It might bear stressing that even agencies of the two countries and the participation
consuls, who represent their respective states in of the PH Narcotics Command in the buy-bust
concerns of commerce and navigation and perform operation at the residence of Minucher at the
certain administrative and notarial duties, such as behest of Scalzo. The job description of Scalzo
the issuance of passports and visas, authentication tasked him to conduct surveillance on suspected
of documents, and administration of oaths, do not drug suppliers and, after having ascertained the
ordinarily enjoy the traditional diplomatic target, to inform local law enforcers who would
immunities and privileges accorded diplomats, then make the arrest. In conducting surveillance on
mainly for the reason that they are not charged with Minucher and later acting as poseur-buyer, and
the duty of representing their states in political then becoming principal witness in the criminal
matters. Indeed, the main yardstick in ascertaining case against Minucher, Scalzo can hardly be said
whether a person is a diplomat entitled to immunity to have acted beyond the scope of his official
is the determination of whether or not he function.
performs duties of diplomatic nature.
Laws of Preferential Application
Scalzo is not entitled to blanket dipmomatic
immunity because he is not a diplomatic agent, as These are certain laws which exempt certain
defined by the Vienna Convention. In this case, individuals from criminal prosecution.
Scalzo was an assistant Attache of the US
diplomatic mission and accredited as such by the EXAMPLE: The 1987 Constitution provides that
PH government. Attaches assist a chief of mission in Members of the Congress, Senator or Congressman, he
his duties and are administratively under him, but is immune from any criminal liability for slander, oral
their main function is to observe, analyze and defamation, libel, for every speech or debate that he
interpret trends and developments in their makes in the house of congress while in regular or
respective fields (cultural, press, administrative, special session.
financial) in the host country and submit reports to
their own ministries or departments in the home 2. TERRITORIALITY PRINCIPLE OF CRIMINAL
government. These officials are not generally LAW
regarded as members of the diplomatic mission
nor normally designated as having diplomatic Our penal laws shall have force and effect within the
rank. Philippine archipelago including its atmosphere,
interior waters, and maritime zone. Therefore, for
Issue: Whether Scalzo may be sued for acting as every act committed in the Philippine archipelago, our
poseur-buyer in the buy-bust operation against criminal laws apply. But, for acts committed outside
Minucher pursuant to his official duties as US-DEA the territory of the Philippines, that offender cannot
agent in PH – NO. be prosecuted before Philippine courts.

Held: It was established that Scalzo worked for the The exceptions to the territoriality principle of
US-DEA and tasks to conduct surveillance of criminal law are provided for under Art. 2 of the
suspected drug activities within the country. If he Revised Penal Code.
was acting within his assigned functions when he
committed the acts alleged in the complaint, then Q: X (husband) and Y (wife), together with Z (best
this controversy could be resolved under the friend of X), went to Hong Kong for vacation for
related doctrine of state immunity from suit. A two weeks. They checked-in to a hotel while one
state cannot be sued in the courts of a foreign state. room is occupied by X and Y and the other room is
If the acts giving rise to a suit are those of a foreign by Z. They went shopping. Suddenly, the wife said
government done by its foreign agent, although she wanted to go back to the hotel and rest for a
not necessarily a diplomatic personage, but while. Z also said that he wants to go back to the
acting in his official capacity, the complaint could hotel because he is not feeling well. The husband
be barred by the immunity of the foreign sovereign said to the wife that she can go there already and
from suit without its consent. Suing a he still needs to go around first. Y and Z went back
representative of a state is believed to be, in effect, to the hotel. X changed his mind and went back to
suing the state itself. But this immunity from suit the hotel too. When X opened the room, X saw Y in
will not apply where the public official is being sued sexual intercourse with Z. He was so hurt. X flew
in his private and personal capacity as an back to the PH right after and later Y and Z
ordinary citizen. A foreign agent, operating within followed. X immediately filed a case for adultery
a territory, can be cloaked with immunity from suit

-3-
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

against his wife and best friend at the office of the support to a child is a matter that falls under family
public prosecutor. Upon seeing that the said place rights and duties. Respondent is subject to the laws
where the act of adultery was committed was in of his country Netherlands as to whether he is
Hong Kong, the public prosecutor outrightly obliged to support his child.
dismissed the case. Is the prosecutor correct?
However, due to respondent’s failure to prove the
A: The charge of adultery under Article 333 of the RPC national law of Netherlands in his favor, the
filed before the METC will not prosper because the doctrine of processual presumption shall govern.
said act of adultery was committed outside the PH
jurisdiction. Therefore, since it is committed by the Also, notwithstanding that the national law of
wife and best friend outside Philippine jurisdiction, respondents states that parents have no obligation
the case will not prosper in the Philippines. to support their children or that such obligation is
not punishable by law, said law would still not find
Q: The husband went to Singapore with some applicability, in light of Bank of America v. American
friends. They will be attending a conference for 2 Realty Corporation:
weeks. The wife was left in the PH. The wife When the foreign law, judgment or contract
received photos and videos coming from common is contrary to a sound and established
friends showing that husband is having extra- public policy of the forum, the said foreign
marital affairs with another woman and right after law, judgment or order shall not be applied.
every conference, they would check in to the hotel. Foreign law should not be applied when its
The husband and the other woman were said to be application would work undeniable
cohabiting already. The wife upon seeing those injustice to the citizens or residents of the
videos and pictures was left crying and even forum.
attempted to commit suicide. Until a friend
advised her to consult a counsel. The counsel Thus, even if Netherland laws neither enforce a
advised her to file a case for violation of Section parent’s obligation to support his child nor penalize
5(i) for psychological violence under RA 9262 non-compliance therewith, such obligation is still
before the PH courts. The wife filed a case. Will the enforceable in PH because it would be of great
case prosper? injustice to the child to be denied of financial
support.
A: Yes. Although the extra-marital affair was
committed in Singapore and not in the PH, the case of But as to petitioner herself, respondent is no longer
Section 5(i) for psychological violence under RA 9262 liable to support his former wife. The effect of
will prosper before Philippine court because as held divorce is that the Filipino wife should no longer be
by the Supreme Court, psychological violence, as one considered married to the alien spouse and thus the
of the acts prohibited under RA No. 9262, is a no longer subject to a husband’s obligations.
transitory or continuing offense.
3. PROSPECTIVITY
Since it is a transitory or continuing offense, even if the
extra-marital affair was placed on a foreign land, the This characteristic provides that our penal laws shall
emotional pain or the mental distress was felt by the only operate prospectively. Our penal laws, as a rule,
wife here in the Philippines. Therefore, the offender cannot be given retroactive application. It shall only be
can be prosecuted before the courts of the place where applied at the time of its effectivity and thereafter.
any of the elements of the crime happened. Therefore,
the case will prosper as an exception to the It cannot be given retroactive application.
territoriality principle of criminal law.
EXCEPTION:
DEL SOCORRO v. VAN WILSEM a. ART. 22: Penal laws shall be given retroactive
GR No. 193707, December 10, 2014 application if they favor the accused PROVIDED
that the accused is not a habitual criminal.
Although it is true that by virtue of the nationality b. If it is the Penal Law itself that provides for the
principle under Article 15 of the NCC, petitioner retroactive application
cannot rely on Art. 195 of FC in demanding support
from respondent who is a foreign citizen, it is still In these two instances, as an exception to the
imperative that the foreign law which governs the perspectivity characteristic, penal laws may be given
foreign citizen be alleged and proved. retroactive application.

Insofar as Philippine laws are concerned, In R.A. 9344, Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of
specifically the Family Code provisions on support, 2004, an example of a Penal Law that specifically and
the same applies only to Filipino citizens. As to expressly provides for its retroactive application to
foreigners, Art. 15 of NCC applies such that they are minor offenders who have been convicted and are
governed by their national law with respect to serving sentence. It is the law itself that provides itself
family rights and duties. The obligation to give for retroactive application.

-4-
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

PHILOSOPHIES OF CRIMINAL LAW

SEC. 68. Children Who Have Been Convicted and
are Serving Sentence. – Persons who have been There are two Philosophies underlying Criminal
convicted and are serving sentence at the time of the Law. We have the so called:
effectivity of this Act, and who were below the age of 1. Classical or Juristic Philosophy; and
18 years at the time the commission of the offense 2. Positivist or Realistic Philosophy
for which they were convicted and are serving
sentence, shall likewise benefit from the retroactive CLASSICAL OR POSITIVIST OR
application of this Act. They shall be entitled to JURISTIC REALISTIC
appropriate dispositions provided under this Act PHILOSOPHY PHILOSOPHY
and their sentences shall be adjusted accordingly. The basis of criminal The basis of criminal
They shall be immediately released if they are so liability is the moral liability is man’s social
qualified under this Act or other applicable law. trait of the offender. environment. All men
Man is a moral creature are born good, no man is
HERNAN v. SANDIGANBAYAN who understands right born evil. What makes
G.R. No. 217874 | December 5, 2017 from wrong, good from man do evil things is the
evil. association that he has
FACTS: Hernan was a public officer and was charge with his fellow beings,
and thereafter convicted by the Sandiganbayan of with his social
the crime Malversation under Article 217 of the environment.
Revised Penal Code. Allegedly the amount The purpose of the The purpose of the
malversate and failed to liquidate is 11,300 and penalty is to exact penalty is rehabilitation.
because of that, based on the provisions of Article retribution. This The positivist
217 of the RPC, the Sandiganbayan upon Hernan the revolves around the philosophy believes that
penalty of prision mayor and this decision of philosophy “an eye for an offender is a socially
Sandiganbayan became final and executory. Then an eye, a tooth for a sick individual who
here comes RA 10951 which reduces the imposable tooth”. For every wrong must be rehabilitated,
penalty on malversation under Article 217. If the done, there is a cured, and not
amount malversate is less than 40,000 the penalty commensurate punished.
would only be prision correccional. penalty.
The determination of The determination of
ISSUE: May the judgment rendered by the penalty is done penalty is done
Sandiganbayan on Hernan still be opened and mechanically. The individually, after the
ordered to lower the imposable penalty. penalty imposed on the offender has been
offender is always in examined and
RULING: SC said that the general rule is that a direct proportion to the investigated.
judgment that has acquired finality becomes injury or damage caused
immutable and unalterable. However according to to the victim. So if the
the SC when there are circumstances after the said offender kills the
finality of the decision which would render its victim, the penalty to be
execution unjust and inequitable the SC seating en imposed to him will also
banc can relax the doctrine of immutability of be death.
judgment. In this case the SC said that it is necessary The emphasis of the law The emphasis of the law
to re-open the case of Hernan and recall the entry of is on the offense and on is on the offender and
Judgment done by the Sandiganbayan. not the offender. It is on not on the offense; on
the crime and not the the criminal and not on
NOTE: According to the SC, it is NOT for further criminal. The classical the crime. This takes
reception of evidence. It is only to modify the philosophy does not into consideration the
penalty imposed by the Sandiganbayan. take into consideration reason, the motive why
the reason why the the offender committed
So, Hernan remains to be convicted and it cannot be offender committed the the act.
changed. However, the case was re-opened in order crime. It suffices that he
to modify the penalty. The Supreme Court lowered committed the crime,
the imposable penalty from prision mayor to prision violated the law, and for
correcional. In the latter part of the decision, the SC that he has to be
said that “now, that Hernan’s penalty has been punished regardless of
reduced to prision correccional which is only motive, regardless of
maximum of 6 years, Hernan may now apply for reason for the
Probation under the New Probation Law. That was commission.
expressly stated by the SC in the lower part of its
judgment. DOCTRINES THAT AFFECT CRIMINAL LAW

-5-
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Doctrine of Pro Reo Magno, rather it is Ms. Teng. Therefore, to penalize

Magno is to foster materialism and opportunism.
The Doctrine of Pro Reo provides that our penal laws Hence, the SC said that Magno is not criminally
shall always be construed applied liberally in favor of liable.
the accused and strictly against the state. The maxim
is ”in dubio pro reo” in case of doubt, rule in favor of The Supreme Court said the maxim behind the
the accused. The reason is the constitutional utilitarian or protective theory is actus non facet
presumption of innocence or the accused is presumed reum nisi men cit rea. This long-standing doctrine,
to be innocent. Unless proven guilty beyond the act is not criminal when the mind is not
reasonable doubt. criminal, is material to acts mala in se. In crimes
mala in se, to bring about the conviction, there must
Lenity Rule be both the mens rea and the actus reus.

Under The Lenity Rule, whenever a penal provision is Mens rea v. actus reus
susceptible of two interpretations, with one
interpretation to be lenient and will favor the accused, Mens rea is defined as a guilty mind, a guilty or a
and another interpretation is strict and will go against wrongful purpose, an evil intent, a criminal intent. It is
the accused bring about his conviction. The lenient essential to bring about the criminal liability. But mens
interpretation shall prevail over the strict rea alone will not suffice, there must be the over acts
interpretation. The reason is the constitutional to constitute the crime. For the crime to exist, there
presumption of innocence. must be the so called “actus reus” or the guilty act,
voluntary and unlawful acts of execution of the said
Equipoise Rule crime by the said offender/accused. It is from both
actus reus and mens rea that a felony is produced.
Under The Equipoise rule, whenever the evidence of Again, this is material in acts mala in se.
the prosecution is equally balance with the evidence of
the defense. The scale of justice will be tilted in favor Acts in mala in se v. Acts mala prohibita
of the accused. For two reasons:
1. the constitutional presumption of innocence, Acts mala in se are acts that are inherently immoral,
2. in every criminal prosecution, the conviction of evil or wrong. They are wrong per se or wrong by the
the accused will depend on the strength of the very nature. There need not be a law to say that an act
evidence of the prosecution and not on the of killing a person is wrong. There not need be a law
weakness of the evidence of the defense. that will say that an act of stealing is evil or wrong.
Everyone knows that you do not have the right to take
Utilitarian/Protective Theory a person’s life. Everyone knows that it is an act that is
inherently immoral or evil. Therefore, it is an act
This theory was first enunciated in the case of Magno malum in se.
v. CA. The Utilitarian or Protective theory provides that
the purpose of penalty in criminal law is to protect On the other hand, acts mala prohibita are acts that
society from actual or potential wrongdoer. are considered wrong because there is a law that
criminalizes or punishes the said act. The best
MAGNO v. CA example of this is illegal possession of loose firearms.
G.R. No. 96132 | June 26, 1992 Owning a firearm is not per se illegal because firearms
are not per se considered contraband unlike drugs.
In this case, the Court says that it behooves upon the What the law punishes is the ownership or possession
court that in imposing a penalty, they should only of a firearms without the corresponding license,
impose it on actual and potential wrongdoers. permit or registration. If there is no law that punishes
Otherwise, it will foster materialism or it, then it will not be considered as criminal in nature.
opportunism. It is an act malum prohibita.

The Court found that on the base of the pieces of ACTS MALUM IN SE ACTS MALA
evidence, Magno is not the actual or the potential PROHIBITA
wrongdoer. Magno issued the check to serve as Acts which are Acts which are only
collateral for the machinery and equipment that inherently evil or wrong because there is a
was leased. Therefore, according to the Supreme wrong. Wrong per se, law that defines and
Court, when Ms. Teng took back and removed the wrong by their very punishes the act.
machineries subject of the lease agreement, it was nature.
incumbent upon Ms. Teng to return the said checks The basis of criminal The basis of criminal
issued only to serve as a collateral. However, Ms. liability is the moral liability is the actual
Teng instead of returning back to Magno, deposited trait of the offender doing of the prohibited
the said checks. Magno was the one who called the act.
bank to stop payment. The Supreme Court said here
that the actual and potential wrongdoer is not

-6-
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

ACTS MALUM IN SE ACTS MALA reckless imprudence causing damage to property.

PROHIBITA What distinguishes acts mala in se from acts mala
Good faith or lack of Good faith or lack of prohibita is that in acts mala in se, the criminal
criminal intent is a valid criminal intent is not a liability of the offenders is always based on criminal
defense. valid defense unless intent or on his negligence, whereas, in acts mala
otherwise provided. prohibita, criminal liability is based on the actual
Modifying No modifying doing of the prohibited act. Therefore, an act
circumstances such as circumstances may be malum in se does not absorb acts mala prohibita and
mitigating and appreciated by the court vice versa.
aggravating unless otherwise
circumstances are expressly provided. The Court said in this case that it is a common
considered by the court misconception that all mala in se crimes are found
in imposing the penalty. under the RPC while all mala prohibita crimes are
The stage in the It must always be an act provided by special penal laws. That is wrong
commission of the crime done, hence, always because in reality, there may be mala in se crimes
whether the crime is in consummated, under special penal laws and there may also be
the attempted, frustrated, no attempted mala prohibita crimes defined under the RPC.
frustrated, or stages, unless provided
consummated stage is by law. Examples of mala in se crimes that are punished by a
considered by the court special penal law:
in imposing the said
penalty. In the case of Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, the SC said
The degree of There is no degree that plunder which is a violation of RA 7080, a special
participation of an considered. All penal law, is malum in se because it is inherently evil
offender whether he is a perpetrators are or wrong to amass, accumulate, acquire ill-gotten
principal, accomplice, or punished to the same wealth. Therefore, although plunder is punished
an accessory is extent. No principal, no under special penal law, it is considered as malum in
considered in imposing accomplice, no se.
the penalty. accessory.
In the case of Acharon v. People, En Banc 2021,
LONEY vs. PEOPLE according to the Supreme Court, violation of Section
G.R. No. 152644, February 10, 2006 5(i) psychological violence and Section 5(e) economic
abuse of RA 9262 are acts mala in se not acts mala
In the case of Loney vs. People, the Supreme Court prohibita. Although they are both under R.A. No. 9262,
said that an act malum in se cannot absorb acts mala a violation of special penal law, the Court said they are
prohibita. acts mala in se and not acts mala prohibita. Therefore,
the Court said that before an offender can be
In this case, the officials of Marcopper Mining criminally liable, there must be evidence that the said
Company for polluting the rivers in Marinduque accused willfully and consciously withheld financial
because of a damage in the peak during the mining support legally to a woman or her child. Absent that
operations, they were charged of number of cases – willful and conscious withdrawal of support, the said
charged for violation of National Pollution Control man cannot be held criminally liable for violation of
Decree, Philippine Mining Act, Water Code of the Sec. 5(i) or Sec. 5(e) of RA 9262 because they are
Philippines (which are all Special Penal Laws). They considered as acts mala in se not acts mala prohibita.
were also charged with violation of Art. 365 –
Reckless Imprudence causing damage to property. In another case recently, in the case of Cadajas v
So, these were the four cases filed against the People, En banc 2021, the Court said that the crime of
officers of Marcopper Mining Company for child pornography which is punished under R.A. No.
polluting the two rivers in Marinduque. 9775 is classified as an act malum in se. It is inherently
evil or wrong to encourage a minor to keep photos of
Upon the filing of these cases, the counsel of the the private parts of a man. The Supreme Court said
officers of Marcopper filed a motion to quash the that child pornography under RA 9775 is a crime
three information for violation of special penal laws malum in se not a crime malum prohibita.
national pollution decree, water code, and
Philippine mining act stating that these acts are GARCIA v. CA
already included in reckless imprudence causing G.R. No. 157171 | March 14, 2006
damage to property. Therefore, double jeopardy
will arise. Garcia, being an election officer, was the head of the
board of canvassers. The camp of former senator
The Supreme Court disagreed. According to the Aquilino Pimentel discovered that Garcia reduced
Supreme Court, violation of these three special by more than 5,000 votes the tally votes of Senator
penal laws cannot be considered to be absorbed by

-7-
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Pimentel. They filed a case against Garcia for Q: What does the phrase ‘Except as provided in the
violation of the election law. treaties and laws of preferential application’
mean?
On her defense, Garcia alleged that she cannot be
held criminally liable. According to her, she had no A: This phrase means treaties entered with other
intention, there was no deliberate intent to countries, laws of preferential palliation takes
decrease the votes of Senator Aquilino Pimentel. preference over the provision of the RPC.
According to her, it just so happened that she was
already tired. She was sleepless because the Therefore, if there is any conflict between any
counting was continuous. Because of tiredness, agreements entered into by the Philippines with
sleeplessness, she failed to announce the correct another country, if it is in conflict with any provisions
number of votes. That’s why the votes were of the RPC, the said agreement shall prevail over the
decreased and because there was no criminal intent provision of RPC.
on her part. She was insisting she should be
acquitted of the crime charged. She should not be Remember the Larranaga case, based on the RPC, a
held criminally liable. person who is convicted of a crime shall serve his
sentence in the New Bilibid prison, that is the national
The camp of Pimentel said NO, what you violated is penitentiary. However, the Philippines entered into an
a special penal law. Therefore, it is an act malum agreement with Spain. This agreement was ratified by
prohibitum. Regardless of your good faith, the Senate. As a result thereof, after Larranaga has
regardless of your lack of criminal intent, you have been convicted of kidnapping and serious illegal
to be convicted. That was the argument of the camp detention with rape and homicide, considering that he
of Senator Pimentel. has 2 citizenship – both Filipino and Spanish. He was
brought to Spain, and there he is serving his sentence.
The Supreme Court said, to increase or to decrease Because based on that agreement, Spanish citizens
a candidate’s votes under the election law is an act who are serving their sentence in the Philippines can
malum in se. It is inherently evil or wrong to be brought to Spain and they are to serve their
increase or decrease a political candidate’s vote. It sentence there. Larranaga took advantage because
is an act malum in se. Therefore, does good faith or definitely, the facilities perhaps are better than prison
lack of criminal intent matter? Yes. facilities here.

However, the Court said although good faith or lack Article 2 of the RPC has two scopes of application;
of criminal intent is a defense, based on Garcia’s 1. Intra-territorial application – Intra-
own admission, she was negligent in the declaration territorial application provides that the RPC
of the votes. shall enforced within the Philippine
archipelago, including its atmosphere, its
ARTICLE 2 – TERRITORIALITY PRINCIPLE interior waters and maritime zone.
2. Extraterritorial application
Article 2. Application of its provisions. – Except
as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential PAR 1: Those who should commit an offense while
application, the provisions of this Code shall be on a Philippine ship or airship
enforced not only within the Philippine
Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior A vessel or aircraft is said to be a Philippine ship or
waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its airship if it is registered under Philippine laws,
jurisdiction, against those who: regardless of the citizenship of the owner. What is
1. Should commit an offense while on a material is the place of registration. Even if it is owned
Philippine ship or airship by foreigners, if it is licensed in the Philippines, it is a
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or Philippine ship or airship.
currency note of the Philippine Islands or
obligations and securities issued by the This situation applies when Philippine ship or airship
Government of the Philippine Islands; is in high seas, or outside the territory but is not yet in
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the the territory of a foreign country. However, if the
introduction into these islands of the obligations vessel is already in a territory of another country, the
and securities mentioned in the presiding number; laws of that foreign country shall apply.
4. While being public officers or employees,
should commit an offense in the exercise of their Q: MV MARIA CLARA is a vessel registered in the
functions; or Philippines, owned by Filipinos and registered in
5. Should commit any of the crimes against the Philippines. It was bound to go to Indonesia. It
national security and the law of nations, defined in carries cargo and passengers from Philippines to
Title One of Book Two of this Code. Indonesia vis-a-vis. MV MARIA CLARA was still
within the Philippine waters when X, an
Indonesian stabbed Y. X was arrested and charged

-8-
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

before the courts of the Philippines. Will the case is connected or related to the performance of their
prosper? official functions, they shall be prosecuted before the
Philippine courts.
A: Yes, based on the generality and territoriality
characteristics of criminal law. Under the principle of But, if the crime that they committed is not, in any way,
generality, when the foreigner is here in the connected to the performance of their official
Philippines, our penal laws are binding. For functions, they can only be prosecuted before the
territoriality characteristic, the vessel was still inside courts of the host country.
the Philippines waters, therefore, based on Article 2
paragraph 1, our penal laws will apply. Q: President Marcos assigned a new Japan consul,
who handpicked X, one of the employees of the
Q: MV MARIA CLARA was in between the DFA, to be his secretary. From the DFA in the
Philippines and Indonesia, not owned by any Philippines, X flew to Japan, and is now working at
country when X killed Y (both Indonesians). X was the Philippine Embassy as secretary to the newly
brought and tried in the Philippines. Will the case appointed consul in Japan.
prosper?
X is the sole breadwinner of her family. Her salary
A: Yes, this is the application of article 2, par. 1. would not suffice for a big family that she supports.
although MV MARIA CLARA was not inside the After office hours at the Philippine Embassy, she
Philippine territory, Philippine laws will apply based would engage in this extra-curricular job – buy and
on the territoriality application of the RPC. Therefore, sell of jewelries. After buying these jewelries, she
although an Indonesian, X can be held liable under the will be selling it to OFWs in Japan. She would go
Philippine laws. from one house to another, selling it, either on
cash or installment basis.
Q: MV MARIA CLARA is already in the waters of
Indonesia when X killed Y (both Filipinos). X was One time, while X was inside the Philippine
brought and tried in Indonesia. Will the case Embassy, the phone rang. At the other end of the
prosper? phone was W, an OFW who was very mad at X. W
told X, “Ano ba naman yan, X? Ako na kapwa mo
A: Yes, even if he is a Filipino citizen and the crime was Filipino, niloko mo. Tanso, peke yung pinagbili mo
made onboard a Philippine vessel, since the vessel was sakin na jewelry. Sinanla ko, walang value. Ano ba
already on the waters of Indonesia, based on naman X. Ako pa na kapwa mo Pilipino, lolokohin
territoriality characteristic of penal laws, it is now mo.” X was so apologetic. X told W, “I will replace
Indonesia who was jurisdiction over the crime. it. I will replace it.”

PAR 2: Those who should forge or counterfeit any However, X did not replace the said fake jewelry
coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or bought by W from X. W was very mad. When W
obligations and securities issued by the came back to the Philippines, the first thing that W
Government of the Philippine Islands; did was to file a case of estafa against X, for
deceiving him of the jewelry that he bought. Will
PAR 3: Those who should be liable for acts the charge of estafa filed by W against X before the
connected with the introduction into these islands Philippine court prosper?
of the obligations and securities mentioned in the
presiding number A: It will not prosper. Although X is a public officer
assigned in a foreign land, although it is true she
Q: XYZ were caught in flagrante delicto in committed estafa by deceiving Y of the said jewelry,
Hongkong, counterfeiting Philippine Peso Coins. the said act was done outside the Philippine territory.
Can they be charged and extradited back to the The said act of estafa has nothing to do with the
Philippines although the crime was committed in performance of her official function as a secretary to
Hongkong? the Philippine consul. Therefore, she acted in her
private capacity. In committing the said criminal act,
A: Yes, based on the second and third paragraph of she can only be prosecuted before the Japanese courts
Article 2 of the RPC. and not before the Phiippine courts.

PAR 4: Those who, while being public officers or Q: In the same problem, what if, while X was in the
employees, should commit an offense in the office, here comes Y. Y is an OFW, and Y went to X,
exercise of their functions “X, can I already get the papers that I submitted
last week? Papers which require the signature of a
This applies to public officers and employees of the consul.” X asked the name of Y, “ano pangalan mo?”
Philippine government who are assigned to work in a And then, thereafter, X told Y, “For a while, I will go
foreign land. While they are working in a foreign land, inside.”
if they committed a criminal act, and that criminal act

-9-
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

After few seconds, X came back to you and told Y, If any of this crime is committed, even if it is done
“Your papers are not yet signed. It is at the bottom outside the Philippine archipelago the offender can be
of the file. You can go back perhaps next week, but prosecuted before the Philippine courts.
still, I am not sure if it will be released by then.” Y
was very sad. “X, I need the document now. My Crime committed against the Law of Nations include
employer is asking for it now. Otherwise, he will be the following;
looking for another worker. I need the document a. Piracy
now.” X said, “I cannot do anything. It is not yet b. Qualified piracy
signed.” Y said, “you can do something. You have to c. Mutiny; and
help me X.” d. Qualified mutiny

X, after thinking for a while, told Y, “Okay, I can Likewise, if the crime committed is against the Law of
help you, but it will cost you $20.” And Y said, “I Nations the said offender can also be prosecuted
have not even received any salary, but I will ask before the Philippine courts;
help from friends. Have the document signed, and
I will give you the $20.” X told Y, “After the Q: A, B, C, D, and E are in America. They decided to
document have been signed, I will give you a call. overthrow the government of the Philippines. In
We meet outside. You give me the $20, I’ll give you preparation for their plan, they bought guns,
the said document.” ammos, and grenades. However, before they can
proceed with their plan, thy got caught. Can A, B, C,
Thereafter, the moment the consul arrived, X D, and E be tried in the Philippines?
immediately placed the document, saying, “Sir,
pauna naman neto. Very urgent lang daw.” So, the A: NO. Their crime is conspiracy to commit rebellion,
said consul immediately signed it. which is a crime against public order, Title Three of the
Revised Penal Code. Thus, they are outside the scope
X gave Y a call. They met outside. There was of extra-territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines
exchange of money and the said signed papers. under Article 2 of the RPC.
Unknown to X, an employee of the Philippine
Embassy, W, a fellow Filipino employee of the Phil. Q: Accused A, B, C, D, and E were in America. At that
Embassy was so envious of her. W took photos of time, America is at war with the Philippines. The
the transaction between X and Y. W sent these accused decided to overthrow the government of
photos to the officials of the DFA. An investigation the Philippines. However, before they can
was conducted. The act done by X was discovered. overthrow the government, all the accused were
X was ordered to return to the Philippine, and caught. Can A, B, C, D, and E be tried in the
upon her return, she was charged with Direct Philippines?
Bribery, under Art. 210, 2nd par. Will the case
prosper? A: YES. All the accused committed conspiracy to
commit treason, which is penalized under Title One,
A: Yes. The case will prosper, because the act done by Book two of the Revised Penal Code. Thus, it is within
X is in connection with the performance of her official the scope of extra-territorial jurisdiction of the
function. As a secretary, she has access to the Philippines under Article 2 of the RPC.
documents to be filed or signed by the said consul.
Therefore, prioritizing it over others in a huge pile, it PEOPLE v. LOL-LO
is not wrongful. It is unjust. But it becomes wrongful G.R. No. 17958, February 27, 1922
because she asked for money. She asked for a bribe.
Because of that, X will be liable for direct bribery Piracy is a crime against the law of nations.
before the Philippine courts. Therefore, since piracy is a crime against the law of
nations, the offender can be prosecuted before the
PAR. 5: These are crimes against the law of nations courts of any country.
whether it is a piracy, qualified piracy, mutiny,
qualified mutiny, he shall be qualified before the Pirates are in law hostes humani generis. Piracy is a
Philippine courts. crime not against any particular state but
against all mankind. It may be punished in the
Crimes against National Security includes the competent tribunal of any country where the
following: offender may be found or into which he may be
a. Treason carried. The jurisdiction of piracy unlike all
b. Conspiracy/proposal to commit treason other crimes has no territorial limits. As it is
c. Misprision of treason against all so may it be punished by all. Nor does
d. Espionage it matter that the crime was committed within the
e. Enticing to war or giving motives for reprisals jurisdictional three-mile limit of a foreign state, "for
those limits, though neutral to war, are not neutral
to crimes."

- 10 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

ARTICLE 3 - DEFINITIONS 2. CULPABLE FELONIES are those wherein the

wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence,
Art. 3. Definitions. — Acts and omissions lack of foresight and lack of skill.
punishable by law are felonies (delitos).
The elements are:
Felonies are committed not only be means of a. Criminal negligence on the part of the
deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa). offender
b. Freedom of action in doing the act
There is deceit when the act is performed with c. Intelligence of the offender
deliberate intent and there is fault when the
wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, Both intentional and culpable felonies are voluntary
lack of foresight, or lack of skill. acts. For without voluntariness, there is neither an
intentional felony nor a culpable felony.
Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by the RPC.
When the law says, ‘by law’, it means the RPC. INTENT

Acts refer to any body movement which has a direct An important element of an intentional felony is
connection to the felony intended to be committed. criminal intent. Intent is the use of a particular means
to achieve the desired result.
It is an external act, an overt act in connection with the
felony intended to be committed. Internal acts or mere BAR Q: Distinguish general criminal intent and
criminal thoughts will never give rise to a crime. specific criminal intent. Illustrate.

EXAMPLE: A lust for his neighbor. Whenever the A: The two kinds of intent are as follows:
neighbor would pass by going to work, A would always
look at the neighbor. And for the whole day, he would 1. General criminal intent – This is presumed by
think of the neighbor with nothing but lust. No matter law from the mere doing of an act. Therefore, it
how criminal his thoughts are it will never give rise to requires no proof.
a crime because it is merely an internal unless he
performs an external act or an overt act related to acts 2. Specific criminal intent – This is not presumed by
of lasciviousness or attempted rape or rape. The law law. It must be proven by the prosecution beyond
requires an act. reasonable doubt, just like any elements of the
crime.
Omission is the failure of a person to perform an act
or to do a duty which is required by law. If specific criminal intent is not proven by the
prosecution, the offender cannot be convicted of
EXAMPLE: If a person found, any personal property on the crime charged; the offender can either be
the street or on any place and he failed to deliver the acquitted of the crime charged or convicted of
same to the owner or to the local authorities. Under another crime.
Art.308 he becomes liable for theft. Or if a person was
driving his vehicle, then he bumped and hit another Q: X stabbed Y. Y sustained a non-fatal wound near
person. And instead of helping that person, he the shoulder and Y was brought to the hospital.
increased his speed and left. It is a hit-and-run The doctor said the wound would heal within a
situation. Such fact that he failed to lend help and period of five days. It is only a slight wound. Y filed
assistance to that victim will aggravate his criminal a case of attempted homicide against X. Is he
liability under Art. 365. So here, for failing to perform liable?
an act which is required by law to be done. He commits
a felony. So felonies are acts or omissions punishable A: Since the case filed is attempted homicide, it is the
by the RPC. burden of the private complainant Y, it is the burden
of the State, it is the burden of the prosecution to prove
KINDS OF FELONY intent to kill on the part of X when he stabbed Y
inflicting on him a slight injury on the shoulder. If the
Based on the manner of committing a felony, we have State, if the prosecution, failed to prove X’s intent to
two kinds of felonies: kill, X’s specific criminal intent, then X can only be
convicted of slight physical injuries.
1. INTENTIONAL FELONIES are those committed
with deliberate intent. Q: In the same problem, when X stabbed Y, X
intended only to threaten Y. However, when he
The elements are: tried to stab Y, the knife penetrated through the
a. Criminal intent on the part of the offender heart of Y. This caused the instantaneous death of
b. Freedom of action in doing the act Y. X is now being prosecuted for homicide. X said
c. Intelligence of the offender he had no intention to kill Y. His only intention was

- 11 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

to threaten him with his knife. Is the defense of X sustained wounds. The doctor declared that the
meritorious? lacerated wound in the parietal area was slight and
superficial and would heal from one to seven days.
A: X’s defense has no merit. Since the victim died,
intent to kill becomes a general criminal intent. The Issue: WON accused is guilty of attempted murder.
best evidence of intent to kill is the fact that the victim
died. Therefore, it requires no proof. The prosecution Ruling: Yes. In the present case, the prosecution
need not prove that X has the intention to kill Y. Since mustered the requisite quantum of evidence to
Y died, the law presumes that the intent of X was to kill prove the intent of petitioners to kill Ruben.
the victim. Esmeraldo and Ismael pummeled the victim with
fist blows. even as Ruben fell to the ground, unable
PEOPLE v. DELIM to defend himself against the sudden and sustained
G.R.NO. 142773, January 28, 2003 assault of petitioners, Edgardo hit him three times
with a hollow block. Edgardo tried to hit Ruben on
In this case, the adopted brother Delim was the head, missed, but still managed to hit the victim
abducted from his house. Thereafter, his deceased only in the parietal area, resulting in a lacerated
body was found by the other Delim brothers. They wound and cerebral contusions.
were charged with the crime of murder. One of their
defenses is that it should be kidnapping because he There are several factors which must be looked
was abducted from his house. into in order to establish intent to kill:
1. Evidence of motive;
The Supreme Court said no, it is homicide. What is 2. Nature and number of weapons used by
evident from the act done by the accused was their the offender;
intent to kill the said victim. There was no intent to 3. The nature and number and location of
detain the said victim. Since there was no intent to wounds inflicted on the victim;
detain the said victim, it cannot be kidnapping. It is 4. Manner of committing the crime; and
homicide. 5. The acts or statements made by the
accused before, after, or during the
In the case of Rivera v. People, the Supreme Court commission of the crime.
enumerated certain factors that will establish intent to
kill. The Court said that if these factors will be proven,
then the intent to kill on the part of the accused can
RIVERA v. PEOPLE be established.
G.R.NO. 166326, January 25, 2006
The Court said that although the injuries sustained
Facts: The victim, Ruben Rodil, testified that a day by the victim were only superficial and slight in
before the incident, a heated exchange of words nature, the accused, Rivera brothers, are liable for
between him and Edgardo transpired when the Attempted Murder. Reasons are:
latter mocked him for being jobless and dependent a. there was motive – prior to the said mauling
on his wife. incident, there was altercation between the
accused and the victim;
At about 7:30 p.m. the next day, a Sunday, Ruben b. the nature and number of weapons used by
went to the store to buy food and to look for his the Rivera brothers – they used their fists
wife. His three-year-old daughter was with him. and a piece of stone or hollow block in hitting
Momentarily, Esmeraldo and his two brothers, the victim;
Ismael and Edgardo, emerged from their house and c. the nature and number and location of
ganged up on Ruben. Esmeraldo and Ismael mauled wounds inflicted on the victim – victim
Ruben with fist blows and he fell to the ground. In sustained superficial wounds all over the
that helpless position, Edgardo hit Ruben three body. The Court said these were merely
times with a hollow block on the parietal area. superficial because the brothers ran away
upon hearing the arrival of the police. Had
Esmeraldo and Ismael continued mauling Ruben. the police not arrived, these would be fatal in
People who saw the incident shouted: Awatin sila! nature;
Awatin sila! Ruben felt dizzy but managed to stand d. manner of committing the crime – the Rivera
up. Ismael threw a stone at him, hitting him at the brothers acted simultaneously in a
back. When policemen on board a mobile car synchronized manner in inflicting injury,
arrived, Esmeraldo, Ismael and Edgardo fled to they acted in conspiracy with one another;
their house. e. the acts and statements of the brothers
during and after the commission of the crime
Ruben was brought to the hospital. His attending – they surrounded the victim then they
physician, Dr. Lamberto Cagingin, Jr., signed a mauled him and when the police came, they
medical certificate in which he declared that Ruben left. SC said that based on the factors
established, there was intent to kill,

- 12 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

therefore, they were liable for Attempted For one to be absolved by reason of mistake of fact, the
Murder because of the presence of Treachery following elements of mistake of fact must be
and Abuse of Superior Strength. proven:
a. That the act done would have been lawful and
MOTIVE justifiable had the facts been as the accused
believed them to be.
One of the factors necessary in order to establish - Granting for the sake of argument that the
intent to kill is motive. Motive is the moving power facts are what they accused believed them to
which impels the person to do an act to achieve the be, the said act will be justified.
desired result. Motive comes ahead of criminal intent b. That the intention of the offender in performing the
because motive is the reason behind criminal intent. act must be lawful.
While criminal intent is material to determine the - He must be guided by a lawful, legitimate,
offender’s criminal liability, motive is not material or justified intent.
not important to determine the offender’s criminal c. That mistake must be without fault, mistake,
liability. carelessness, negligence on the part of the
offender.
There are however instances where motive
becomes material to determine the offender’s Based on the third element of mistake of fact, mistake
criminal liability: of fact may be raised only as a defense in intentional
1. When the act of the offender would result to felony. It cannot be raised as a defense in a culpable
variant crimes; or felony because in culpable felony what is present is
2. When there is doubt on the identity of the criminal negligence and the third element of mistake
offender; or of fact requires that there must be no negligence,
3. When there is only circumstantial evidence to carelessness on the part of the offender in committing
prove the commission of the crime—no the said mistake of fact.
eyewitness, no direct evidence.
It is necessary that the offender must have exercised
FERNANDEZ v. PEOPLE diligence in ascertaining the true facts of the case. He
G.R.NO. 241557, December 11, 2019 cannot have acted with negligence and at the same
time invoke mistake of fact. Therefore, mistake of fact
The case charged against Fernandez was Frustrated can only be a defense in intentional felonies. Mistake
Murder, convicted up to Court of Appeals. When the of fact is not a defense in culpable felony.
case reached the Supreme Court, the Supreme
Court acquitted Fernandez. Both the victim and US v. AH CHONG
police officer Fernandez admitted that they did not G.R. No. L-5272, March 19, 1910
know each other. They only saw each other at the
trial of the case. The only reason the victim was able Ah Chong was a cook in Ft. McKinley. He was afraid
to recognize Fernandez was because his name was of bad elements. One evening, before going to bed,
given by a co-worker at the salon but the victim he locked himself in his room by placing a char
himself admitted that he never seen Fernandez only against the door. After having gone to bed, he was
during the trial of the case. awakened by someone trying to open the door. He
called out twice, “Who is there?” but received no
The Court acquitted Fernandez. There was doubt on answer.
the identity of said accused Fernandez because of
the darkness of the night and because the said Fearing that the intruder was a robber, he leaped
victim did not even turn around to look who was from his bed and called out again, “If you enter the
firing at him. Since there was doubt on the identity room, I will kill you.” But at that precise monent, he
of the said offender, the Court said that it would be was struck by the chair that had been placed against
an acquittal. the door. Believing that he was attacked, he seized
a kitchen knife and struck fatally wounded the
MISTAKE OF FACT intruder who turned out to be his roommate.

A defense against criminal intent is mistake of fact. Ah Chong must be acquitted because of mistake of
This refers to misapprehension of facts on the part of fact.
the person who caused injury to another. If a person
acted under mistake of fact, he is absolved of criminal a. That the act done would have been lawful and
liability because there is no criminal intent on the part justifiable had the facts been as the accused
of the offender. It negates criminal liability because of believed them to be.
the absence of criminal intent on the part of the
offender. In this case, Ah Chong thought that there was an
intruder. Since the door lock has been broken,
Ah Chong placed a chair against it. Ah Chong
stood up, the chair hit him and so Ah Chong

- 13 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

thought he was under attack because of the There was also no fulfillment of duty because
darkness of the night. Had it been true that there although they have the duty to stop the members of
is an intruder, his act is justified. Had it been true NPA, they went beyond their duty by immediately
that this intruder was attacking him, his act was firing at them without ascertaining the real
justified. identities of the person inside the said van.

b. That the intention of the offender in performing ARTICLE 4: CRIMINAL LIABILITY

the act must be lawful. In this case, the intention
of Ah Chong is to protect his life. Article 4. Criminal liability. – Criminal liability shall
be incurred:
c. That mistake must be without fault, mistake, 1. By any person committing a felony (delito)
carelessness, or negligence on the part of the although the wrongful act done be different from
offender. In this case, Ah Chong asked a number that which he intended.
of times “Who is it?” but the said roommate 2. By any person performing an act which would be
failed to make a reply. So, it is enough for Ah an offense against persons or property, were it
Chong to believe that he is not the roommate. not for the inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment or an account of the
YAPYUCU VS. SANDIGANBAYAN employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.
G.R. No. 120744-46 25 June 2012
PROXIMATE CAUSE DOCTRINE
Yapyucu were members of the Police stationed in
Pampanga. They received a tip that NPA were The elements of Article 4, par. 1 are:
spotted near their vicinity. Thus, Yapyucu and his a. That the intended act is a felonious act;
men convened in a nearby road to wait for the b. The resulting act is a felony; and
alleged vehicle of the NPA. Upon seeing a Tamaraw c. The resulting felony is the direct, natural and
Jeep reportedly containing NPA soldiers, Yapyucu logical consequence of the offender’s felonious
and his men immediately open shot the jeep. As a act.
result, Licup, one of the passengers of the jeep, died,
and another one, Villanueva, was injured. Upon Article 4, paragraph 1 is the proximate cause
closer inspection of the jeep, it was later found out doctrine. Under the proximate cause doctrine, an
that the passengers were not members of the NPA, offender becomes criminally liable for the resulting
and that they were not armed. felony, although not intended by him, for as long as
his felonious acts is the proximate cause of the
An information for homicide was filed against resulting felony.
Yapyuco. Yapyucu on the other hand, pleaded
mistake of facts. He argued that had the passengers Based on the elements of Article 4, paragraph 1, for
been members of the NPA, he would have been one to be liable under the proximate cause doctrine,
justified in firing at them. it is necessary that the offender is performing a
felonious act. His intended act is a felonious act, which
The Court said that the first element of Mistake of resulted to a felony. Whatever that felony is, if that
fact – that the act done would have been lawful had felony is the direct, natural, and logical consequence
they been what the offender believed them to be – of his felonious acts, he becomes criminally liable,
was absent. In this case, even if the passengers were although that was not his intent.
members of the NPA, the accused was not justified
in firing at them absent of any reason to believe that Proximate cause
their lives were in danger. It is the cause that sets into motion all other causes and
which unbroken by an efficient intervening cause
Also, the 3rd element of Mistake of fact is that the produces the felony without which the felony would
mistake must be without fault, negligence, or not have resulted.
carelessness of the offender. In this case, the
accused could have been more prudent in the Based on the definition of proximate cause, for one to
exercise of his functions. He could have stopped the be liable, it is necessary that there must be no efficient
jeep to ascertain the passengers. Likewise, even if intervening cause that has broken the causal
the jeep did not stop, they could have pursued the connection between the felonious act done by the
jeep seeing as they have an available car and the offender and the resulting felony. The moment that
jeep was moving in a slow speed due to the potholes there is an efficient intervening cause, the offender
in the road. would not become criminally liable for the resulting
felony.
The Supreme Court convicted the accused of
homicide and denied their defense of mistake of Efficient intervening cause
fact. It is an active force which is a distinct act or fact
absolutely foreign from the act of the offender. Totally,

- 14 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

it has nothing to do, nor is not connected to the place, he was not performing a felonious act. The first
offender’s felonious acts. Only then will it be element of the first paragraph of Article 4, paragraph
considered as efficient intervening cause. 1 is absent.

The offender will be liable for another crime because Q: X and Y were fighting. In the course of said fight,
the proximate cause would be that efficient X pulled out a knife and he stabbed Y. He hit the
intervening cause and his felonious act would only be chest of Y. Y was brought to the hospital but it was
a remote cause. Hence, he does not become criminally a shallow wound, it was non-fatal. While Y was
liable if there is an efficient intervening cause. treated by a doctor, because of the negligence of
the doctor, the wound became infected, which
Q: Mang Pedro was sleeping, and taking his siesta resulted to spreading the disease all over the
at 3PM. He was awakened by the noise of the blood stream. Because of that, Y suffered
children taking mangoes from his mango tree. He respiratory disease causing his death. Because of
opened the window and told the children, “You go this, the relatives of Y filed a case of homicide
down from my tree. You are stealing the fruits of against X. Is X liable for the crime under the
my tree.” The children did not mind him. proximate cause doctrine?

Mang Pedro got mad and took his shotgun and A: Yes, X is liable for the death of Y under the
went to the tree. He told the children to go down. proximate cause doctrine. The negligent act of the
“Baba, pag di kayo nagisibabaan, pagbabarilin ko doctor cannot be considered as the efficient
kayo.” Upon showing that he was armed with a intervening cause. X’s act of stabbing Y is a felonious
shotgun, all the children were so afraid and rushed act. It resulted to a felony which caused the death of Y.
coming down. One of them jump. It was a bad fall. The said act of stabbing was the proximate cause of the
The said boy hit his legs on a very big stone on the death of Y. The negligent act of the doctor cannot be
ground. The said boy suffered serious physical considered as an active which is a distinct act or fact
injuries. Is Mang Pedro liable for serious physical that is absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the
injuries? offender. Although it is not an active force, it is not
absolutely foreign from the felonious act of X.
A: Yes, Mang Pedro is liable for serious physical Precisely, Y was brought to the hospital because X
injuries. Under the proximate cause doctrine, Article 4, stabbed him. Had not X stabbed him, Y would not be
paragraph 1, his intended act is a felonious act – needing the negligent treatment of the doctor.
“Pagbabarilin ko kayo,” he was threatening to kill the
children which amounted to grave threats. It is a Hence, X shall be criminally liable for the death X. The
felonious act. Such act resulted to a felony – the child judge should convict X for the crime of homicide under
was injured and sustained serious physical injuries. the proximate cause doctrine. The liability of the
The said serious physical injuries is the direct, natural, doctor may be administrative or civil in nature, but not
and logical consequences of the said act of Mang Pedro criminal in nature.
threatening the children. Therefore, Mang Pedro is
liable for serious physical injuries under the Q: X and Y were fighting. X stabbed Y hitting the
proximate cause doctrine. latter on the abdomen. Thereafter, X left. Y was on
his way home. Suddenly, rain poured and there
Q: What if in the same problem, Mang Pedro was was a lightning which struck Y. He fell on the
taking a nap, when heard the voices of the ground. As a result, he died. Based on the autopsy
children. He got out and told the children “Baba, report, the cause of death is burning because of the
mag-si baba kayo! Pag di kayo bumaba, tatawag said lightning. Because of this, the relatives of Y
ako ng police para hulihin kayo!” filed a case for homicide against X because based
on the autopsy report, it was stated there that Y
One of the children jumped, from the topmost sustained a fatal stab wound on the abdomen. The
portion of the tree, and in going down the ground wife of Y filed a case of homicide against X under
his legs hit a big stone and sustained serious the proximate cause doctrine. If you were the
physical injuries. Is Mang Pedro liable for serious judge, how will you rule the case?
physical injuries sustained by one of the boys?
A: If I were the judge, instead of convicting X of
A: Mang Pedro is not liable. Under the proximate cause homicide, I will downgrade the charge to frustrated
doctrine, Mang Pedro’s statement was just merely an homicide.
exercise of his rights. These children were stealing the
fruits of his tree. It is only right for Mang Pedro to say This is because the said lightning striking on the body
that he was going to call the police if he caught of Y is considered as an efficient intervening cause.
someone stealing. He was merely acting within his Although X’s act of stabbing Y is a felonious act and it
rights. He is not doing a felonious act. His intended act resulted in Y's death homicide, the third element is
of calling the police is not a felonious act. Therefore, he absent. There was a lightning that broken the causal
will not be criminally liable for any resulting felony connection between the act of stabbing and the
that will result to the children because in the first resulting felony which is homicide. The said lightning

- 15 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

is an active force which is a distinct act or fact that is cause. Therefore, it is only slight physical injuries
absolutely foreign from the act of stabbing. It totally but it would be aggravated by treachery because
has nothing to do with the act of X stabbing Y. the act of stabbing was so sudden, leaving the victim
Therefore, it is considered as an efficient intervening without any defense.
cause.
Under Art. 4 1st paragraph, there are three instances
It is frustrated homicide. The said wound was on the wherein the offender becomes criminally liable for the
abdomen which is a vital part of the body. Hence, it resulting felony although different from that which he
was a fatal wound. Therefore, the judge should convict intended:
X of frustrated homicide not of homicide because of a. Aberratio Ictus or mistake in the blow.
the lightning which is an efficient intervening cause b. Error in Personae or mistake in the identity.
that has broken the causal connection between the c. Praeter Intentionem or when the consequence
stabbing and resulting felony which is homicide. went beyond the intention.

In the case of Urbano v. IAC and in the case of People ABERRATIO ICTUS
v. Villacorta, in both cases, the SC held that the said
accused was not liable under the proximate cause Aberratio ictus or mistake in the blow is a situation
doctrine. wherein the offender directed the blow at his intended
victim but because of poor aim, the blow landed on
URBANO v. IAC another person.
G.R. No. 72964 January 7, 1988
Generally, aberratio ictus will result to two crimes:
The Court said that based on the expert testimony 1. The crime against the intended victim, and
of the doctor, the incubation period of serious 2. The crime against the actual victim.
tetanus poisoning is only 14 days. If the stab wound
inflicted by Urbano on Javier on his palm had If these two crimes happen to be grave or less grave
serious severe tetanus germs, he would have died felonies, apply complexity of crimes under Article 48,
within 14 days. However, he did not. But if one of the resulting crimes happens to be only a
light felony, Art. 48 will not apply because Art. 48,
Therefore, the Court said this victim performed acts complexity of crimes, doesn’t apply to light felonies.
that brought the tetanus germs on his wounds. The
said tetanus poisoning is an efficient intervening So, in effect, aberratio ictus will be beneficial to the
cause that had broken the causal connection accused. Instead of being prosecuted for two crimes,
between the act of stabbing and the resulting felony he will only be prosecuted for only one crime, although
which is homicide. The said accused was not held it may be a complex crime.
liable because there was a settlement of the civil
aspect of the case. Q: X was mad at Y because Y killed X’s brother and
so, X wanted to take a revenge against Y. He knew
PEOPLE v. VILLACORTA that Y always pass by this area, so he planned to
G.R. No. 186412, September 7, 2011 stage an ambush against Y. On the day, nearing the
time that Y will pass by, X went to the place. He was
The crime charged was attempted murder. The in hiding. He brought along a gun. The moment he
Court, citing the case of Urbano v. IAC, held that saw Y passing, X came out, pulled down his gun and
Villacorta is not criminally liable for the crime of fired at Y. However, X was not a sharpshooter and
murder. He cannot be held liable for the crime of instead, Y was only hit slightly on the shoulder.
murder because the said tetanus poisoning is an The bullet went through Z, a passerby. At the exact
efficient intervening cause that has broken the time he was passing, the bullet went through him.
causal connection between Villacorta’s act of Because of that, Z died. Y sustained only a light
stabbing the left side of the body of Cruz using a wound. What crimes are committed by X?
sharpened bamboo stick and the resulting felony
which is the death of the said victim. A: In so far as the intended victim Y is concerned, X is
liable for attempted murder. His intention was to kill
If the stab wound inflicted by Villacorta on Cruz has Y. He staged an ambush against Y. It is attempted
severe, serious tetanus germs he would have died murder qualified by treachery. He planned it and
within 14 days but he did not. Therefore, the Court because of it, Y was totally without any defense so it is
said this victim Cruz performed acts that brought attempted murder.
the tetanus germs on his wounds.
In so far as Z, the actual victim, is concerned, the crime
In this case, the Court convicted Villacorta of slight committed is murder. In the case of People v. Flora,
physical injuries qualified by treachery because the which was cited by the SC in the case of People v.
prosecution failed to prove the intention to kill, Adriano, and the SC called it the Flora Doctrine. SC
since they concentrated so much on the proximate said that treachery that attended the intent to kill the

- 16 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

intended victim is also present in so far as the actual one before the MeTC/MTC, for slight physical injuries
victim is concerned. Therefore, in so far as Z, it is in so far as the victim Z is concerned.
murder. The said act of firing resulted in two grave
felonies. We have attempted murder and murder. ERROR IN PERSONAE
Therefore, X shall be prosecuted based only on one, an
information, People v. X, for the complex crime of The second situation under Art. 4, first paragraph is
murder with attempted murder. known as Error in Personae or mistake in identity.
It is a situation wherein the offender directed the blow
Q: But what if in the same problem, so X staged an at a person whom he thought to be the intended
ambush against Y to take a revenge for the killing, victim, but the intended victim was not at the scene of
for the death of his brother. When Y passed by, X the crime. He has mistaken the actual victim to be the
came out from hiding and fired a shot at Y but he intended victim. There was a mistake in identity.
was not a sharp shooter. The bullet hit only the There was an error in persona.
forearm of Y and it went through Z, a passerby. The
passerby sustained a fatal wound. Z was Effect of error in persona on the offender’s
immediately brought to the hospital because of criminal liability:
immediate medical intervention, Z survived. What a. If there is a variance between the intended felony
crime/crimes is/are committed by X? and the felony actually committed, it is a
mitigating circumstance. Art. 49 applies. The
A: Insofar as the intended victim Y is concerned, still it lesser of the two penalties shall be the one imposed
is attempted murder. In so far as Z, the passerby, the on the said offender.
actual victim is concerned, the crime committed is b. If however, there is no variance between the
serious physical injuries. intended felony and the resulting felony, error in
persona has no effect on the offender’s criminal
Why not frustrated murder? Isn’t it that he sustained liability.
a fatal wound? It is only serious physical injuries
because, in so far as the passerby is concerned, there Q: X boxed Y strongly. Y fell and while Y was down,
was on the part of X no intent to kill. Therefore, it X kicked him again strongly. The very thin Y flew
should only be serious physical injuries. and so X left. He was laughing as he had defeated Y
but Y wanted to retaliate so Y stood up opening his
In the first problem, in so far as the passerby, it is balisong. The moment that he was already up, he
murder because he died. Intent to kill is a general could feel that there was a person near him and so,
criminal intent. But in this case, since the passerby he stabbed that person near him thinking it was X,
who was hit accidentally did not die, then, it is only who boxed and kicked him but that was his father.
serious physical injuries because in so far as he is The father saw how he was boxed and thrown by X
concerned, X has no intent to kill. The said single act of so the father came to help Y but Y mistook him to
firing resulted in a grave felony, attempted murder, be X. And so, Y stabs his own father. Y tried to bring
and a less grave felony, serious physical injuries. the father to the hospital, but the father was
Therefore, X shall be prosecuted only for one crime pronounced dead upon arrival. What case should
based on one Information, People v. X, for the complex be filed against Y?
crime of attempted murder with serious physical
injuries. A: Y should be charged with parricide. The offender
shall always be prosecuted for the offense that he
Q: What if in the same problem, X waited for the actually committed. In this case, Y actually stabbed
arrival of Y. For the moment Y arrived, he pulled and caused the death of his father. Therefore, Y should
out his gun and fired at Y. He was not a be prosecuted for parricide. The judge convicted Y of
sharpshooter. The bullet hit only the forearm Y parricide. Evidence showed indeed he stabbed his
and it went through the passerby. But the passerby own father.
was only hit slightly on the shoulder and the
passerby sustained only slight wound the same as Q: Should the judge impose the penalty prescribed
Y sustained. Only a slight wound. Both wounds by law for parricide under Art. 246, reclusion
would heal within 3-5 days. What crimes should be perpetua?
filed against X?
A: No, because Art. 49 applies. There is a variance
A: This time, since one of the resulting felonies between Y’ intended felony to kill X which is homicide
happened to be only a light felony, you cannot complex and Y’s actual felony which is parricide killing his own
it. Art. 48 will not apply. Therefore, this time, X shall be father.
prosecuted for two crimes. One is attempted murder
in so far as his intended victim Y is concerned and Since the intended felony is different from the felony Y
another one, slight physical injuries in so far as the actually committed. Article 49 applies. The lesser of
actual victim, the passerby, is concerned. This time, the two penalties shall be the one imposed. Therefore,
there will be two information to be filed against X. One the lesser penalty for homicide which is reclusion
before the RTC for attempted murder and the other temporal shall be imposed by the judge on Y although

- 17 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

should be convicted of parricide, the penalty shall be

only that for homicide – reclusion temporal. In the case of People v. Sales, the SC convicted Noel
Sales of Parricide without appreciating praeter
So, in this case, error in personae or mistake in identity intentionem. The SC said that there was no notable
is a mitigating circumstance. It lowers the imposable disparity between the means employed by the father.
penalty. Hitting his son with a piece of wood while tied to a tree
and the resulting felony is the death of his son. If you
Q: But, what if X, wanting to get even with Y, went repeatedly hit the frail body of a boy, with such thick
to the worksite of Y. Upon seeing Y, X armed with a piece of wood while he is tied to a tree, definitely the
dos por dos, began hitting Y. X wanted to seriously boy will die. Therefore, the father was held liable for
injure Y to get even with Y. When he saw that Y is parricide without the mitigating circumstance of
already down on the ground, Y was in pain, X left. praeter intentionem.
He had no intention to kill Y as his only intention
is to injure him. As X is leaving, he saw Y coming Q: What If two brothers were having a fight and, in
inside the worksite. So X was shocked. He just the course, thereof, the elder brother, X, boxed his
seriously injured Y and now Y is in front of him. So younger brother, one long strong punch on the
X looked back and only it was at that time when he chest. Because of the impact, the said brother, Y,
realized that the person he seriously injured was was thrown on the wall and it was the head of Y
the twin brother of Y. which hit the cemented wall. The back of the head
started to bleed. X became so afraid. X brought his
The twin brother filed a case of serious physical brother Y but the brother was pronounced dead
injuries against X. X defends that he cannot be upon arrival.
criminally liable for serious physical injuries
because he has no intention to injure the twin X is now being prosecuted for the crime of
brother. His intention was to injure Y and not the homicide. X said no he cannot be held liable for
twin brother. Therefore, X argued that he cannot homicide. He loves his brother so there is no
be liable for serious physical injuries because intention to kill his brother. They were in a fight
there is error in personae or mistake in identity. Is only when he boxed the brother. Is X liable for
X’s defense correct? homicide? In case of conviction, should he be given
the benefit of praeter intentionem as a mitigating
A: No. As held by the SC in the case of People v. circumstance?
Sabalones, error in personae or mistake in identity is
not an absolutory cause. It is not an exempting A: X is liable for homicide under the proximate cause
circumstance. Therefore, error in personae or mistake doctrine. His act of boxing his brother is a felonious
in identity will not absolve an offender from any act. It resulted to a felony – the death of brother. The
criminal liability. It can only be mitigating if there is a death of his brother is the direct, natural, and logical
variance. But, in this case, there was no variance consequence of his felonious act. X is liable for
between the intended felony and the felony actually homicide for the death of his brother.
committed. Therefore, X should be held criminally
liable for serious physical injuries although it was However, X deserves to be given the mitigating
done on a different victim. circumstance of praeter intentionem. There was a
notable disparity between the means employed by X
PRAETER INTENTIONEM and the resulting felony. No one could have foreseen
that out of X mere act of boxing his brother, the
The last situation under Article 4(1) is referred to as brother would die. Therefore, he should be liable for
Praeter intentionem or when the consequence went homicide under the proximate cause doctrine with the
beyond the intention. mitigating circumstance of praeter intentionem.

Elements of praeter intentionem So, these are the circumstances provided for under
a. A felony has been committed Article 4(1).
b. That there is a notable disparity between the
offender’s felonious act and the resulting IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
damage.
Under Article 4(2), any person performing an act
No one could have foreseen that with this offenders’ which would have been an offense against a person or
act, felony would result. property were it not for the inherent impossibility of
its accomplishment or on account of the employment
Whenever praeter intentionem is present, it is of inadequate or ineffectual means.
considered as a mitigating circumstance always.
Because it is provided for under Article 14 (3) that the If Article 4(1) refers to the proximate cause doctrine,
offender has no intention to commit so grave a wrong Article 4(2) refers to the impossible crime doctrine.
as that was committed. It is always and all ways a
mitigating circumstance if the elements were proven.

- 18 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Impossible crime is one wherein the act done would Therefore, based on the last element, an impossible
have amounted to a crime against a person or crime is a crime of last resort. You can only file a case
property, but it is not accomplished because of its of impossible crime against the offender if the acts
inherent impossibility of accomplishment or done by him will not constitute any other violation of
employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. the RPC. If the acts done by the offender would fall
under any other provision of the RPC, that is the
In reality, an impossible crime is not indeed a crime. charge and not an impossible crime.
The act is not accomplished. The act did not produce
into a crime. There is an inherent impossibility for the In the case of Intod v. CA, the crime charged is
act to be consummated. Therefore, in reality it is not a attempted murder, and Jacinto v. People, the crime
crime. However, the offender should be prosecuted for charged was qualified theft. In both cases, the SC ruled
an impossible crime in order to prevent his criminal that offenders are guilty of impossible crimes. Both are
tendency or perversity. impossible crimes because of the physical or factual
impossibility.
Elements of impossible crime:
1. The act done, had it been accomplished, would INTOD v. CA
have amounted to a crime against persons or G.R. No. 103119 Oct 21, 1992
property.
2. The act was done with evil intent. In Intod, unknown to the accused, the intended
3. The act was not accomplished because of its victim was not at the scene of the crime. Therefore,
inherent impossibility or because of the the act will not ripen into murder. The SC said that
employment of inadequate or ineffectual it is an impossible crime.
means.
4. The act does not fall under any other provision Many legal luminaries attack the SC for its decision
of the RPC. in Intod because according to them the SC failed to
appreciate the fourth element. Although it will not
First Element: Act had it been accomplished, would fall to murder, it would at least fall to malicious
have amounted to a crime against persons or property. mischief because definitely the said place was
damaged because they tapered with bullets the
An impossible crime will only lie if the act committed room. But the decision of the SC stayed.
by the offender had it been consummated or
accomplished would have produced a crime under JACINTO v. PEOPLE
Title 8 or Title 10. Only in these two titles. G.R. No. 162540 July 13, 2009

Second Element: Act was done with evil intent. In Jacinto, what is also present is physical or factual
impossibility. Unknown to the accused, the check
Precisely because as I have said earlier, the offender is has no funds. Therefore, he was not able to get the
being punished because of his criminal tendency, face value of the check. The argument of the office
because of his criminal perversity. of the solicitor general is that it should still be theft
because he failed to remit the said check. He took
Third Element: Act not accomplished because of its the check and for that alone, he should be criminally
inherent impossibility or because of the employment liable for qualified theft.
of inadequate or ineffectual means.
The SC said no. For him to be liable of qualified theft,
There is inherent impossibility when under any and all the thing taken must have value because of the
circumstance, the act will not ripen into a crime. element of intent. In this case, the thing taken was a
worthless check. Therefore, it cannot be qualified
In the case of Intod v. CA, the SC said that there are two theft.
kinds of inherent impossibility.
Q: What if in a buy-bust operation, the police
a. Legal impossibility – when all the intended officers arrested X. Allegedly the poser-buyer
acts, even if accomplished would not produce a bought 500 pesos worth of shabu and after
crime. receiving the alleged plastic of shabu, X was
b. Physical or factual impossibility – when immediately arrested by the police officers. The
extraneous circumstances unknown to the said plastic sachet of the alleged shabu was
offender or beyond the control of the offender confiscated from him was brought to the PNP to
prevented the consummation of the crime. undergo forensics, thereafter, X was charged of
illegal sale. During the hearing of the case, when
Fourth Element: The act must not fall under any the forensic chemists teestified in court, he
other provision of the RTC. testified taht based on his confirmatory tests, the
contents of the said plastic sachet were not shabu,
they were tawas. Because of that, since the crime

- 19 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

charged was illegal sale, the judge convicted the enacted by the congress. What is the duty of the
accused of an impossible crime of an illegal sale of court?
drugs. Is the judge correct?
A: The judge shall render the proper decision, and
A: No, an impossible crime will never apply to a shall report to the President, through the Department
violation of special penal laws. Illegal sale of of Justice, the reasons which induce the court to
dangerous drugs is under RA 9165, the believe that said act should be made the subject of
comprehensive dangerous drug of 2002 as amended. legislation. [Art. 5, RPC]
It is punished by special penal law, there can never be
an impossible crime in case of a violation of a special Q: What if X was charged and then thereafter
penal law because based on the first element, it only convicted by the trial court, and X was already 80
applies if the crime had it been consummated would years old, and the penalty for the crime that he has
amount to a crime against persons or property. committed would be reclusion perpetua. Based on
the evidence presented, the judge believed that it
Q: X at knife point took the cellphone of Y. Y gave was only for a certain reason that X had done the
the phone and ran away. X looked at the phone and crime. All the evidence showed that X really killed
noticed that it looks exactly like the one he lost a the victim by planning it. The judge convicted X of
week ago. And indeed, it was his phone. He was murder with the qualifying circumstance of
arrested and charged with an impossible crime of treachery. The judge had doubts in convicting X,
robbery. Is he liable? should the judge convict him nevertheless because
of the doubts of the judge?
A: No. The act done would’ve amounted to simple
robbery because it was done with intimidation. The A: Under Art 5, the court may, through the DOJ,
act was done with evil intent. However, the act was not recommend that this act be subject of a penal
accomplished because of its inherent impossibility. legislation. If a judge tried the case.
Robbery would not arise because it is necessary that
the thing taken must belong to another. There is legal ART. 6 – STAGES OF FELONY
impossibility. However, the last element is absent. The
act done would fall under any other provision of the Article 6. Consummated,, Frustrated, and
RPC which is grave coercion by compelling someone Attempted Felonies. — Consummated felonies, as
by means of violence or intimidation to do an act well as those which are frustrated and attempted,
against his will. Hence, X would not be charged of an are punishable.
impossible crime of robbery, but grave coercion under
Art 286, in particular, compulsive coercion. A felony is consummated when all the elements
necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
ART. 5 – DUTY OF THE COURT IN ACTS NOT present; and it is frustrated when the offender
PENALIZED AND EXCESSIVELY PENALIZED performs all the acts of execution which would
produce the felony as a consequence but which,
Article 5. Duty of the court in connection with nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes
acts which should be repressed but which are not independent of the will of the perpetrator.
covered by the law, and in cases of excessive
penalties. – Whenever a court has knowledge of any There is an attempt when the offender
act which it may deem proper to repress and which commences the commission of a felony directly by
is not punishable by law, it shall render the proper overt acts and does not perform all the acts of
decision, and shall report to the Chief Executive, execution which should produce the felony by
through the Department of Justice, the reasons reason of some cause or accident other than his own
which induce the court to believe that said act spontaneous desistance.
should be made the subject of legislation.
Under Article 6, there are three stages in the
In the same way, the court shall submit to the Chief commission of a felony:
Executive, through the Department of Justice, such 1. Attempted stage
statement as may be deemed proper, without 2. Frustrated stage
suspending the execution of the sentence, when a 3. Consummated stage
strict enforcement of the provisions of this Code
would result in the imposition of a clearly excessive ATTEMPTED FELONY
penalty, taking into consideration the degree of
malice and the injury caused by the offense. It is when the offender commences the commission of
a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform
Q: What if X committed what the neighborhood all the acts of execution which should produce the
believed to be an immoral act. He was brought to felony by reason of some cause or accident other than
court by the police. But the judge found that the his own spontaneous desistance.
case against him is not punished by any law
Elements of an attempted felony

- 20 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

a. That the offender commences the commission

of a felony directly by overt acts Again, just like in Lamahang, it is an attempt to commit
b. That the offender was not able to perform all an indeterminate offense. And since indeterminate
acts of execution offense has no juridical standpoint in the RPC, you
c. By reason of some cause or accident other than cannot charge a person with an indeterminate offense.
his own spontaneous desistance Therefore, the Supreme Court convicted Baleros of a
crime that is directly connected to his overt act, and
In the first element, it is necessary that the overt act that is unjust vexation or light coercion under Art. 247.
is directly connected to the crime committed. Because obviously, his acts annoyed, vexed and
Therefore, the attempted felony which is punished by irritated the offended party that led to the filing of the
law is one which is directly connected to the overt act said case.
performed by the offender, although he has a different
crime in mind. Q: X parked his car. He was about to open the gate
when here comes Y. Y at knife point told X, to give
It is immaterial what the crime in mind is. What the key to his car. Afraid, X gave the key to Y.
matters is to what crime is his overt act connected. Thereafter, he tried to push X inside his car.
That will be the attempted felony that is punished by However, the police arrived and arrested Y. Y was
law. charged with attempted kidnapping. Will the case
prosper?
The offender, based on the second and third
elements, was not able to perform all acts of A: No. Y is not liable for attempted kidnapping. The
execution. He was not able to consummate the crime overt acts committed by Y asking the key at knife
because of some cause or accident, other than his own point, forcing the victim to go inside his car, are not
spontaneous desistance. overt acts intending to detain. These are not overt acts
that are directly connected to the kidnapping of a
Therefore, if the reason why the offender was not able person. Therefore, it cannot be an attempted
to consummate the crime is his own spontaneous kidnapping. It is also an indeterminate offense, which
desistance, he does not incur criminal liability. refers to an overt act of the offender is ambiguous. The
Desistance negates criminal liability in the attempted moment he told the woman to go inside her car, he
stage. may rape the woman, or kill her. Hence, the said
RATIONALE: The offender is still in the subjective charge of attempted kidnapping will not prosper.
phase of committing the felony. The offender
begins the commission of the felony up to the time FRUSTRATED FELONY
he has still control of his acts. He may either
proceed to consummate the crime, or he may A felony is frustrated when the offender performs all
desist. If he desisted, then he does not incur the acts of execution which would produce the felony
criminal liability. If he proceeded with the as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not
commission of the crime, it may be attempted, produce it by reason of causes independent of the will
frustrated or consummated. of the perpetrator.

In the case of Lamahang v. People, the accused was Elements of a frustrated felony:
charged with attempted robbery. With the use of an a. That the offender has performed all acts of
iron bar, he tried to open a store. The Supreme Court execution to produce the felony
said that it cannot be attempted robbery because his b. The felony was not produced by reason of
overt act of opening the said store with the use of an causes independent of the will of the
iron bar is not directly connected to robbery. Instead, perpetrator.
there is an attempt to commit an indeterminate
offense. Once inside the store, he may do other things, Attempted felony Frustrated felony
not necessarily to rob. Therefore, he can only be held The offender merely The offender has
liable for attempted trespassing. commences the already performed all
commission of the acts of execution.
The same is true in the case of Baleros, Jr. v. People. Is felony. He has not yet Nothing more is left for
the overt act of pressing a wet cloth soaked with performed all the acts of him to do.
chemicals on the face of a woman directly connected execution.
to the crime of rape? The Supreme Court said no. The The felony was not The felony was not by
obvious intent of Baleros is to make the offended party produced by reasons of reason of causes
unconscious. However, the moment the woman causes or accidents independent of the will
becomes unconscious, Baleros, Jr. may do other acts, other than the of the perpetrator.
such as rape, acts of lasciviousness, rob or kill the offender’s own
woman, but not necessarily to rape the woman. The desistance.
act of Baleros is not directly connected to rape, hence,
the Supreme Courrt said it cannot be considered as an
attempted rape.

- 21 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Attempted felony Frustrated felony of trespass, otherwise known as trespass to property

Offender is still in Offender is already in under Article 281. Since it constituted another
subjective phase of the objective phase of violation of the RPC, it cannot be an impossible crime
committing the felony committing the felony. because an impossible crime is a crime of last resort.
He no longer has control You will only file it if the act done by the offender
over his acts. would not constitute another violation of the RPC.

CONSUMMATED FELONY So as the public prosecutor charge in that case, you

should indict X for the crime of trespass to property.
A felony is consummated when all the elements
necessary for its execution and accomplishment are Q: The husband has a mistress so the husband
already present. The moment all the elements of a wanted to get rid of the wife so that he will be able
crime are already there, it is in the consummated stage to live happily with his mistress and also, for
of the felony. insurance purposes. And so he decided to place
poison on the food of his wife. When the wife ate
Q: X was in need of money, His son is in the the food, indeed, she was poisoned. As the doctor
hospital. During the holiday, X went to his friends, husband was looking at his wife suffering, showing
relatives, neighbors asking and begging to borrow signs of being poisoned, he felt pity. They’ve been
some money for the hospitalization of his son. together for years and so because of that, the said
However, none of these people had the money. doctor husband went to his bag, took the antidote
They too, needed the money. Hence, they were not and administered it to his wife. Thereafter, he
able to lend X the money he needed. X was so sad. immediately brought the wife to the hospital. The
wife survived, the wife did not die. Because of that,
So X is now on his way home. When X was walking the said doctor was charged with frustrated
towards his house, he took notice of a big house, parricide. He said, “no” and if ever he will be
and that all its windows are open. Because of that, charged, it should only be attempted parricide. If
he believed that it will be very easy for him to ever he is liable, it should only be attempted
enter and rob the house. So indeed he jumped on parricide. Is the charge correct? Or is it the
the walls and entered the house, hoping to take all argument of the doctor husband that is correct?
valuables to sell it. However, X was disappointed
because the house was empty. A: The charge is wrong. The second element of the
frustrated felony is absent.
As X was leaving the house empty-handed, he
opened the gate, there were barangay tanod First element, the offender has already performed all
waiting for him. He was apprehended and brought the acts of execution that would produce the felony as
him to the police station. X was charged with a consequence, when the doctor husband placed the
attempted robbery before the prosecutor. poison to the food, and the wife ate the food with
poison and showed signs of being poisoned, the doctor
In the counter-affidavit, X was insisting that if ever husband has already performed all acts of execution
he was liable, it must be an impossible crime, not that led to the death of his wife, nothing more. He is
attempted robbery. If you were the prosecutor, of left with nothing to do. First element is present.
what crime will you indict X?
The second element, however, the felony was not
A: You have to indict X the crime under Art 281 - produced by reason of causes independent of the will
Trespass to property. of the perpetrator. Here, it appears that the felony of
parricide happened because of the [husband] doctor’s
It cannot be attempted robbery because the X’s act of own will. He was the one who applied the antidote, and
entering the house is not directly connected with he brought the wife to the hospital. Therefore, the
intent to gain. It did not show his intent to rob. It is an second element of frustrated felony being absent, the
indeterminate offense. husband should not be charged with frustrated
parricide.
His defense, however, is unmeritorious. The crime is
not an impossible crime because the fourth element is His defense, if ever he should be liable, should be
not present. attempted parricide. However, such defense is not
meritorious. The first element of attempted felony is
The fourth element – the act must not fall under any of immediately absent. The first element, that the
the provision of the RPC. offender commences the commission of the felony
directly by overt act. This is absent. The doctor
In this case, his act would constitute another violation husband did not only commence the commission of
of the RPC, where he entered an uninhabited place. the felony, but he has also already performed all acts
The said house was uninhabited, no one was inside, of execution. His act has passed the subjective phase
nothing inside. Therefore, it amounted to other forms and the attempted stage. Therefore, it cannot be
attempted parricide because all the acts of execution

- 22 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

have already been produced by the doctor. Therefore, the consent of the owner, without violence against or
the husband should not be charged with attempted intimidation of persons or use of force upon things.
parricide.
According to the SC in Valenzuela v. People, the only
The proper charge should be physical injuries operative act necessary to consummate the crime of
depending on the days that the said wife would be theft is the unlawful taking of the personal property of
needing medical intervention. If the wife will be another. And the said act of unlawful taking is deemed
needing medical intervention for a period of more complete the moment the offender gains possession of
than 30 days, it will be serious physical injuries and it the personal property of another even if he had no
will be qualified. If the said wife would be needing opportunity to dispose the said property. What is
medical intervention for 10-30 days, it will be less material is, has he gain possession of the personal
serious physical injuries. Lastly, if the wife will be property of another? If so, then unlawful taking is
needing medical intervention for 1-9 days, then it is complete, then theft is consummated.
slight physical injuries.
Q: X entered a high-end jewelry store. The moment
In the case of People v. Trinidad and People v. he entered he told the sales lady, “I am going to
Labiaga, Supreme Court ruled that in case of propose to my girlfriend. Can you show me your
intentional killing, in order to bring about frustrated best wedding rings. I want big diamonds.” The
felony, it is necessary that the wound inflicted by the sales lady brought out from the glass cabinet all
accused on the victim must be a fatal wound, must be their best-selling engagement rings. X wanted
a mortal wound sufficient to bring about death, but more so the sales lady kept on bringing
death did not supervene because of immediate engagement rings on top of the said glass table.
medical intervention. Suddenly X said, “This one. I like this one. I’m in a
hurry. Immediately give me the receipt because I
In the case of People v. Trinidad, the crime charged have to go.” And so, the sales lady went to the
was frustrated homicide. In the case of People v. corner to make the receipt. At that particular
Labiaga, the crime charged was frustrated murder. In moment, X saw that the sales lady was so busy, he
both cases, the Supreme Court ruled no. The wounds immediately gathered all these diamond
inflicted by the accused were non-fatal. Therefore, it engagement rings, placed it inside his backpack
would only be attempted homicide and the other one and thereafter he ran towards the door of the high-
is, attempted murder. end jewelry store. No matter how he tried to open
the door, it wouldn’t open. It was locked. By way of
So, if a problem is given and the problem is about security of the said high-end store, the moment a
intentional killing- parricide, murder, homicide, if the customer enters the door automatically locks and
wound inflicted by the perpetrator of the crime to the it will only be opened by the person inside. The
victim is a nonfatal wound, then it will only be in the police arrived, X was arrested. What crime is
attempted stage. But if the wound inflicted by the committed by X?
accused on the victim is a mortal wound, fatal wound,
sufficient to bring about death, and the victim survived A: X is liable for theft. It is in the consummated stage.
because of the immediate medical intervention, the The moment he took the diamond rings and placed it
crime committed is in the frustrated stage. inside his backpack, unlawful taking is complete. Theft
is already consummated. Even if he did not have the
CRIMES THAT DO NOT ADMIT THE opportunity to disposed it because he was not able to
FRUSTRATED STAGE leave the high-end jewelry store, still the crime
committed is the crime of theft in the consummated
1. Theft stage. That was the ruling of the SC in Valenzuela v.
People. Even if Valenzuela and company did not able
There are some crimes that do not admit frustrated to dispose the said detergents, the SC said it is indeed
stage and one of this is the crime of theft. consummated stage.

As held in the en banc, landmark case of Valenzuela v In the case of Canceran v. People, based on allegation
People (2007), in that case, the Supreme Court did in the information, the crime charged by the Office of
away with frustration in the crime of theft. Since then, the Public Prosecutor was frustrated theft. After trial
the Supreme Court said that theft admits only of two on the merits, the judge convicted Canceran of theft in
stages.: attempted and the consummated staged. the consummated. The judge said, it was very wrong
for the prosecution to charged him with frustrated
The Supreme Court said that there is no frustration in theft. “Hindi ba nila alam yung ruling ng SC, sa
the crime of theft because by its definition under Valenzuela v. People na wala ng frustrated theft?” It
Article 308 of the Revised Penal Code, theft is should be consummated theft. Canceran in his appeal
committed by any person, who with the intent to gain, said that when the judge convicted him of
shall take the personal property of another without consummated theft, while the information alleges
frustrated theft, he was denied being informed of the
nature and cause of accusation against him. That was

- 23 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

his main argument. The SC said Canceran is correct. In the case of People v. Orita, the SC said there is no
Since the crime charged by the Office of the Public such crime as frustrated rape. In the case of People v.
Prosecutor was only frustrated theft, it is wrong for Campuhan (En Banc), the SC said in Orita case, we
the court to convict him of consummated theft. You finally abandoned frustrated rape. There is no such
cannot convict an accused for a crime higher than crime as frustrated rape because rape is committed
what for he was charged. Because in doing so, you when a man has carnal knowledge of a woman against
deny him to rebut the allegations. You deny him of his her will.
due process. You deny him to be informed of the
nature of the cause of accusation against him. So the Since the law uses carnal knowledge and not sexual
SC said, even if in this case in reality, theft is already intercourse, SC said the slightest penile penetration of
consummated, we cannot convict him of a woman’s vagina already give rise to consummated
consummated theft because the information charges rape.
him only of frustrated theft. Hence, the SC said
Canceran shall only be convicted of attempted theft. Therefore, the SC said that penetration need not be
complete or full. There need not even be hymenal
Q: The three brothers, X, Y and Z. They were on laceration because slightest penile penetration will
their way home. They did not have much money to already consummate the crime of rape.
buy food. Their tricycle passed by this gate, there
was a warehouse. The gate was opened. The Q: But when is there slightest penile penetration?
warehouse was opened. The 3 brothers could see
piled sacks of palay. Since there were no guards, A: SC said the moment the penises touch the lips or
the 3 brothers entered the gate and they realized labia of the pudendum of a woman’s genitalia, then
the sacks contained rice. They tried to carry 1 sack there is already the slightest penile penetration. The
of rice and they were able to bring it to their crime of rape is already committed on its
tricycle and then off they left. Midway to their consummated stage.
house, the one brother said “sabi ni nanay ‘wag
tayong kakain ng galing sa nakaw.” Because of In the case of People v. Christopher Parejo, the
that, the eldest brother turned back to the accused, entered the bedroom of a sleeping girl. The
warehouse and entered the gate. But suddenly, the accused undress himself and places himself at the top
guard saw them and so the guard apprehended of the girl. The girl began crying aloud, shouting aloud.
them. They were charged with the crime of theft. Parejo covered her mouth with a blanket but the cries
They resisted and insisted that they return the of the girl got even louder. Parejo was afraid that he
sack of rice that amounted to desistance. would be discovered, so he left. In both her affidavit
Therefore, they cannot be charged with the crime and testimony to the court, the girl stated that the
of theft. Is the argument meritorious? Are they penis of Parejo “naidikit” to her genitalia. The SC said,
liable for theft? when you say naidikit, there is no penetration yet, it
merely touches the outer surface of the girl’s genitalia.
A: They are liable for theft. The moment the three Hence, the SC ruled out the consummated rape.
brothers took the sack of rice from the warehouse and
brought it to their tricycle, unlawful taking was The SC said the crime committed is attempted rape. In
complete. Therefore, theft is consummated. The act of this case, the SC distinguished Attempted Rape from
returning which is restitution cannot be considered as Acts of Lasciviousness.
desistance because desistance is only present on the
attempted stage. Restitution is not desistance, it is Attempted rape Acts of lasciviousness
only a mitigating circumstance which is akin to There is part on the There is no such intent.
voluntary surrender according to the Supreme Court. accused intent to lie and
Therefore, the fact that they restituted or return the intent to penetrate the
sack of rice will only mitigate their criminal liability victim.
and would mean also that they will have no civil
liability. However, it will not absolve them of criminal So when based on the circumstances surrounding the
liability. commission of the crime, there was on the part of the
offender intent to penetrate the victim by his penile
Restitution is not an absolutory cause. In fact, it is an failed to touch the pudendum of the female genitalia,
admission of the commission of the crime but it is akin it is only on the attempted stage.
to voluntary surrender, therefore, it will mitigate the
offender’s criminal liability. If based on the circumstance, there is no intent to
penetrate, as held in the case of Cruz v. People, it is
2. Rape Acts of Lasciviousness.

Another crime which does not admit a frustrated stage In Cruz v. People, the victim (helper) was awakened.
is the crime of Rape. She was sleeping on the tent. The master was already
on top of her and she was completely naked. She

- 24 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

struggled and she was able to leave the said tent. The Adultery can be punished only the moment there is
master was charged with attempted rape. The SC said carnal union between a married woman and another
NO. It is an act of lasciviousness. In the words of SC, the man not being her husband.
act of a man climbing on top of a naked woman, absent
any showing that his erected penis is capable of False Testimony can be punished only if the false
penetration cannot amount to attempted rape. It is witness testified falsely against the accused or in favor
only Acts of Lasciviousness. of the accused.

In this case, the prosecution failed to show that there Physical Injury is punished based on result, is it
was intent to penetrate the said girl. serious, less serious or less serious.

Q: The accused was charged with a crime of ART. 8 – CONSPIRACY

homicide. The fiscal presented W. W was brought
by the parents of the victim to the fiscal. The Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony.
parents said “Fiscal, eto po ang aming pinaka- – Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are
matibay na testigo. Nakita po n’ya kung paano punishable only in the cases in which the law
sinaksak ang aming anak.” The fiscal interviewed specially provides a penalty therefor.
W. The fiscal was convinced that W saw the act of
killing, the accused stabbing the son. And so the A conspiracy exists when two or more persons
public prosecutor presented W to the witness come to an agreement concerning the commission
stand. He was asked of his name and his other of a felony and decide to commit it.
personal circumstance and raised his hand and
swore to tell nothing but the truth and W said yes. There is proposal when the person who has
decided to commit a felony proposes its execution
The fiscal started asking questions: “W, do you still to some other person or persons.
recall where you were on the night of October 28,
2022.” Before W was about to give his answer, the Under Art. 8, a conspiracy exists when two or more
door of the court room opened and a woman persons come to an agreement concerning the
appeared shouted “Judge, sandali sandali. Asawa commission of a felony and they decide to commit it.
ko ‘yan. Hindi ‘yan nagsasabi ng totoo. Bayad ‘yan.
Hindi po totoong nakita n’ya yung krimen. On the other hand, there is proposal when a person
Binayaran lang po s’ya dahil wala po kaming pera”. who has decided to commit a felony proposes its
Because of that, the judge terminated the hearing execution to some other person.
for that day. After investigation, it was discovered
that W was a paid witness by the parents of the As a rule, conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony
victim in order to pin down the accused. Because are not punishable acts because they are mere
of that, W was charged with Attempted False preparatory acts. The law requires an avert act that at
Testimony. Is W liable of charge? least brought about the felony. So, as a rule, conspiracy
and proposal to commit a felony, being mere
A: No. W is not liable as charge because there is no preparatory acts, are not punishable acts.
such crime as attempted false testimony. There is also
no frustrated false testimony. False testimony is a Exception to the rule, as provided for under Art. 8, first
formal crime which admits only the consummated paragraph, conspiracy and proposal to commit a
stage. felony become punishable the moment the law
specially provides a penalty thereof. So, when it is the
Material Crimes v. Formal Crimes law itself that provides a penalty for merely
conspiring, for merely proposing to commit a felony,
Material crime Formal crime they become crimes by themselves.
Crimes that admit The crime is only
different staged punished the CONCEPTS OF CONSPRICAY
consummated stage.
They are punished based Q: Distinguish the two concepts of conspiracy and
on consequence and not illustrate.
based on tendency.
Hence, no frustrated and 1. Conspiracy as a crime in itself.
frustrated stages. The mere act of conspiring makes the offender
Examples are robbery, Examples are adultery, criminally liable. The law provides a penalty for mere
and theft false testimony, and conspiracy.
physical injury
Q: A, B, C, D, and E, agreed to have a public uprising
for the purpose of going against what the
government wants to promulgate. They were
conspiring to commit sedition. They were arrested

- 25 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

and charged with conspiracy to commit sedition. conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. It means that
Will the case prosper? all perpetrators are punished to the same extent,
regardless of the quantity and quality of their
A: Yes. The case will prosper because conspiracy to participation in the commission of the crime.
commit sedition is a crime by itself. The law prescribes Therefore, the moment conspiracy is established, you
a particular penalty for conspiracy to commit sedition. do not ask which of these men inflicted the fatal blow
or merely served as lookout or performed only a
2. Conspiracy as a means of committing a felony. minor act that is immaterial.

The offenders will not yet become criminally liable As held in the cases of People v. Carandang, People v.
although they are already conspirators, they will not Octa, People v. Feliciano and other similar cases,
yet become criminally liable unless and until they conspiracy was established.
perform an overt act to the same crime agreed.
PEOPLE V. OCTA
Q: A, B, C, D, and E, agreed to kill W. This was GR 195196 13 July 2015
discovered and they were charged with conspiracy
to commit murder. Will the case prosper? Although Octa’s participation was that merely of
receiving the money from the wife of the kidnap
A: No. There is no such crime as conspiracy to commit victims. Yet the SC said that since the act done by
murder. Conspiracy to commit murder is not a crime Octa was the act of receiving the money when the
by itself. The law does not punish it. There is no kidnapping was still going on and the victims were
prescribed particular penalty for it. A, B, C, D, and E not yet released, he is a conspirator in the
must at least perform an overt act towards the commission of the crime. Therefore, he should be
commission of murder for them to become liable as held liable for the crime of kidnapping for ransom.
conspirators in attempted murder. He is a co-conspirator. Regardless of his act of only
receiving the money.
KINDS OF CONSPIRACY AS A MEANS OF
COMMITTING A FELONY The money conspiracy is not established, each
offender shall be penalized based on the particular
1. Direct or express conspiracy act committed by him. Therefore, in this case,
whatever is the act done by them, the penalty will
The conspirators met, planned, and agreed to commit only correspond to the said act.
a crime. It is a conspiracy based on a preconceived
plan or agreement. PEOPLE V. CASTILLO
GR 132895 10 March 2004
Since the conspirators met, planned, and agreed to
commit a crime, their mere presence at the time of the The SC said Padayhag has no intent to detain the
commission of the crime will make them liable already victim or extort ransom. Padayhag in fact did not
as conspirators because they were part of the criminal even know the intention of Castillo. Therefore, the
design. They were the ones who planned the SC said that Padayhag is not a co-conspirator. Since
commission of said crime. Therefore, their mere Padayhad is not a co-conspirator because
presence at the scene of the crime will make them conspiracy is not established, then Padayhag was
already criminally liable as conspirators acquitted. But Castillo was convicted.

2. Implied or inferred conspiracy PEOPLE V. BOKINGCO

GR 187536 10 August 2011
A conspiracy which is deduced from the mode and
manner of committing the crime. Here the Although both were charged with the crime of
conspirators acted simultaneously in a synchronized murder for having killed the husband Pasion, the SC
and coordinated manner towards a common criminal conspiracy between Bokingco and Col was not
objective or goal. established beyond reasonable doubt. What was
established was that while Bokingco was killing the
Since it is merely a conspiracy which is deduced from husband, Col was staging a robbery against Elsa, the
the mode and manner of committing the crime, before wife. The two are separate and distinct acts. The fact
one can be held liable as a conspirator, there must be that Bokingco called Col saying “Col, let’s go, he is
an active participation in the commission of the crime. already dead” the SC said that they are only one in
Mere presence, mere approval, mere acquiescence to escaping but they do not have the same intent to kill
the commission of the crime will not make the the said victim, Pasion. So, in this case, the SC said
offender criminally liable. There must be an active that in so far as Col is concerned, the crime charged
participation in the commission of the crime. should be attempted robbery. But, since the crime
charged is murder and since Col has nothing to do
The moment conspiracy is established, whether it is with the act of murder, then he should be acquitted
direct or express conspiracy or implied or inferred

- 26 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

of the crime charged. However, Bokingco was demurrer to evidence denied by the
convicted only of homicide. Murder was Sandiganbayan. However, when the case reached
downgraded to homicide as treachery was not the SC, the SC granted the demurrer to evidence.
proven beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, the case was dismissed.

TWO KINDS OF MULTIPLE CONSPIRACY The reason for the dismissal of the plunder case was
that conspiracy in this case, wheel or circle
1. Wheel or circle conspiracy – when a person or conspiracy, was not proven. The SC said that in
persons known as a hub deals individually with order to prove wheel or circle conspiracy, the hub
another person or group of persons known as the must be identified. The main plunderer must be
spokes. identified. Nowhere in the information filed by the
Ombudsman can you see who is alleged to be the
2. Chain conspiracy – when just like in a ordinary hub or the main plunderer. Since this is a charge of
business transaction, there is a constant and conspiracy to commit plunder, there must be the
continuous communication among the main plunderer. There must be the hub. Without
manufacturers with the wholesaler, the wholesaler the allegation in the information as to who is the
with the retailer, the retailer with the consumer. hub or the main plunderer, conspiracy will fail.

These two kinds of multiple conspiracy was first Another reason for the dismissal of the case is that
discussed by the SC in the case of Fernan v. People. according to the SC, the participation of the former
president was merely an approval, an okay. As held
FERNAN v. PEOPLE in the case of Arias, SC said that the Arias doctrine
GR 145927 24 August 2007 teaches us that all heads of offices have to rely to a
reasonable extent on their subordinates and on the
Mangubat, the chief accountant, and his men were good faith of those who prepare bids, purchase
able to withdraw funds from the government supplies, or enter into negotiations.
through fake Letter of Advice Allotments (LAA).
Mangubat and his men would type fake LAAs and Therefore, there can not be a conspiracy on the part
sell it contractors for 20% of the gross amount. of the head of office by merely affixing his or her
They deal with the other employees and among signature or approval. Conspiracy requires a
those employees who Mangubat dealt with were deliberate positive act, therefore in the case, the
Fernan and Torrevillas. So Mangubat and his men case of plunder was dismissed against the former
were the hub and Fernan and Torrevillas were the president.
spokes.
Q: Can there be plunder in case of violation of SPL?
Fernan and Torrevillas were civil engineers of the
ministry of public works and highways. As civil A: Yes, in the case of People v. Morilla, both Morilla
engineers, Fernan and Torrevillas signed fake tally (driver of ambulance) and Mayor Mitra were both
sheets which served as basis for the general charged as conspirators for transporting dangerous
vouchers saying that there constructions of roads in drugs in violation of Section 5 of RA 9165. It is a special
Cebu. But, in truth, there was no such construction. penal law but there is conspiracy.
The barangay chairman testified that no such
materials arrived and no such construction of a Conspiracy can be applied in this case because there is
road in Cebu. an express provision under Section 26 of RA 9165
which provides that they can be punished for
So, in this case, the SC said that Fernan and conspiracy. Under section 26 of RA 9165, the law
Torrevillas, although their only participation was expressly provides that there is the attempted stage as
that of signing the fake tally sheets, which served as well as the conspiracy in case of violation of Section 5
necessary for the issuance of the general vouchers, (transporting dangerous drugs). Therefore, since it is
then the SC said Fernan and Torrevillas are within the SPL itself that provides for the said conspiracy, it
the wheel or circle conspiracy where Mangubat and can be considered against the accused.
company were guilty.
In the case of Go-Tan v. Tan, the parents-in-law would
This multiple conspiracy was again considered by the not give support to the woman, they would not allow
SC in the case of GMA v. People. her to work, they would not give her money. Thus, a
case was filed against both the husband and his
GMA V. PEOPLE parents. There is conspiracy.
GR 220598 19 July 2016
The SC said that, applying Article 10 of the RPC, the
GMA and the other officers of PCSO were charged husband can be charged together with his parents for
for plunder. The camp of GMA, after the office of violation of RA9262. There is nothing in RA 9262
Ombudsman presented their evidence, filed a which provides that the RPC cannot apply. In fact,

- 27 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

under RA 9262, it is provided that the RPC applies another, provided that the following requisites are
suppletorily. present;
First. That the evil sought to be avoided actually
ART. 9 – GRAVE FELONIES, LESS GRAVE FELONISE exists;
AND LIGHT FELONIES Second. That the injury feared be greater than
that done to avoid it;
Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light Third. That there be no other practical and less
felonies. – Grave felonies are those to which the law harmful means of preventing it.
attaches the capital punishment or penalties which 5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a
in any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or office.
with Art. 25 of this Code. 6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order
issued by a superior for some lawful purpose
Less grave felonies are those which the law
punishes with penalties which in their maximum Under Article 11, justifying circumstances are those
period are correctional, in accordance with the which, if present or attendant in the commission of the
above-mentioned Article. felony, would mean that the offender acted within the
bounds of the law. The offender is said to not have
Light felonies are those infractions of law for the transgressed the law. Therefore, there is no crime
commission of which a penalty of arrest menor or a committed. There is no criminal liability, and also,
fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both; is provided. there is also no civil liability.

ART. 10 – OFFENSES NOT SUBJECT TO THE If an offender is charged in court and he raised as a
PROVISIONS OF THIS CODE defense any of the justifying circumstances under
Article 11, that offender/accused is in effect admitting
Art. 10. Offenses not subject to the provisions of having committed the acts or omissions alleged in the
this Code. - Offenses which are or in the future may information. However, he is avoiding criminal
be punishable under special laws are not subject to responsibility by saying that his act is justified.
the provisions of this Code. This Code shall be Therefore, the moment the defense raised a justifying
supplementary to such laws, unless the latter circumstance, the judge will order an inverted trial.
should specially provide the contrary.
In a regular trial, it is the State, through the
ART. 11 - JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES prosecution, that first to present the evidence. It is the
State who has the burden of proof to prove the guilt of
Article 11. Justifying circumstances. - The the accused beyond reasonable doubt. However, the
following do not incur any criminal liability: moment the accused says that his defense is any of
those enumerated under Article 11, the law prima
1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or facie presumes that he already is liable. Therefore, the
rights, provided that the following circumstances burden of evidence is shifted on him to contradict the
concur; said presumption made by law. The burden of
First. Unlawful aggression. evidence is on him to prove the elements of the
Second. Reasonable necessity of the means justifying circumstance that he is raising.
employed to prevent or repel it.
Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part If he failed to prove the elements of the justifying
of the person defending himself. circumstance that he is raising, definitely it is a
2. Any one who acts in defense of the person or conviction because in saying that his act is justified,
rights of his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or the law presumes he already admitted the commission
legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters, of the crime.
or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees and
those consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, SELF-DEFENSE
provided that the first and second requisites
prescribed in the next preceding circumstance are Article 11. Justifying circumstances. - The following
present, and the further requisite, in case the do not incur any criminal liability:
provocation was given by the person attacked, that 1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or
the one making defense had no part therein. rights, provided that the following circumstances
3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or concur;
rights of a stranger, provided that the first and First. Unlawful aggression.
second requisites mentioned in the first Second. Reasonable necessity of the means
circumstance of this Article are present and that the employed to prevent or repel it.
person defending be not induced by revenge, Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part
resentment, or other evil motive. of the person defending himself.
4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or xxx
injury, does not act which causes damage to

- 28 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Self-defense includes defense of one’s life and limb, 3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of
defense of one’s honor and chastity, defense of one’s the person defending himself
property coupled by an attack on the person trusted
with the said property. There must be no sufficient provocation coming from
the accused. Provocation is allowed. What the law
Elements of self-defense under Article 11 (1) requires is that there must be no sufficient
provocation.
1. Unlawful aggression
Provocation refers to any improper or unjust act
In the cases assigned, the Supreme Court has which is capable of inciting or exciting a person to
repeatedly stated that in case of self-defense, the commit an unlawful act.
primordial element is unlawful aggression. Without
unlawful aggression, there is no self-defense. Without It is considered sufficient when it is adequate to stir a
unlawful aggression coming from the victim, there is person to commit a wrongful act and when it is
no reason for the accused to defend himself. Hence, it proportionate to the gravity of the act.
is necessary first and foremost that there is unlawful
aggression. In the recent cases decided by the Supreme Court,
People v. Olarbe (2018) and Ganal Jr. v. People
The unlawful aggression must come from the victim (2020), in both cases the Supreme Court appreciated
himself, not from any other person. the defense in favor of the accused and therefor
acquitted Olarbe and Ganal, Jr.
Elements of unlawful aggression
a. There must be a physical or material attack or PEOPLE V OLARBE
assault G.R. No. 227421, 23 July 2018
b. The attack or assault must be actual or at least
imminent. Crime Charged: Murder
c. The attack or assault must be unlawful. RTC & CA: [Olarbe is guilty of murder.] It said that
the unlawful aggression had ceased to exist.
Two kinds of unlawful aggression Therefore, Olarbe should not have killed the said
a. Physical or material unlawful aggression victim.
- the attack is by means of physical force or by SC: Acquitted
means of a weapon
b. Imminent unlawful aggression FACTS: The said neighbor, Arca, tried to shoot
- the attack is impending or at the point of Olarbe. They grappled for the possession of the gun.
happening. Olarbe gained possession and he shot Arca on the
head. But instead of going down on the ground,
If there is an unlawful aggression coming from the going down on the floor, Arca pulled out his bolo
victim, the said person defending himself must use and tried to hack the common law spouse of Olarbe.
means reasonable in order to repel the said unlawful Again, Olarbe grappled for the possession of the
aggression coming from the victim. bolo and once in possession, he hacked the said
neighbor, Arca. In this case, based on the autopsy
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed report, the cause of death of the victim were both
to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression gunshot wounds and hackings.

The means used by the accused to protect his life and RTC & CA: [Olarbe is guilty of murder.] It said that
limb must be reasonable and rational. the unlawful aggression had ceased to exist.
Therefore, Olarbe should not have killed the said
Factors to be considered to determine whether the victim.
means employed is reasonably necessary: ISSUE: Whether or not lawful aggression had
a. Nature and the number of the weapons used ceased to exist.
by the unlawful aggressor as against that of
the person defending himself. HELD: No. In order to determine whether there is a
b. Personal circumstances of the unlawful need for self-defense, Supreme Court said that the
aggressor versus that of the person defending right of a person to take life in self-defense arises
himself. from his belief in the necessity of doing so and his
c. Place and location of the assault. belief and the reasonableness thereof are to be
judged in the light of the circumstances as they had
These factors will determine if the means used by the appeared to them not in the circumstances as they
accused to defend his life and limb is indeed would appear to other people.
reasonably and rationally necessary.
According to the Supreme Court, you have to take
into consideration what the accused was feeling at
that particular moment. His right to defend his life

- 29 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

must be adjudged in light of the circumstances as qualified by abuse of superior strength, But they
they appear to him and not as they appear to other said, “no.” They merely acted in self-defense. Was
people. At that particular moment, Olarbe felt that there self-defense?
the unlawful aggression had not yet ceased. His life,
his common law spouse were still in danger and A: No, there was no self-defense.
hence, he has to defend themselves. Supreme
Court appreciated the said self-defense. Under the first element of self-defense under Article
11 (1), there must exist an unlawful aggression on the
GANAL JR. V PEOPLE part of the said victim. The act of X pointing the gun at
G.R. No. 248130, 02 December 2020 the Barangay Chairman after firing several gunshots
can be considered as an unlawful aggression when he
FACTS: Ganal Jr. killed the victim, Julwin. Julwin at pointed it to the Chairman. The said life and limb of the
that time was only armed with a knife and fist-size Chairman was in actual and imminent danger.
stones [stones na kasing laki ng kanyang kamao] yet However, the moment X obeyed the Chairman and
Ganal Jr. was armed with pistol. Ganal Jr. was armed placed down the gun, and the Chairman had taken the
with gun, and he was consumed the bullets of his gun, that could no longer amount to unlawful
gun hence, Julwin died. aggression. The Chairman and the Tanod
simultaneously hit him with their stick.
CRIME CHARGED: Homicide
Since the unlawful aggression ceased to exist, there is
RTC & CA: [Ganal Jr. is guilty of homicide.] It ruled
no longer reason for them to wound the said victim.
that there is no self-defense, because it already
Hence, self-defense should not lie in their favor. Since
ceased to exist. There is also no reasonable
the first element of unlawful aggression had already
necessity of the means employed – a gun versus fist-
ceased to exist. Then, the SC said that it is already an
sized stones and also, knife.
act of retaliation.
ISSUE: Whether or not Ganal is entitled to the
justifying circumstance of self-defense. In that case, the said accused became the unlawful
aggressor. Self-defense would not lie in their favor.
HELD: Yes. Supreme Court said that there is self-
defense because the right of a person to take on self- Q: X stabbed Y. Y was hit on the forearm.
defense arises from his belief in the necessity of the Thereafter, Y went home. X followed Y. Y was able
means, and this shall be judged in the light of the to reach the house. When Y went to the house,
circumstances as they appear to the accused and instead of staying inside, Y took the bolo and went
not as in the light of the circumstances as they outside. He challenged X. “X you hacked my
appear to other. forearm. Let’s fight” Y hacked and killed X. y was
arrested and brought to the police station. Y was
Julwin knocked down the father, Ganal Sr. and he
charged with homicide for having killed X. Y said
proceeded to go to Ganal Jr. At that particular
he merely acted in self-defense. Is there self-
moment, Ganal Jr. felt that his life and his family
defense?
were in danger and because of that, he fired the said
shot. Supreme Court appreciated self-defense.
A: In this case, there are 2 phases. First, X hacked Y.
There was unlawful aggression on the part of X.
Q: The barangay chairman heard gunfires while
there was this barangay party. The barangay Second phase, Y ran and was able to go home. The
chairman and the tanod asked the people, “Where moment Y run and was able to go home and which the
was this gunfire coming from?” The people said, house the inceptive unlawful aggression by X had
“there.” So the barangay chairman went to the said ceased to exist. But Y was not satisfied in just reaching
place together with his tanods and they saw X in home and took his bolo and challenged X. X accepted.
possession of the gun. “Are you the one who fired
the gun?” Then X pointed the gun to the barangay In case of an agreed fight, there is no such defense as
chairman and the tanod. The barangay chairman self-defense. It was an agreed fight, therefore, you
said, “Give me the gun, you are drunk.” X placed the cannot claim self-defense because in the first place you
gun on the ground. The barangay chairman went agreed to the said fight. In fact in this case, Y was the
to get the gun. Thereafter, the barangay chairman one who challenged the victim. Therefore, Self-
started hitting X with their stick repeatedly on the defense will not lie in favor of the said accused.
head. X kept on retreating and retreating until it
was dead end. Nowhere to go. The barangay Q: The woman was on her way home, early in the
chairman still repeatedly hit and hit the head of X. morning. When a man appeared in front of her and
All of them simultaneously hitting the head of X covered her mouth, punched her on the stomach,
with the stick. They only stop when the mother of carried her, pinned her down. The man undressed
X arrived. X sustained fatal wounds on the head himself and that particular moment the woman
but he survived. The chairman and the tanods took her knife inside his pocket. So when the man
were charged with the crime of frustrated murder went on top of the said woman. The woman, so

- 30 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

afraid without looking, stabbed the man in the the accused Noe Toledo (Toledo). Toledo requested
heart. The man died. The woman is now charged the group of Ricky to refrain from making any noise.
with homicide. Is the woman liable? She claims
that she merely acted in self-defense in defense of Around 9:00 p.m., Gerardo, Ricky’s uncle arrived,
her honor/chastity. Is there self-defense on the had dinner and went home accompanied by Ricky.
part of the said woman? Thereafter, Ricky returned to the house and went to
sleep with the three others. They had not laid down
A: Yes, there is self-defense on the part of the woman. for long when they heard stones being hurled at the
roof of the house and Ricky saw Toledo stoning
Under the first element of self-defense under Article (three times) their house. Ricky went out of the
11 (1), there must exist an unlawful aggression on the house and proceeded to Toledo’s house. When
part of the said victim. The woman was just walking Ricky asked why Toledo was stoning the house, the
when the man suddenly appeared, covered her mouth, latter did not answer but met Ricky at the doorstep
punched her, carried her, pinned her down and of his (accused’s) house and, without any warning,
undressed her. stabbed Ricky on the abdomen with a bolo thereby
causing his death.
Under the second element, the means employed of the
accused must be reasonably necessary to prevent or Toledo contends that Ricky, already inebriated, was
repel the unlawful aggression. You take into incensed when he admonished Ricky’s group not to
consideration the place and occasion early in the make any loud noise. According to him, Ricky pulled
morning. No one was there to help the woman. You out a balisong and threatened to stab him. To
take into consideration their difference in personal defend himself, Toledo took his bolo returned to the
circumstance. The woman was so weak. He has been door and pushed it with all his might using his left
punched by a strong man. Therefore, the means hand. He then pointed his bolo, which was in his
employed by the woman was reasonable. Otherwise, right hand, towards Ricky. The bolo accidentally hit
she could have been raped. Ricky on the stomach, and the latter lost his balance
and fell to the floor. Thereafter, he surrendered to
Last element, there was no provocation, not even a the barangay captain.
minor provocation from the woman. Therefore, self-
defense would lie in her favor. ISSUE: Whether or not the defense of Toledo of
accident and self-defense be admitted and
As opposed in the case of People v. Jaurigue, The appreciated.
Supreme Court did not appreciate the defense of
Defense of One’s Honor and Chastity. The said act of HELD: No. The SC ruled that there is no such thing
the man that he just placed his hand in the lap of as accidental self-defense. The accused cannot
Jaurigue, in a chapel fully lighted and the father is claim the death purely accidental and when the
there, therefore there can be no lawful aggression, her findings of the lower courts were unfavorable, later
honor, her chastity, and liberty cannot be said to be in on changed his defense by alleging that what
immediate danger. In this case, the SC distinguished happened was purely self-defense.
the said incident from the incident wherein the said
victim man entered the bedroom of Jaurigue. SC said The two defenses perpetuated by the accused are
can Jaurigue killed the said victim that night that he totally inconsistent with each other. Although in the
entered her bedroom, she could have been justified justifying circumstance of self-defense, an accused
but for her to kill this man inside a chapel well-lit and is excused because of DELIBERATELY trying to
filled with people and his father was even there, the SC repel an unlawful aggression which could have
said then self-defense cannot lie in the said accused. killed or injure him. And so, such acts are not in tune
with ACCIDENT which presupposes an act which
TOLEDO v. PEOPLE was not even contemplated or planned but purely
G.R. No. 158057, 24 September 2004 accidental.

Crime Charged: Murder In the case of Toledo v. People, the SC said that it is
RTC & CA: HOMICIDE with mitigating wrong for the accused to raise the defenses of accident
circumstances of voluntary surrender. On appeal, and then thereafter self-defense. Because in the trial
Toledo invoked Article 12, par. 4 of the RPC, he court, the accused said that he accidentally killed the
claimed that he stabbed Ricky by accident; hence, victim when he appealed to the SC, he said that he
he is exempt from criminal liability. killed the victim in an act of self-defense. SC said it is
SC: Homicide wrong to raise both defenses because according to the
SC that these defenses are inconsistent with each
FACTS: Victim Ricky Guarte (Ricky) and three other. When you say accident, it happened outside the
others (Lani, Michael, and Rex) were having a sway of things. There was no intent on the part of the
drinking session at the house of the victim’s person who did the said wrong, there was no criminal
parents, which is 5 meters away from the house of intent at all because it happened outside the sway of
things.

- 31 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Senoja who wanted a confrontation this time. It was

On the other hand, when you say self-defense, it is a Senoja who was now the unlawful aggressor in this
threat and positive overt act done by the accused second phase of their confrontation.
deliberately and intentionally to save his own life. In
case of self-defense, the offender intentionally killed The affirmative defense of self-defense may be
and intentionally wounded the victim because complete or incomplete. It is complete when all the
otherwise he will not do so, he will be the one killed. three essential requisites are present; it is
So self-defense is a self-deliberate and self-positive act incomplete if only unlawful aggression on the part
done by the accused based on the impulse of self- of the victim and any of the two essential requisites
preservation. So, it cannot be raised together with were present. Unlawful aggression on the part of
accident. the victim is a condition sine qua non to self
defense, complete or incomplete. The right of self-
SENOJA v. PEOPLE defense proceeds from necessity and is limited by
G.R. No. 160341, 19 October 2002 it. The right begins where necessity does, and ends
where it ends.
Crime Charged: Homicide
RTC & CA: HOMICIDE There is however, a perceptible difference between
SC: Homicide necessity and self-defense. Self-defense excuses the
repulse of a wrong; necessity justifies the invasion
FACTS: Exequiel Senoja, Fidel Senoja (they were of a right. Hence, it is essential to self defense that it
brothers),Jose Calica and Miguel Lumasac were should be a defense against a present unlawful
drinking gin in the hut of Crisanto Reguyal. Leon attack. Self-defense is an act to save life; hence, it is
Lumasac suddenly barged in, holding a bolo and right and not a crime.
was looking for his brother Miguel whom he
suspected of drying up the rice field he was plowing. It is a settled rule that to constitute aggression, the
However, when Senoja (Exequiel) approached person attacked must be confronted by a real threat
Leon, the latter tried to hack him so he embraced on his life and limb; and the peril sought to be
Leon and Jose took Leon’s bolo. After the avoided is imminent and actual, not merely
confrontation, Leon wanted to get his bolo back imaginary.
because he wanted to go home. After getting it back,
Leon walked out of the place followed by Senoja. Hence, when an inceptual or unlawful aggression
ceases to exist, the one making a defense has no
Suddenly, Senoja stabbed Leon in the back. When right to kill or injure the former aggressor. After the
Leon turned around, Senoja continued stabbing him danger has passed, one is not justified in following
until he fell to the ground. Then the petitioner ran up his adversary to take his life.
towards the barangay road and threw away the
knife he used to stab Leon. Petitioner admitted In the case of Senoja v. People, the SC said that the
killing the victim but invoked the affirmative right of self-defense proceeds from necessity and is
defense of self-defense. His version said that after limited by it. SC said there is a difference between
the commotion inside the house, Leon left but with necessity and self defense. Self-defense excuses the
a threat that something will happen to Senoja. repulse of a wrong while Necessity justifies the
Senoja followed Leon as the latter was making his invasion. Hence, according to the SC, it is essential to
way home. When Leon realized that Senoja was self-defense that it is a defense against a person who
following him, Leon walked back towards him and has been unlawfully attacked.
suddenly hacked Senoja at the left side of his head
and right thigh. Unable to evade the treacherous The maxim behind the concept of self-defense is that
attack by Leon, Senoja drew his colonial knife and “Stand ground when you are right”. It means that
stabbed Leon in self-defense, inflicting upon him the accused is where he should be, the law does not
multiple wounds which caused his death. require him to retreat and when his assailant is fast
approaching him otherwise he runs the risk of being
ISSUE: Whether or not Senoja merely acted in self- stabbed in the back.
defense
DEFENSE OF A RELATIVE
HELD: No. Senoja is guilty of HOMICIDE. In this
case, there were two events concerned: 1) The Article 11. Justifying circumstances. - The following
arrival of Leon who was armed with a bolo and 2) do not incur any criminal liability:
When Leon demanded for his bolo because he xxx
wanted to go home already after the commotion 2. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or
inside the house, and then eventually left with a rights of his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or
threat. Quoting the appellate court, the SC said that legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters,
the victim had already left the hut. At that point in or of his relatives by affinity in the same degrees,
time, the victim was simply walking toward his and those by consanguinity within the fourth civil
home; he had stopped being an aggressor. It was

- 32 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

degree, provided that the first and second o’clock in the morning. When suddenly, he heard
requisites prescribed in the next preceding the voice of his 70 year old father in law. When he
circumstance are present, and the further requisite, looked at the other side of the road, he saw his
in case the provocation was given by the person father in law having an argument with his
attacked, that the one making defense had no part neighbor named W. X stopped in order to see what
therein. is going to happen. X saw W punched the face of his
father in law. The father in law because of his
Elements: seniority fell on the ground. When X saw his father
1. Unlawful aggression; in law fell on the ground, he was already walking
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to from the other side of the road. When X saw W
prevent or repel it pulled out a knife and was about to stab his father
3. It is necessary that the said relative that he is in law, X ran and shouted “DON’T STAB HIM”. The
defended be included in the enumeration in the moment X arrived, he pushed W and W fell on the
2nd paragraph which are the following: ground. It was a bad fall as the knife that he was
a. Spouse holding pierced his chest. X and his father in law
b. Ascendants brought W to the hospital. It was a fatal wound but
c. Descendants, or W was still able to survive. X is not being
d. Legitimate, natural or adopted brothers prosecuted for frustrated homicide, he argued
or sisters, that he merely acted in defense of a relative. Will
e. Relatives by affinity in the same degrees, the defense of a relative lie in his favor?
and
f. Relatives by consanguinity within the A: First you take into consideration is the father in law
fourth civil degree within the meaning of a relative to be dependent on
the 2nd paragraph, Yes he is a relative. The father in law
In case the provocation was given by the person is related to X as a relative by affinity.
attacked, the one making the defense had no part
therein. If it is a relative by affinity it must be of the same
degree as ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural,
The third element of a defense of a Relative, even if the adopted brothers or sisters. The father in law is in the
relative being defended is the one who gave the same degree of affinity as an ascendant in so far X is
provocation, for as long as the relative making the concerned. Therefore, the defense of a relative will in
defense is not a party to such provocation, there is still his favor.
a valid defense of a relative.
Granting for the sake of argument, that it was the
DEFENSE OF A STRANGER father in law who provoked W and X has nothing to do
with it. Therefore, the defense of a relative would lie
Article 11. Justifying circumstances. - The in his favor.
following do not incur any criminal liability:
xxx Q: But what if, exactly the same facts, the only
3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or difference is that instead of a father in law, it was
rights of a stranger, provided that the first and the first cousin of his wife that is being defended
second requisites mentioned in the first by X. Will the defense of a relative will lie in favor
circumstance of this article are present and that the of X?
person defending be not induced by revenge, A: No, the first cousin is a relative by consanguinity
resentment, or other evil motive. within the fourth civil degree of the wife but not of X.
Because, in so far X is concerned, the first cousin of the
Elements of Defense of a Stranger: wife is a relative by affinity and he is outside of the
1. Unlawful aggression; same degree as ascendant, descendant, legitimate,
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed natural, adopted brothers or sisters. Therefore, the
to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression; defense of a relative will not lie, it should be defense of
3. The person defending is not induced by a stranger.
revenge, resentment, or other evil motive.
All the elements are present. There was Unlawful
In case of a defense of a stranger, it has the same aggression, the said cousin was about to be stabbed.
elements. But the third element is necessary for a There was Reasonable necessity, X did not even used
defense of a stranger to lie in favor of the accused that a weapon, he just pushed him. It just so happen that
he is not motivated by any ill motive, by any act of the said man fall and pierced his chest. Last element, it
revenge. Only by a noble objective of helping, cannot be said that X was ignited by any ill motive, he
defending a total stranger. only came there to help the said first cousin of his wife.
Therefore, defense of a stranger will lie in favor of the
Q: X was on his way to the office, he was on his way accused.
to the bus station and he was walking around 6
STATE OF NECESSITY

- 33 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Under Article 101 of the Revised Penal Code, if there

Article 11. Justifying circumstances. - The following are many people that have been benefited by the said
do not incur any criminal liability: state of necessity, the judge will divide the civil
xxx liability proportionately among them. So not only X,
4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or but also the driver and the persons in the said car who
injury, does not act which causes damage to were conducting the repair. Their lives too were
another, provided that the following requisites are saved.
present;
First, That the evil sought to be avoided actually FULFILLMENT OF A LAWFUL DUTY
exists;
Second, That the injury feared be greater than Article 11. Justifying circumstances. - The following
that done to avoid it; do not incur any criminal liability:
Third, That there be no other practical and less xxx
harmful means of preventing it 5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty
or in the lawful exercise of a right or office.
This is otherwise known as state of necessity. In case
of justifying circumstance, there is no crime, there is The elements of this justifying circumstance:
no criminal, there is no criminal liability and there is 1. The offender acted in the due performance of
no civil liability. An exception to that no civil liability his duty or in the lawful exercise of a right of
is the fourth paragraph which is the state of necessity. office.
2. That the resulting felony is the unavoidable
In case of the 4th paragraph or state of necessity, there consequence, the necessary consequence of the
is no criminal liability but there is a civil liability. due performance of his duty.
However, this civil liability shall be imposed not only
to the accused but also to other persons who benefited These are the two elements of fulfillment of duty. So if
in the state of necessity. a felony resulted from a public officer or from a
person's fulfillment of his duty, if the felony results,
X was driving carefully. The road was a little bit the question is, is this resulting felony unavoidable? If
slippery. When suddenly he saw right in front of unavoidable, his act is justified. He cannot be held
him, there was a 10 wheeler truck under repair. civilly and criminally liable.
There was no light at all. No early warning device
to warn him that there was this truck right in the OBEDIENCE TO A LAWFUL ORDER
middle of the road under repair. He was already
very near the truck and if he will go on, there will Article 11. Justifying circumstances. - The following
be a collision between his car and the 10 wheeler do not incur any criminal liability:
truck. If he turns to the left he will be hitting the xxx
island, if he turns to the right, he will be hitting two 6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order
people. He turned to the right and two people were issued by a superior for some lawful purpose.
injured and sustained less serious physical injury.
Prosecuted for reckless imprudence resulting in In case of the last justifying circumstance, person who
less serious physical injuries. He raised the acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for
justifying circumstance of state of necessity. Will some lawful purpose.
state of necessity lie in favor of X? That the evil
sought to be avoided actually exists-the collision The elements of obedience to a lawful order are:
between his car and the 10-wheeler truck. That 1. That an order has been issued by a superior
the injury feared be greater than that to avoid it. officer
The injury that he feared? 2. That the said order is lawful
In case of collision, there is a great possibility they will 3. That the means used by the subordinate to
die. Last element, that there be no other practical or carry out the said order must also be lawful.
less harmful means of preventing it. At that particular
moment, at the spar of the moment, wanting to save It is necessary that the order not only coming from the
his life, he believed his decision was the best. If he goes superior be lawful but also the means used be lawful
on, either collide, he may die. If he turns to left hitting in order for this justifying circumstance to lie.
the island, his car may turn upside down, he may die.
If he turned to the right, he would be injuring the Q: X was convicted by the trial court sentencing
people. Therefore, State of necessity will lie in his him for the crime of murder. Sentencing him with
favor. a penalty of reclusion perpetua. The judgement
became final and executory and so X in now being
However, the judge will impose upon him civil brought by the BJMP guards and the BJMP vehicle
indemnity but not only to him. Those people repairing to the Muntinlupa, to the Bilibid where he’s going
the truck, they were saved by the said accident. They to serve the final sentence imposed upon him by
also benefited from the said state of necessity. the court. On the way to Muntinlupa, X told the
Therefore, they too shall shoulder civil indemnity.

- 34 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

police officers guarding him, inside the BJMP Therefore, both elements of fulfilment of duty being
vehicle, that he needed to answer the call of present can be raised as a justifiable circumstance that
nature. Police officer Y told the driver to stop and will free him from both criminal and civil liability.
accompanied him behind a tree. However, X told
the said Police officer that it’s impossible for him Another defense that Police Officer Y may raise would
to open the zipper of his pants. His hands had be DEFENSE OF A STRANGER, it is also present.
handcuffs behind, and if the police officer would
do the honor of opening the zipper of his pants. There was unlawful aggression coming from X. on the
The police officer wouldn’t want to open, instead part of the said woman he was about to stab her. The
he unlocked the said handcuffs. The moment X’s means used by Police Officer Y was reasonable. At that
hands were free, X repeatedly kicked and punched particular moment, if he would go there and try to
Police Officer Y and then thereafter he ran as fast fight with X, the woman might be already stabbed. The
as he could. Police Officer Y was so shocked of what only way was to fire from the outside, fire from the
happened, he shouted to other Police Officer, distance and based on the facts, there was no showing
Police Officer Z and to the driver, and all three of that Police Officer Y was ignited by any ill motive, his
them, they chased X. only motive is to save the life of this woman held as
hostage. Therefore, Defense of a Stranger would also
X went inside the public market, when X came out lie in favor of the said Police Officer.
he was already holding a hostage, a pregnant
woman. The said pregnant woman was held So, these are the six justifying circumstances under
hostage by X. His arms were around said pregnant Art. 11.
woman and there was a bolo pointed on the chest
of the said pregnant woman. The woman was BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME
wearing a duster, blood was already coming out
because the said bolo was pierced severely, Q: What if X and Y are husband and wife? And they
deeply, already on the chest. The said woman was have been living together for let’s say five years. It
asking X, please release her, she is pregnant, used to be a happy marriage until the said husband
please save her and the life of the baby. When X lost his job. When the husband lost his job, he
just laughed, the pregnant woman struggled, and turned to drinking. Since the time he lost his job,
then thereafter kicked the prisoner with all her there were no nights wherein he would not go
might. This caused X to get mad at the said home drunk. And whenever he would go home
pregnant woman and so he was about to stab the drunk, he would turn his ire on the said wife. He
said pregnant woman but Police Officer Y fired a would physically abuse the wife, hurting the wife,
shot on X, hitting X on the forehead causing X to die kicking the wife, slapping the wife. This has been
instantaneously. going on for one year from the time the husband
lost his job. The following morning, after physical
Police Officer Y is now being persecuted for the injuring/abusing his wife, the said husband would
crime of homicide. What defenses may be raised ask forgiveness after seeing the bruise, the
by Police Officer Y in order to be free of both contusion on the different parts of the body of the
criminal and civil liability? wife, especially on the face. He would be kissing,
embracing the wife and being loving to the wife
A: Police officer Y may raise the defense of fulfilment but come night time, he would again be physically
of duty. At that moment, he was acting in the abusing the said wife.
performance of his duty. It is his duty to bring, it is his
duty to arrest X and then thereafter bring him to the Until one time, the said husband after having a
Bilibid. drinking spree with his friends, upon arrival at the
house, the wife greeted the husband and told the
It is also his duty to save the life of an ordinary citizen husband, “Did you have dinner already? I
being held as hostage by X. So, at that time, Police prepared your dinner. Come let us eat.”
Officer Y was acting in the fulfilment of duty.
But instead of being thankful to his wife, the
How about the second element? Is it present? husband immediately gave the wife two slaps on
the face and a punch on the chest. The wife fell. The
A: Police Officer Y’s act of shooting X was the wife exclaimed, “Bakit naman? Anong ginawa ko?”
unavoidable consequence of saving the life of the said
pregnant woman. Had he not fired a shot at the said The moment the said woman asked that, the said
woman, X was already at the point of stabbing the said husband pulled out a balisong, opened it and was
woman because said woman had kicked him that about to stab the wife but the wife shouted. The
caused him to be angry. Had Police Officer Y not fired moment the wife shouted, the said husband closed
that shot, the said woman might be dead. again the said balisong and he just kicked the face
of the wife, went to the bedroom and went to sleep.

- 35 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

The husband was fast asleep when the wife tranquil period, the batterer may show a tender
entered the bedroom to get some clothing. As the and nurturing behavior towards his partner
wife was about to get out of the bedroom, she because he becomes conscious of his cruelty
stared at the said husband. As she was staring at and therefore tries to compensate by asking for
the husband, she became so afraid. Before, just the woman’s forgiveness and giving empty
punches and kicks but this night, a knife was promises of never repeating the assault. On the
already pulled out by her husband and she was other hand, the battered woman falsely
about to be stabbed had she not shouted aloud. convinces herself that the battery will never
happen again, that the batterer will change and
According to the mind of the wife, tomorrow or the that this “good and caring man” is the real
next day, she might be killed and also their person whom she loves.
children. This has to end. So, the wife went to the
kitchen, took a knife and while the husband was These must be the three phases attendant in the said
fast asleep, the wife repeatedly stabbed the two battering episodes of abuse.
husband to death.
In this case, not only two battering. For more than a
The wife is now being prosecuted for parricide. year, the said woman had been physically abused by
She claimed the defense of battered woman the said husband. Therefore, battered woman
syndrome. To prove that her state of mind at the syndrome will free the said woman from criminal and
time of the stabbing was that of someone suffering civil liability.
from the battered woman syndrome disease, her
defense counsel presented the psychiatrist who Under Sec 26 of RA 9262, the law provides that
had been treating her for already more than one victim-survivors found by the court to be suffering
year. The psychiatrist testified to such. What from battered woman syndrome, do not incur any
would be the decision of the court? criminal liability nor civil liability notwithstanding the
absence of any of the elements of the justifying
A: The court has to acquit the said woman based on circumstance of self-defense.
battered woman syndrome.
Therefore, even if at the time the said woman stabbed
Battered woman syndrome is a scientifically defined and killed her husband, the husband was fast asleep
pattern of psychological and behavioral symptoms and that there was no unlawful aggression coming
found in women living in battering relationship as a from the husband so that particular element of self-
result of cumulative abuse. That is how battered defense is absent still it was proven that at the time of
woman syndrome is defined under Section 3(c) of RA stabbing, she was in the state of battered woman
9262, as amended. syndrome. She has to be acquitted of the crime
charged. The law provides, this will absolve the
Based on this, it is necessary that the said woman must woman from both criminal and civil liability
be suffering from some battering episodes. In the case notwithstanding the absence of any of the elements of
of People v. Marivic Genosa, 2004 En Banc, the SC said the justifying circumstance of self-defense.
that in order for battered woman syndrome to bring
about the offender’s acquittal, there must be at least Q: The said husband has been verbally abusing the
two battering episodes. These two battering episodes wife. For let’s say more than a year, the husband
must be a cycle of violence characterized by three has been verbally abusing the wife.
phases, which includes:
Then, one night, he did not only verbally abuse the
1. Tension-building phase – there is minor wife. He also physically abused the wife. He
battering whereby the woman allows herself to slapped the wife, punched the wife. Then went to
be abused for abuse which she considers minor. bed. The following day upon seeing the bruise on
She thus tries to pacify the batterer through a the face of the wife, he asked forgiveness. He even
kind and nurturing behavior or by simply gave flowers to the wife to ask for forgiveness. But
staying out of his way to prevent the escalation at that night, and the night thereafter, again the
of violence. This is a slippery slope because the husband continuously verbally abused the wife.
woman harbors the belief that the man has the The wife will just cry in silence, the said husband
right to abuse her in the first place. went to bed and fell asleep. The wife shivered in
fear, and she was afraid that tomorrow she will be
2. Acute battering phase – characterized by physically abused or might be killed.
brutality and destructiveness whereby the
woman has no control and it is only the batterer Because of that, the wife took a knife and stabbed
that may put an end to the violence. the husband while asleep. She is now being
prosecuted for the crime of parricide. She raised
3. Tranquil-loving phase – begins when the battered woman syndrome as a defense. Will
acute battering incident ends. During this battered woman syndrome lie in her favor?

- 36 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

A: Again, battered woman syndrome is a scientifically

defined pattern of psychological and behavioral Exempting circumstances are those which of present
symptoms found in women living in battering or attendant in the commission of a felony would serve
relationships. Therefore, the woman must be living in to exempt the offender from criminal liability, but not
battering relationships. from civil liability. The said offender is absolved from
criminal liability but not from civil liability because a
Under Section 3(b) of RA 9262, battery refers to any wrongness had been done.
act of inflicting physical harm upon the woman or her
child resulting to the physical and psychological or He is only exempted from criminal liability because he
emotional distress. Therefore, for it to be considered acted without voluntariness. There is no voluntariness
as battery, it is necessary that there must be the in the commission of the crime when any of the
infliction of physical harm upon the said woman. elements of voluntariness is absent. Either criminal
intent, criminal action, or intelligence. Either of these
In People v Genosa, the law requires two battering elements of voluntariness is absent at the time the
episodes. offender committed the crime. Therefore, he will be
exempted from criminal liability but not from civil
In the said bar problem, there is only one battering liability.
episode because there is only one instance wherein
the husband inflicted physical harm upon the said While in case of justifying circumstance there is no
woman. Therefore, battering woman syndrome, this crime, there is no criminal and civil liability. In case of
time, will not apply to the said woman as a defense for exempting, there is a crime, but there is no criminal
the crime of parricide. She has to be convicted. liability because he acted without voluntariness.
However, such conviction may be mitigated by several Hence, there is no criminal liability but there is civil
mitigating circumstances. liability because a violation of the law had been done.

ART. 12 - EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES In so far as mitigating circumstances are concerned,

just like justifying circumstances, it is both an
Article 12. Circumstances which exempt from admission and avoidance on the part of the accused.
criminal liability. - The following are exempt from The moment that the accused invokes any of the
criminal liability: exempting circumstances under Article 12. He in effect
1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the admits the acts alleged in the information, but he is
latter has acted during a lucid interval. trying to save himself from responsibility by saying
When the imbecile or an insane person has that he should be exempted and he acted without
committed an act which the law defines as a felony voluntariness.
(delito), the court shall order his confinement in
one of the hospitals or asylums established for IMBECILE OR INSANITY
persons thus afflicted, which he shall not be
permitted to leave without first obtaining the Article 12. Circumstances which exempt from
permission of the same court. criminal liability. - The following are exempt from
2. A person under nine years of age. criminal liability:
3. A person over nine years of age and under 1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the
fifteen, unless he has acted with discernment, in latter has acted during a lucid interval.
which case, such minor shall be proceeded against When the imbecile or an insane person has
in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80 of this committed an act which the law defines as a felony
Code. (delito), the court shall order his confinement in
When such minor is adjudged to be criminally one of the hospitals or asylums established for
irresponsible, the court, in conformably with the persons thus afflicted, which he shall not be
provisions of this and the preceding paragraph, permitted to leave without first obtaining the
shall commit him to the care and custody of his permission of the same court.
family who shall be charged with his surveillance
and education otherwise, he shall be committed to So, we have here two exempting circumstances, we
the care of some institution or person mentioned in have imbecility and insanity. An imbecile person is one
said Art. 80. who is already advanced in age, but he has only the
4. Any person who, while performing a lawful mental incapacity of a child. An imbecile person has no
act with due care, causes an injury by mere accident lucid interval, so imbecility is at all times exempted.
without fault or intention of causing it.
5. Any person who act under the compulsion of Unlike insanity which refers to the total aberration of
irresistible force. the mind. This person cannot distinguish right from
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an wrong and would not know the consequences of his
uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury. acts. For insanity, the exempt the offender from
7. Any person who fails to perform an act criminal liability, it must occur immediately prior to or
required by law, when prevented by some lawful at the time of the commission of the crime.
insuperable cause.

- 37 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Even if the offender claims insanity, if it is proven that MINORITY

he acted during a lucid interval, still he can be held
criminally liable. Article 12. Circumstances which exempt from
criminal liability. - The following are exempt from
Based on the Civil Code, the law presumes that every criminal liability:
man is sane, and of sound mind. Therefore, otherwise xxx
stated, the law presumes that all acts done by persons 2. A person under nine years of age. (NOTE:
are voluntary, and it is improper to say that he deed modified by Section 6 of RA.9344. Minimum age of
the said act unconsciously. Therefore, any person, any responsibility is now 15 years or under)
offender who claims the exempting circumstance of 3. A person over nine years of age and under
insanity has the burden of proving beyond reasonable fifteen, unless he has acted with discernment, in
doubt that he was insane immediately prior to or at which case, such minor shall be proceeded against
the time of the commission of the offense. in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80 of this
Code.
Insanity exists when there is complete deprivation of When such minor is adjudged to be criminally
intelligence while committing them. He is deprived to irresponsible, the court, in conformably with the
have discernment to understand right from wrong. An provisions of this and the preceding paragraph,
insane person has no full and clear understanding of shall commit him to the care and custody of his
the nature of the consequences of his acts. family who shall be charged with his surveillance
and education otherwise, he shall be committed to
If the accused becomes insane at the time of the trial, the care of some institution or person mentioned in
his insanity will no longer be exempting. What will said Art. 80.
happen is his case will be archived and he has to be
brought to a mental institution. The trial of the case Par. 2 & 3 of Article 12 refers to minority and this was
will resume, the moment he regains his sanity, except already amended by RA 9346, Sec. 6.
when penalty has already prescribed.
Q: What is the effect of minority on the criminal
Q: X killed Y, and is charged for Murder. The liability of an offender?
defense of X, is that he was insane at the time of the
commission of the crime and immediately prior to A: You have to qualify based on the age of the said child
the commission of the crime. To prove his insanity, in conflict with the law.
the defense counsel, presented X in open court and
testified that a week prior to his act of killing Y, he Q: What is the effect of minority in the criminal
was suffering from sleepless nights, he lost his liability of an offender?
appetite, he was always nervous and tense, always
afraid, and he has been hearing voices ordering A: You have to qualify your answer based on the age of
him to kill Y, and he simply obeyed the said voice. the said child in conflict with the law. Under Sec.6 of
According to him, he was insane and should be RA9344, as amended by RA10630, a child in conflict
acquitted of the crime of murder. To corroborate with the law 15 years or under at the time of the
the testimony, the defense counsel presented the commission of the crime, shall be totally exempt from
sister who testified to open court that a week prior criminal liability, regardless of discernment. A child
to the killing, she would see her brother looking above 15, but below 18 shall likewise be exempt from
blankly at nowhere and talking and arguing to criminal liability, unless he acted with discernment.
himself. The sister further stated that on the day When he acted with discernment, he shall be
that X killed Y, X went home crying and upon prosecuted in Court.
seeing her hugged her so tightly and saying “I am
sorry, I am sorry” and gave the weapon to the 1. So, the moment, the child in conflict with the law is
sister. The sister said, her brother was insane 15 or below, regardless of discernment, he is
prior to and at the time of the commission of the totally exempted from criminal liability.
crime. Would the accused’s defense of his insanity, 2. If the said minor offender/child in conflict with the
bring about his acquittal? law is above 15, but below 18, and he acted without
discernment, still, he is exempted from criminal
A: In this case, the answer is NO. According to the SC, liability.
even assuming that the accused’s testimony is 3. But, if the child in conflict with the law is above 15,
credible, while these acts are suggestive of abnormal but below 18, and he acted with discernment, then
mental condition it cannot be equeated with total he shall be prosecuted in Court.
mental deprivation, and absence of the power to
discern. The SC said that mere abnormality of mental SEC. 6, RA 9344, as amended. Minimum Age of
faculties, will not exclude imputability. So in this case, Criminal Responsibility. – A child 15 years of age or
the said offender cannot be excluded from criminal under at the time of the commission of the offense
liability. shall be exempt from criminal liability. However,

- 38 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

the child shall be subjected to an intervention They were both charged for the crime of Homicide.
program pursuant to Section 20 of this Act. Should X and Y be prosecuted in court?

A child is deemed to be 15 years of age on the A: Insofar as X is concerned, since he was, at the time
day of the fifteenth anniversary of his/her at the commission of crime, only 14 years old, the case
birthdate. against him must be immediately dismissed. Under
Sec.64 of RA9344, the law categorically provides that,
A child above 15 years but below 18 years of age case of children 15 years old and below, at the time of
shall likewise be exempt from criminal liability and the commission of the crime, shall be immediately
be subjected to an intervention program, unless he dismissed. So if the said child is 15 and below at the
or she has acted with discernment, in which case, time of the commission of the crime, no questions
such child shall be subjected to the appropriate asked, no discernment asked, under Sec.64, the case
proceedings in accordance with this Act. of the said child should be immediately dismissed.
Therefore, applying that in the case, since X was only
The exemption from criminal liability herein 14 years old at the time of the killing, the case against
established does not include exemption from civil him should immediately be dismissed.
liability, which shall be enforced in accordance with
existing laws. Y was 16, therefore, he is on the bracket of above 15,
but below 18. In that case, discernment must be
Q: Who is this so-called child in conflict with the determined. Did he act with discernment? Based on
law? the facts of the problem, Y acted with discernment. Y
acted with discernment and this is evident from the
A: A child in conflict with the law is a child alleged as, fact that Y warned W, the witness, that if he would tell
accused of, or adjudged as having violated, an offense anybody what they did to Z, they also would kill W.
under Phil. laws. He is a child in conflict with the law. Therefore, with that warning, Y knew what they did to
Under Sec.6 of RA9344, Par.4, the law expressly Z. Y knew that killing Z was an unlawful act., that
provides, that the exemption from criminal liability killing Z will cause them the arrest and imprisonment.
arising from minority does not include exemption So Y acted with discernment. Hence, Y should be
from civil liability. So minority only exempts the proceeded in Court.
offender from criminal liability, but not from civil
liability. That’s why it is only an exempting Q: Let us say that in this case, Y was 16 years old,
circumstance, and not a justifying circumstance. and he as charged in Court, because it was evident
he acted with discernment. After trial on the
SEC. 64, RA 9344, as amended. Children in merits, the RTC Judge convicted Y of the crime of
Conflict with the Law 15 Years Old and Below. - Upon homicide. The judge found Y guilty of homicide.
effectivity of this Act, cases of children 15 years old However, at the time of promulgation of judgment,
and below at the time of the commission of the Y was only 17 years old. He committed the crime
crime shall immediately be dismissed and the child when he was 16. What is the duty of the court?
shall be referred to the appropriate local social
welfare and development officer. Such officer, upon A: The duty of the court is to suspend his sentence
thorough assessment of the child, shall determine without need of obligation.
whether to release the child to the custody of
his/her parents, or refer the child to prevention Under Section 38 of R.A. 9344, the law provides that
programs as provided under this Act. Those with once the child who is under 18 years of age at the time
suspended sentences and undergoing of the commission of the crime is found guilty of the
rehabilitation at the youth rehabilitation center offense charged, the court shall determine and
shall likewise be released, unless it is contrary to ascertain the civil liability arising from the said crime
the best interest of the child. committed. However, instead of pronouncing a
judgment of conviction, the court shall place the child
Q: X and Y are brothers. X and Y killed Z. They in conflict with the law under suspended sentence
wanted Z to join their rugby gang, but Z would not without need of obligation.
want to join. When they saw the opportunity, X and
Y killed Z. X and Y’s act of killing of Z was witnessed The RTC found Y guilty of homicide for having killed Z.
by Z’s cousin, W. In fact, at the time that they were He was only 17 at the time of the promulgation of
killing Z, the cousin was asking X and Y, “Stop! judgment. Therefore, he is entitled to suspended
You’re already killing him!” But, X and Y did not service of sentence without need of obligation.
mind the begging on the part of the said cousin.
They proceeded to kill Z. After X and Y have killed Q: What if due to a protracted trial, the case against
Z, they warned the witness W not to tell it to Y terminated when Y was already 21 years old. He
anybody, otherwise, W will be the next. At the time is already an adult at the time of the promulgation
of the commission of the crime, at the time X and Y of judgment. What is the duty of the court?
killed Z, X was 14 years old. Y was 16 years old.

- 39 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

A: The duty of the court is still to suspend his sentence earlier plea of "not guilty" to "guilty." The presiding
without need of obligation. judge then explained the consequences of a change
of plea. Upon hearing the change of plea, the other
Section 38, last sentence further states that appellants likewise manifested, through their
suspension of sentence shall be applied even if the counsel who had earlier conferred with them and
juvenile is already 18 years of age or more at the time explained to each of them the consequences of a
of the promulgation of judgment. Therefore, even if Y change of plea, their desire to change the pleas they
is already an adult at the time of the promulgation of entered.
judgment. Still, he is entitled to suspension of sentence
without need of obligation as expressly required and Thereupon, the trial court ordered their re-
ordered by Section 38. arraignment. After they pleaded guilty, the trial
court directed the prosecution to present evidence,
Q: What if due to a protracted trial, when the judge which it did.
promulgated the judgment, X 16 years old at the
time of the commission of the crime was already Both RTC and CA rendered a decision convicting the
22 years old at the time of promulgation of accused.
judgment. Should the judge suspend the sentence
to be imposed on X? Issue: Whether the plea of guilty to a capital
offense was validly entered.
A: No. Under Section 40 of R.A. 9344, suspended
sentence can be given or extended only until the child Held: No. The questions propounded by the trial
in conflict with the law reaches the maximum age of court judge failed to ensure that accused-appellants
21 years. Therefore, he is not entitled to a suspended fully understood the consequences of their plea. In
sentence. fact, it is readily apparent from the records that
Karim had the mistaken assumption that his plea of
Q: What is the effect of minority on Y’s criminal guilt would mitigate the imposable penalty and that
liability? both the judge and his counsel failed to explain to
him that such plea of guilt will not mitigate the
A: Since he was only 16 at the time of the commission penalty pursuant to Article 63 of the Revised Penal
of the crime, his minority shall be considered as a Code. Karim was not warned by the trial court judge
privileged mitigating circumstance. The judge will that in cases where the penalty is single and
convict him. He is no longer entitled to suspended indivisible, like death, the penalty is not affected by
sentence. However, his minority shall be considered as either aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
a privilege mitigating circumstance which will lower
the imposable penalty by one degree. The duties of the trial court when the accused
pleads guilty to a capital offense. The trial court is
Under Section 51 of R.A. 9344, it is not only the mandated:
minority of Y that will cause to lower the imposable (1) to conduct a searching inquiry into the
penalty by 1 degree. He is also entitled to the benefit voluntariness and full comprehension of the
under Section 51. Instead of serving his sentence in consequences of the plea of guilt,
regular penal institution, he shall be serving his (2) to require the prosecution to still prove the guilt
sentence in agricultural camps and other training of the accused and the precise degree of his
facilities that may be established, maintained, culpability, and
supervised, and controlled by the Bureau of (3) to inquire whether or not the accused wishes to
Correction in coordination with DSWD. present evidence in his behalf and allow him to do
so if he desires.
PEOPLE v. GAMBAO
G.R. No. 172707 October 1, 2013 The rationale behind the rule is that the courts must
proceed with more care where the possible
Facts: The accused conspiring, confederating and punishment is in its severest form, namely death,
mutually helping one another and grouping for the reason that the execution of such a sentence
themselves together, did then and there by force is irreversible. The primordial purpose is to avoid
and intimidation, and the use of high powered improvident pleas of guilt on the part of an accused
firearms, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously take, where grave crimes are involved since he might be
carry away and deprive Lucia Chan y Lee of her admitting his guilt before the court and thus
liberty against her will for the purpose of extorting forfeiting his life and liberty without having fully
ransom as in fact a demand for ransom was made as understood the meaning, significance and
a condition for her release amounting to consequence of his plea. Moreover, the requirement
P400,000.00 to the damage and prejudice of Lucia of taking further evidence would aid this Court on
L. Chan. appellate review in determining the propriety or
impropriety of the plea.
During the hearing, after the victim and her son
testified, Karim manifested his desire to change his As a general rule, convictions based on an

- 40 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

improvident plea of guilt are set aside and the cases school on the night of the incident, and YYY, the
are remanded for further proceedings if such plea is brother of the Appellant, who testified going home
the sole basis of judgement. If the trial court, with the latter and the Deceased, but the Appellant
however, relied on sufficient and credible evidence asked him to leave them behind. Further, it found
to convict the accused, as it did in this case, the that the alibi that he went home after watching
conviction must be sustained, because then it is television did not preclude the possibility that he
predicated not merely on the guilty plea but on was at the crime scene. On appeal, the CA affirmed
evidence proving the commission of the offense the RTC Decision.
charged.45 The manner by which the plea of guilty
is made, whether improvidently or not, loses legal Issue: Whether or not the Appellant committed the
significance where the conviction can be based on crime of rape with homicide without direct
independent evidence proving the commission of evidence.
the crime by the accused. Contrary to accused-
appellants’ assertions, they were convicted by the Held: Yes It held that the crime of rape may be
trial court, not on the basis of their plea of guilty, but proven not only by direct evidence, but also by
on the strength of the evidence adduced by the circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence
prosecution, which was properly appreciated by are proof of collateral facts and circumstances from
the trial court. The prosecution was able to prove which the existence of the main fact may be inferred
the guilt of the accused-appellants and their according to reason and common experience. In the
degrees of culpability beyond reasonable doubt. absence of direct evidence, resorting to
circumstantial evidence is usually necessary in
In this case, the Supreme Court held that Section 51 proving the commission rape because it is generally
applies for as long as the child in conflict with the law unwitnessed and, very often, only the victim is left
was a minor at the time of the commission of the crime to testify for him or herself. It becomes even more
regardless of his age at the time of promulgation of difficult when the complex crime of rape with
judgment. Therefore, even if at the time of homicide is committed because the victim could no
promulgation of judgment, Y is already 40 years old, longer testify.
he will not be brought to the Bilibid to serve his final
sentence. He will only be serving it in agricultural In the present case, BBB testified seeing the
camps and other training facilities that may be Appellant dragging the Deceased to the school on
established, maintained, supervised, and controlled by the night of the incident. Further, YYY testified
the Bureau of Corrections in coordination with the going home with him and the Deceased on the night
DSWD. What matters is he was a minor at the time of of the incident, but the Appellant asked him to leave
the commission of the crime. them behind. Furthermore, after the Deceased’s
body was found, the Appellant fled town and hid his
PEOPLE VS. ZZZ identity using an alias. These series of
G.R. No. 228828 July 24, 2019 circumstantial evidence proffered by the
prosecution constitutes an unbroken chain that
Facts: In May 1996, BBB, the uncle of the Deceased leads to a reasonable conclusion that the Appellant
AAA and Appellant ZZZ, saw the the latter dragging was the author of the crime.
AAA by the wrist toward the school while on his
way to the store to buy cigarette. Presuming that In this case, the Supreme Court defined discernment.
nothing was off between two individuals Discernment - the mental capacity of the minor to
considering they were relatives, BBB merely fully appreciate the consequences of his unlawful act.
reprimanded them. The following day, the news
spread that AAA was missing. A coupld of days later, To fully appreciate the consequences of his unlawful
AAA’s lifeless body was found in a bamboo grove act. In that case of People v. ZZZ for Rape with
near the school. In the autopsy, it was observed that Homicide, the SC said that the accused acted with
there were contusions on AAA’s face, right arm, and discernment in carrying off the crime and the SC
front and side parts of her thigh. Further, there enumerated certain instances:
were contusions on the genital area, which could a. First, he perpetrated the crime in a dark and
have been caused by a hard or blunt instrument. isolated place. He abducted his cousin. He
Thus, an information was filed against Appellant for brought the cousin in a dark place and raped
the commission of Rape with Homicide before the and killed his cousin.
RTC. b. Second, when he learned that he had been
tagged as a suspect, he evaded the authorities
In its decision, the RTC found the Appellant guilty of by fleeing and concealing his identity. He went
Rape with Homicide. It ruled that the there was to another to another town. He changed his
moral certainty that the Appellant committed the name.
crime since he was the last person seen with the c. Third, the DSWD confirmed that the said
Deceased before she disappeared. This was testified accused knew and understood the
by BBB, who saw the Appellant dragging AAA to the consequences of his act.

- 41 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

d. And lastly according to the SC, based on the unconstitutional because they provide for penalties
testimony of the doctor, the doctor concluded against minor offenders.
that the said victim was raped by means of force
and this was evidenced by contusions all over ACCIDENT
her body and by tear from her vaginal area.
Article 12. Circumstances which exempt from
The SC said that all these acts showed that the said criminal liability. – The following are exempt from
accused, although minor, acted with discernment. He criminal liability:
was convicted of Rape with Homicide. xxx
4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act
Q: What are Status Offenses? Are local government with due care, causes an injury by mere accident
units allowed to enact ordinances that provide for without fault or intention of causing it.
status offenses?
For accident to lie and exempt the offender from
A: Under Sec. 57 of R.A. 9344 as amended, status criminal liability, the following elements must be
offenses are any conduct not considered an offense or present:
not penalized if committed by an adult shall not be a. Offender is performing a lawful act
considered an offense and shall not be punished if b. He is performing the lawful act with due care
committed by a child. c. He causes injury to another by mere accident
d. The injury is without fault or intent on the
Q: Are LGU allowed to enact ordinances that
part of the offender.
provide for status offenses?

A: RA 9344, Section 57, has been amended by RA These are the elements of accident in order to be
10630 by adding another provision which is Section considered as an exempting circumstance.
57-A. Under Section 57-A of RA 9344, as amended by
RA 10630, ordinances enacted by local government The second element is very important. It is
units concerning juvenile status offenses such as necessary that when the offender performs the
curfew violation, truancy, parental disobedience, anti- lawful act, he must be doing it with due care,
smoking and anti-drinking laws, and ordinances without fault, without intent on his part. Even if the
issued by LGUs on light offenses and misdemeanors offender is doing a lawful act, if there is the absence
against public order or safety such as, disorderly of due care on his part, he becomes liable for a
conduct, public scandal, harassment, drunkenness, culpable felony.
public intoxication, criminal nuisance, vandalism,
gambling, mendicancy, littering, public urination, and Although in case of exempting circumstances, there
trespassing, shall be for the protection of children. is no criminal liability and as a rule there is civil
liability. In case of accident, it is more akin to
So, under this added provision Sec 57-A of RA 9344, justifying.
Yes, LGUs such as the City of Manila, Province of
Batangas, and the Province of Laguna, their respective In case of accident, there is both, no criminal and
sanggunians can enact/pass ordinances on juvenile
civil liability because in the first place the offender
status offenses and light offenses committed by
acted lawfully with due care, without fault, without
minors against public order and safety.
intent.
However, the law requires that these ordinances shall
be for the protection of children. In what manner? The Accident happens outside the sway of things. It
law provides that these ordinances shall not carry cannot be prevented, only in that manner the
penalties to be imposed on children. No penalties shall offender be absolved on both criminal and civil
be imposed on children for the said violation. Instead, liability. No criminal, no civil liability.
they shall be brought to their residence, to the
barangay official, or to the barangay hall and they shall Q: There is a house in Mandaluyong, based on
be released only to the custody of their parents. They police officers’ surveillance, is engaged in the
cannot be penalized for having committed these so- manufacture of shabu. Based on their surveillance,
called status offenses, light offenses and it is a shabu laboratory. After being positive on
misdemeanors against public order or safety. their surveillance conducted in the big house in
Mandaluyong, the police officers applied for a
That’s why in the case of SPARK v. QC, the curfew search warrant and the RTC judge granted the said
ordinances enacted by Quezon City, Manila, and search warrant. Now, it’s time to raid the house.
Navotas were questioned as to their constitutionality. Many members of the police force of Mandaluyong
The Supreme Court said that the curfew ordinance of went to the said house. While some police officers
Quezon City was constitutional. But the curfew were conducting the raid inside the house, the
ordinances of Manila and Navotas were declared other police officers were outside. They were

- 42 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

manning the area outside. There were so many ELEMENTS:

police vehicles outside. 1. The compulsion is by physical force
2. Physical force must be irresistible
While the said incident was going on, here comes 3. Physical force must come from a third person
W. W just bought a new motorcycle so he was
trying to practice the ride of his motorcycle— he The force employed on the accused by another person
was going around and around. He passed by the is irresistible when it has reduced the accused to a
area. Along this area, there are many police patrol mere instrument such that he acted not only without
cars. W was so in a hurry with his beautiful newly will but also against his will. He had no recourse or
bought motorcycle. He was driving so fast. He was choice but to obey because otherwise, he will be the
driving recklessly. He hit one of the side mirrors of one or something wrong will be done on him.
the police car. The said side mirror was so
damaged that it fell and so the other police officer It is necessary that the said irresistible force must
heard it. Although W knew that he caused damage come from another person.
on the side mirror of the police car, he did not stop.
He did not bother to stop. It is considered as an exempting circumstance because
the element of freedom of action, an element of
One of the police officers in the said area, Police voluntariness is absent. The said accused acted
officer Y, gave chase on W. He chased the without freedom of choice.
motorcycle of W. police officer Y boarded 1 police
car and chase W. They were chasing each other UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR
along the highway of Mandaluyong. When police
officer Y saw W was about to turn right, he is afraid Article 12. Circumstances which exempt from
that he will be losing W so he pulled out his service criminal liability. - the following are exempt from
pistol and he tried to shoot the tires of the said criminal liability:
motorcycle. If he would be able to shoot the said xxx
tire, the motorcycle would definitely stop and he 6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an
would be able to arrest W. However, police officer uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury
Y was not a sharpshooter. He repeatedly fired
shots; all the shots went on the street. A bullet Elements:
bounced and hit the head of a passerby. The 1. That there exist an uncontrollable fear
passerby died. Because of this, police officer Y is 2. The fear must be real and imminent
now being prosecuted for the death of said 3. The fear of an injury must be equal or greater
passerby. The defense of police officer Y said that than the wrong act committed
he cannot be held criminally liable according to
him; that he should be exempted for both criminal TY v. PEOPLE,
and civil liability; that it was purely an accident. G.R. No. 149275, September 27, 2004
The fourth exempting circumstance under Art. 12.
Will accident lie in favor of Police officer Y? The Supreme Court did not appreciate the
exempting circumstance of Uncontrollable Fear.
A: Accident will not lie in favor of Police Office Y. The According to the Supreme Court, her defense that
act of Police officer Y chasing W, after W hit and she issued the checks because of fear that her
damaged the side mirror of the police car— it is a mother if not released from the hospital will
lawful act. However, the moment Police officer Y commit suicide.
already pulled out his pistol and repeatedly shot the
tires of the motorcycle of W, it is no longer a lawful act. The Supreme Court stated that the fear is not real
Not only that, he did not do so with due care. He knows and that it is not impending to happen. Therefore,
that he is not a sharpshooter— just one fire he could because of the absence, it is merely speculative, and
not hit yet still he fired shots repeatedly. it is just brought by imagination.

The first and second elements were immediately Hence, this exempting circumstance is not present.
absent. Therefore, the defense of accident will not
apply in favor of police office Y Q: Past 12 midnight, X was on his way home, so X
was walking on the road then suddenly X heard
IRRESSISTIBLE FORCE three successive gun fires. X was afraid. X stopped
and he sat on the ground and he touched his body
Article 12. Circumstances which exempt from and realized that he was not the one shot so the
criminal liability. – the following are exempt from shots were not against him.
criminal liability:
xxx After that, he heard some laughter and this
5. Any person who act under the compulsion of an laughter were on the right side of the said road
irresistible force where there was tall thick grass. Wanting to know

- 43 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

what the laughter was all about, X crawled 2. A person fails to perform such act.
towards the place and hid. Thereafter, he tried to 3. Failure to perform such act was due to some
look at what was happening and then he clearly lawful or insuperable cause.
saw A, B AND C standing and laughing in front of
Pedro. Pedro was lying on the ground bleeding all This is also another exemption to the general rule that
over the body and X saw A fire again at Pedro. X incase of exempting circumstances, there is no
was shocked by what he witnessed. Because of criminal liability but there is civil liability. In par 7,
this, X tried to get out of the said place. As he was there is both no criminal and civil liabilities.
crawling, the companions of A, B and C saw him
and he was forcibly brought to A. “Yan ang Justifying Exempting
napapala ng mga marites” Circumstance Circumstance
Affect the act and the Affect the doer of the act
A told X, “what did you see?” X who was so afraid, offense or the offender
told A that he did not see anything. A, pointed the Offender acted within The offender committed
gun on the temple of X, and instructed X that with the bounds of the law. a wrongful act, a
the use of the gun, X will shoot Pedro to kill him, He did not transgress violation of the law.
otherwise X will be killed. Because of that, X said the law. No wrong
“No, he cannot fire at Pedro because he doesn’t kill committed
people and he doesn’t know how to shoot.” There is no crime and There is a crime, there is
there is no criminal. wrong but there is no
However, A told X with the gun on pointed on his, criminal because he
“you are going to shoot Pedro or I will be the one acted without
to fire at your head. I will count 1,2,3 at the end of voluntariness.
3 and you haven’t fired at Pedro, I will fire at your There is no criminal and There is no criminal
head. The moment X heard the word 3, X fired at no civil liability. liability, but there is civil
Pedro without looking. Pedro was hit on the head, liability because a
he died. A, B, C were arrested. While being wrong or violation has
investigated by the police, all of them pointed X as indeed been committed.
the one who killed Pedro and so X was arrested. May be raised only as May be raised as
They were all charged as co-conspirator for defense in intentional defense both in
murder. The defense of X was that he acted under felonies. intentional and culpable
the compulsion of an irresistible force. He acted felonies.
under the impulse of uncontrollable fear of equal
or greater injury. Are these exempting ART. 13: MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
circumstances present so as to free X from
criminal liability? Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The
following are mitigating circumstances:
A: Yes. There was uncontrollable fear on the part of X. 1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter,
He will be shot on the head. It was real, imminent and when all the requisites necessary to justify or to
impending to happen. He saw A shot Pedro. If A can do exempt from criminal liability in the respective
that to Pedro, A will also definitely shoot him. The fear cases are not attendant.
of the injury is greater than the act that he committed. 2. That the offender is under eighteen year of
The fear that he will be killed is greater than killing age or over seventy years. In the case of the minor,
Pedro. Therefore, he should be exempted from he shall be proceeded against in accordance with
criminal liability but not civil liability. There was the provisions of Art. 80.
physical force employed on him. He had no recourse 3. That the offender had no intention to commit
but to shoot Pedro. He acted not only w/o will but also so grave a wrong as that committed.
against his will. He has no choice, his life or the life of 4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the
Pedro, and he chose to save his life. Therefore, he shall part of the offended party immediately preceded
be exempted from criminal liability. the act.
5. That the act was committed in the immediate
LAWFUL INSUPERABLE CAUSE vindication of a grave offense to the one committing
the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants, or
Article 12. Circumstances which exempt from relatives by affinity within the same degrees.
criminal liability. – the following are exempt from 6. That of having acted upon an impulse so
criminal liability: powerful as naturally to have produced passion or
xxx obfuscation.
7. Any person who fails to perform an act required 7. That the offender had voluntarily
by law, when prevented by some lawful insuperable surrendered himself to a person in authority or his
cause. agents, or that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt
before the court prior to the presentation of the
Elements: evidence for the prosecution;
1. An act is required by law to be done.

- 44 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or circumstance. When all the elements necessary to
otherwise suffering some physical defect which exempt the offender from criminal liability, we have
thus restricts his means of action, defense, or incomplete exempting circumstance.
communications with his fellow beings.
9. Such illness of the offender as would diminish Whether incomplete justifying or incomplete
the exercise of the willpower of the offender exempting shall be treated as ordinary mitigating
without however depriving him of the or privileged mitigating, would depend on certain
consciousness of his acts. rules:
10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a
similar nature and analogous to those above 1. When majority of the elements necessary to justify
mentioned. the act or to exempt the offender from criminal
liability are present in the commission of the crime,
Mitigating circumstances are those circumstances if the incomplete justifying and exempting shall be
present or attended in the commission of a felony treated as privileged mitigating circumstance;
would serve to lower the imposable penalty because
there is a diminution of the offender’s voluntariness in 2. If less than a majority of the elements necessary to
the commission of the crime. justify the act or to exempt the offender from
criminal liability are not present in the commission
While in exempting, there is totally no voluntariness in of the crime, then the incomplete justifying/
the commission of the crime. Therefore, exempting incomplete exempting shall be treated only as an
circumstances frees the offender from criminal ordinary mitigating circumstance. Therefore, it can
liability. be offset.

In case of mitigating circumstances, there is only a 3. If there are only 2 elements necessary to justify the
diminution on the voluntariness of the offender in the act or exempt the offender from criminal liability,
commission of the crime. Therefore, it will not exempt the presence of one element is already considered
the offender from criminal liability, but it will lower majority. Hence, the said incomplete justifying or
the imposable penalty on the part of the said offender incomplete exempting shall be considered as a
in case of conviction. privileged mitigating circumstance.

TWO KINDS OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES: 4. In case of incomplete self-defense, incomplete

defense of a relative, or incomplete defense of a
1. Ordinary Mitigating Circumstances stranger, there must always be unlawful
aggression. If only the element of unlawful
It can be offset by a generic aggravating circumstance. aggression is present, the said incomplete self-
If not offset, it will serve to lower the imposable defense, incomplete defense of a relative, or
penalty to the minimum period of the penalty incomplete defense of a stranger shall only be an
prescribed by law. ordinary mitigating circumstance. However, if
aside from unlawful aggression, another element is
2. Privileged Mitigating Circumstances present, then it shall be considered as a privileged
mitigating circumstance.
It cannot be offset by any aggravating circumstance.
Its effect is to lower the imposable penalty by 1 to 2 PEOPLE v. ULEP
degrees. So, the penalty will be lowered not by periods, G.R. No. 132547, September 20, 2000
but by degrees.
In the case of People vs. Ulep, police officer Ulep
INCOMPLETE JUSTIFYING AND EXEMPTING was charged with the crime of murder for having
CIRCUMSTANCE killed Wapili who was running amuck at that time.
And so, police officer Ulep raised justifying
Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The circumstances of self-defense and fulfillment of
following are mitigating circumstances: duty. He said that his act was justified.
1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter,
when all the requisites necessary to justify or to Wapili was running amuck. The assistance of the
exempt from criminal liability in the respective police officers was sought by the people in the
cases are not attendant. neighborhood. When they arrived, Wapili allegedly
xxx was about to attack them. And so they fired at him.
When he slumped on the ground, police officer Ulep
Otherwise stated, we have incomplete justifying went to him. Allegedly, took his weapon and fired
circumstance, and incomplete exempting shots on his head that causes his death.
circumstance. When all the elements necessary to
justify the acts are not attendant in the commission of Police officer Ulep was raising self-defense and
the crime, we have incomplete justifying fulfillment of duty.

- 45 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Supreme Court said there was no self-defense I said, when minority is not exempting, it is always a
because the element that is absent is unlawful privileged mitigating circumstance.
aggression. At the time Ulep fired at the head of the
said victim, the unlawful aggression that he has Minority is exempting when:
tried to commit, to shoot the police officer, has a. The offender is 15 years or under, regardless
already ceased to exist. The said unlawful of discernment.
aggression has ceased to exist because the said b. The offender is above 15 but below 18 acting
victim was already slumped on the ground. He without discernment, in this case minority is
could no longer mount any unlawful aggression, he exempting.
could no longer mount any attack. Therefore, since
it is the unlawful aggression that is absent, there is Minority is mitigating when:
neither justifying circumstance of self-defense nor Minority is mitigating when the said offender is above
incomplete justifying circumstance which is a 15 but below 18 but acted with discernment. In that
mitigating circumstance. case, minority is a privileged mitigating circumstance
based on Art. 68, 2nd paragraph of the RPC, the penalty
Police officer Ulep also raised fulfillment of duty. shall be lowered by one degree.
Another justifying circumstance. Is it present?
When the accused/offender is over 70 years old,
The justifying circumstance of fulfillment of duty seniority is considered as ordinary mitigating
has 2 elements: 1) that the accused acted in the circumstance.
due performance of his duty. This is present. PO
Ulep and the other police officers were there LABOSTA vs. PEOPLE
because their assistance was sought by the people. G.R.No. 243926, June 23, 2020
They were there to perform their duty, to maintain
peace and order, and give aid to the people. The first In the 2020 case of Labosta vs. People, accused
element is present. 2) the resulting injury is the Labosta was 74 years old at the time he killed the
necessary and unavoidable consequence of the victim. Convicted. When the case reached the SC,
due performance of the duty. The second element the Court affirmed the conviction, however,
is absent. Firing at the head of Wapili, killing Wapili, because of his age, 74 years old at the time of the
was not the necessary consequence of the said commission of crime, the SC lowered the imposable
fulfillment of the duty. The said victim was already penalty due to the mitigating circumstance of
slumped on the ground, face down, there is no need voluntary surrender and senior age of the victim.
to fire at his head. He could only be arrested at the He was 74 at the time he killed the victim. At the
particular moment. He was already defenseless. time the SC promulgated its judgment, Labosta was
Therefore, the 2nd element is absent. already 91 years old. SC lowered the imposable
penalty.
Since based on the rules, there are 2 elements, the
presence of one is considered majority. Therefore, PRAETER INTENTIONEM
incomplete fulfillment of a duty shall be treated as a
privileged mitigating circumstance. In this case, the Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The
Supreme Court appreciated the incomplete following are mitigating circumstances:
fulfillment of duty as privileged mitigating xxx
circumstance, and convicted PO Ulep of the crime of 3. That the offender had no intention to commit
homicide. so grave a wrong as that committed.
xxx
The SC said it is not murder because treachery was
not proven. We have discussed this in Art. 4, 1st paragraph. To
review, the elements are:
MINORITY AND SENIORITY a. A felony has been committed.
b. There is a notable disparity between the means
Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The employed by the offender and the resulting felony.
following are mitigating circumstances:
xxx SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION OR THREAT
2. That the offender is under eighteen year of
age or over seventy years. In the case of the minor, Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The
he shall be proceeded against in accordance with following are mitigating circumstances:
the provisions of Art. 80. xxx
xxx 4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the
part of the offended party immediately preceded
The second mitigating circumstance is minority and the act.
seniority. When I discussed exempting circumstances, xxx

- 46 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

The elements of the fourth mitigating be regarded as unlawful aggression, the said act was
circumstance of sufficient provocation or threat as however, vexatious, improper and enough to incite
a mitigating circumstance: Miranda into anger. Hence, it is considered as
1. The provocation must be sufficient sufficient provocation. So, the SC convicted Miranda of
2. It must originate from the offended party frustrated homicide. However, the SC appreciated in
3. The provocation must be immediate to his favor the mitigating circumstance of sufficient
commission of the crime by the person who provocation.
was provoked.
IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF A GRAVE OFFENSE
It is necessary that the said provocation must come,
must originate from the victim/offended party. If it Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The
comes from any other person, this mitigating following are mitigating circumstances:
circumstance will not lie in favor of the accused. The xxx
very victim must be the one who provoked him to 5. That the act was committed in the immediate
commit the crime. vindication of a grave offense to the one committing
the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants, or
Provocation is said to be sufficient if it is adequate for relatives by affinity within the same degrees.
a person to commit a wrongful act and when it is xxx
proportionate to the gravity of the act. Based on the
third element, the law requires that the provocation The fifth mitigating circumstance, that the act
must be immediate to the commission of the crime by committed in the immediate vindication of a grave
the accused, by the person provoked. The word offense to the one committing the felony, his spouse,
‘immediate’ here does not allow a lapse of time – right ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural or
after the victim provoked the accused, the accused adopted brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity in
committed this wrongful act against the said victim. the same degree.
No lapse of time in between the provocation and the
commission of the crime by the accused. The elements of immediate vindication of a grave
offense:
In the case of Urbano v. People, the SC appreciated 1. That there be a grave offense to the one
the mitigating circumstance of praeter intentionem, committing the felony, his spouse, ascendants,
paragraph 3 of Art. 13 and sufficient provocation, descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted
paragraph 4 of Art. 13. SC said praeter intentionem is brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity in the
present. A felony has been committed. Homicide has same degree; and
been committed. Second element is also present. 2. The commission of the crime was not far
There is a notable disparity between the means removed from the commission of the said
employed by Urbano and the resulting felony. Urbano offense. It is necessary that the commission of
was using the punch, luckily, he landed a punch on the the crime was done in immediate vindication of
jaw of Tomelden that caused Tomelden to lose the said grave offense.
consciousness. SC said, since both elements are
present, there is a notable disparity and it is evident The law used the word ‘immediate’ a second time.
that the said offender, Urbano, has no intention to Whereas, in sufficient provocation, the word
commit so grave a wrong as that of killing the victim. ‘immediate’ does not allow a lapse of time, in case of
Therefore, these two mitigating circumstances were immediate vindication of a grave offense, under the
considered by the SC in favor of Urbano. fifth paragraph of Art. 13, the word ‘immediate’ allows
a lapse of time.
In another case of Miranda v. People, accused
Miranda was charged with frustrated homicide. In this SC said the word ‘immediate’ allows a lapse of time
case, the victim, Pilo, threw stones at the house of because according to the SC, there was an erroneous
Miranda. As an act of retaliation, the said accused translation of the Spanish Kodigo Penal. We have
intended on the life of the said victim and so, he was studied that the RPC was merely copied from the
charged with frustrated homicide. The defense of Spanish Kodigo Penal. In the Spanish Kodigo Penal, the
Miranda is that he was merely acting in self-defense. word used was ‘proxima’ but when it was translated
SC said no. According to the SC, Pilo’s act of merely to the RPC, the word used was ‘immediate.’ SC said, we
throwing stones at the house of Miranda would not consider that the word used in the Spanish Kodigo
amount to unlawful aggression because there was no Penal was proximate. Therefore, it suffices that the
impending threat on the life and limb of Miranda. The said grave offense be the proximate cause of the
said stones merely hit the roof and the door of the commission of the crime by the accused. There may be
house of Miranda. a lapse of time in between.

Therefore, SC said it cannot be considered as unlawful When you say grave offense, the law does not require
aggression. It did not place the life and limb of Miranda that it be an act punished by law. The law does not
in actual and imminent danger. However, according to require that it be a crime. It refers to any act that is
the SC, although Pilo’s act of throwing stones may not immoral, unjust and will move the said accused to

- 47 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

vindicate himself, to vindicate his relatives that is time X hacked Y, the latter was already running away
sufficient to be considered as grave offense. after raping the sister.

PASSION OR OBFUSCATION The first element of defense of a relative, unlawful

aggression, is already absent as it already ceased to
Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The exist. Since the unlawful aggression had ceased to
following are mitigating circumstances: exist, there is no more reason for X to wound and kill
xxx Y. Therefore, in that case, his defense of self-defense
6. That of having acted upon an impulse so will not lie. Neither is their incomplete defense of a
powerful as naturally to have produced passion or relative. There is also no incomplete defense of a
obfuscation. relative because the element of unlawful aggression is
xxx absent. If it is the element of unlawful aggression that
is absent, there is no incomplete defense of a relative.
The elements of passion or obfuscation as a
mitigating circumstance: Can X claim mitigating circumstances that will
1. That there be an act both unlawful and lower his imposable penalty?
sufficient to produce passion and obfuscation
on the part of the accused; and A: Yes. First, X may claim the mitigating circumstance
2. The commission of the crime was not far of immediate vindication of a grave offense under the
removed from the commission of the act that fifth paragraph of Art. 13. All the elements of
produced the passion and obfuscation by a immediate vindication of a grave offense are present.
considerable length of time during which the First, Y’s act of raping X’s sister is considered as a
offender might have recovered his normal grave offense. Second, X’s act of killing Y is done in
equanimity. immediate vindication of the said grave offense of
rape. Both elements of immediate vindication of grave
The first element requires that there was an unlawful offense are present. Therefore, it can be raised.
act done on the accused that produced the passion and
obfuscation on his feelings. Therefore, it is necessary Another mitigating circumstance that X may claim is
that that feeling of passion and obfuscation on the part the mitigating circumstance of sudden impulse of
of the accused must arise from lawful sentiments passion or obfuscation. All the elements of the sixth
because an unlawful act had been done against him. mitigating circumstance, sudden impulse of passion or
Again, it must be sudden. It must be immediate to the obfuscation, are present. First, Y’s act of raping X’s
commission of the crime. sister was an unlawful act that produced passion or
obfuscation on the part of X. Second, X act of killing Y
The second element requires also the immediateness. was done immediately after the rape. Therefore, it is
It is necessary that it must be done immediately not far removed from the commission of the crime,
because the law says the commission of the act which from the commission of the act of rape by considerable
produced the passion and obfuscation must not be far length of time during which X might have recovered
removed from the commission of the crime by a his normal equanimity. Therefore, X can also claim the
considerable length of time. mitigating circumstance of sudden impulse of passion
or obfuscation.
Q: X and Z are brothers and sisters. X is arriving
home. When he was nearing the house, he heard In case both were proven, immediate vindication of a
the cries of his sister. The sister was crying aloud grave offense and sudden impulse of passion or
and seemed to be asking for help. So, X ran obfuscation, the judge shall only consider it as one
towards the house. Upon opening the door, he was mitigating circumstance.
shocked. X saw their neighbor, Y, on top of his
naked sister. He saw that his sister was struggling As held by the SC in the case of People v. Ignas, as held
so hard against this man, Y. Y was also naked. X, by the SC in the case of People v. Pagal, if paragraph
shocked by the incident, shouted. Because of that, 4 (sufficient provocation) and paragraph 5
Y ran away. However, X took his bolo, ran after Y (immediate vindication of a grave offense) and
and thereafter, he hacked Y repeatedly until Y paragraph 6 (sudden impulse of passion or
died. X is now being prosecuted for the crime of obfuscation) are all present in the commission of the
homicide. X claimed that he acted in self-defense crime, or if any two of them are present, like for
of a relative particularly in defense of his sister’s example, immediate vindication of a grave offense and
honor and chastity. sudden impulse of passion or obfuscation as in the
problem, if both are present, SC said they shall be
Is X’s defense meritorious? In case X’s defense is treated only as one mitigating circumstance if they
not meritorious, can X claim the benefit of any arose from the same facts and circumstance.
mitigating circumstance?
So, they shall be considered only as one mitigating
A: X defense has no merit. The justifying circumstance circumstance in the computation of the penalty, not as
of defense of a relative is not present because at the two mitigating circumstances.

- 48 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

In the case of People v. Pagal, one of the mitigating

In the case of People v. Sabalberino, the husband was circumstances raised by the defense was that accused
prosecuted for the crime of parricide. The defense Pagal and his companion acted based on sudden
claimed different mitigating circumstances including impulse of passion and obfuscation because allegedly
passion and obfuscation, praeter intentionem that they have been maltreated by the said victim. The SC
William Sabalberino has not intended to commit so said that the mitigating circumstance of passion and
grave a wrong as that of killing the wife, and voluntary obfuscation is not present in this case for three
surrender. None of these were considered by the SC. reasons.

The SC convicted the accused of parricide. The SC said First, since this mitigating circumstance allegedly
that the mitigating circumstance of passion and arose from the maltreatment of the accused, it cannot
obfuscation was not present in the commission of the be considered because the alleged maltreatment
crime. The SC said that the first requirement of passion occurred at a much earlier day than that of the
and obfuscation is that there must be an act both commission of the crime. Likewise, the SC said,
unlawful and sufficient to produce passion and passion and obfuscation cannot be considered as
obfuscation on the part of the accused. Therefore, SC mitigating circumstance in a crime which is planned
said, it is necessary that passion and obfuscation must and calmly meditated upon before its actual execution.
originate from lawful sentiments. The SC said that the Pagal and company planned and meditated the said
quarrel between the accused and his wife, no matter crime of robbery and homicide before actually doing
how heated or serious it was, is not the kind that it. Therefore, SC it cannot be said that there was
would cause the passion and obfuscation passion and obfuscation.
contemplated under the law. SC said that the
excitement, which is inherent in all persons who In the case of People v. Ignas, it took Ignas 2 weeks
quarrel or fight and come to blows do not constitute before he went to the public market in order to
passion and obfuscation. So, the SC did not consider it shoot/kill the paramour of his wife. 2 weeks after the
in favor of William. time of discovery of the infidelity of the wife. The SC
said that 2 weeks is already too long a time for Ignas
The SC also did not consider the mitigating to have recovered his normal equanimity. Therefore,
circumstance of praeter intentionem. According to the SC said that passion and obfuscation cannot be
defense, the said accused loved the wife so he did not considered as a mitigating circumstance in favor of
intend to commit so grave a wrong as that of killing the Ignas. Within the span of 2 weeks, definitely he would
wife. The second element of praeter intentionem is have been able to recover normal equanimity.
absent. There was no notable disparity between the
means employed by William and the resulting felony, VOLUNTARY SURRENDER
parricide. Intent to kill the wife was revealed by
William’s act of attacking the wife with a deadly Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The
weapon, a knife, and inflicting upon her mortal following are mitigating circumstances:
wounds on the chest and the heart. SC said that the xxx
location of the wife’s stab wounds, belie William’s 7. That the offender had voluntarily
claim of lack of intention to grave a wrong as that of surrendered himself to a person in authority or his
killing of his wife. agents, xxx

The other mitigating circumstance raised was Elements:

voluntary surrender. The SC said again the mitigating 1. That the offender has not actually been arrested
circumstance is not presence because the essence of NOTE: Even if there is already a warrant of
voluntary surrender is spontaneity of the intent of the arrest issued by the Court against the said
accused to give himself up and submit himself to offender, as long as the police officers has not
authority either because of his guilt or he wishes he yet exerted efforts in order to effect the said
save the authority the trouble or expense that may be warrant of arrest and the said offender has not
incurred for his search and capture. In this case, there yet been actually arrested, there can still be
was no showing of spontaneity on the part of William. voluntary surrender.
He was not the one who asked for the police, it was the
neighbors. When the police arrived, William met with 2. That he surrendered to a person in authority or his
them without any resistance. The SC said that such agent
lack of resistance on the part of William in going to the NOTE: What did he do? He surrendered to a
police does not equate to voluntary surrender. The person in authority, such as the governor,
voluntariness of one’s surrender should denote a mayor, barangay chairmen, or he surrendered
positive act and not a mere compliant or submissive to agents of a person in authority, such as the
behavior in the presence of public authorities. So no police officers and barangay tanods.
mitigating circumstance was granted by the SC in
favor of the accused husband. 3. The said surrender is voluntary in nature.
NOTE: Surrender is said to be voluntary in
nature if it is done spontaneously and

- 49 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

unconditionally. The SC said that there must be frustrated homicide. Yet, he pleaded guilty to the
the element of spontaneity in the act of lesser crime of serious physical injuries based on a
surrendering. valid plea-bargaining agreement. Since it was not done
spontaneously, it cannot be considered as a mitigating
The said offender either felt remorse and he wanted to circumstance.
confess guilt or he wanted to save the government the
time, the effort, the expense that they will incur in Q: A case of robbery was charged against X, Y, and
order to arrest him. Z. They were charged as conspirators in principal
and direct participation in the crime of robbery.
These are the elements of voluntary surrender. However, only X is facing trial Y and Z were at
large. During arraignment, X pleaded not guilty to
VOLUNTARY PLEA OF GUILT the crime. During pre-trial, the defense counsel
moved that X be allowed to enter into a valid plea
Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The bargaining agreement by pleading guilty to the
following are mitigating circumstances: crime of robbery however to that being of a mere
xxx accomplice. After getting the consent of the private
7. That the offender [xxx] had voluntarily complainant and the public prosecutor, the judge
confessed his guilt before the court prior to the granted the motion of the defense counsel. X was
presentation of the evidence for the prosecution; rearraigned as a mere accomplice in the robbery.
xxx After the prosecution has proven the civil aspect of
the case, the judge rendered a decision fionding X
Elements: guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
1. The plea of guilt must be done spontaneously and robbery, as an accomplice. But in imposing the
unconditionally. penalty, the judge did not consider X plea of guilt
NOTE: The plea of guilt is said to be done as a mitigating circumstance. IS the judge correct?
spontaneously if it is the original crime charged.
The plea of guilt is said to be done A: Yes, X plead guilty to be an accomplice to the crime
unconditionally if it is not subject to any of robbery cannot be considered as a mitigating
imposed condition. circumstance that will lower the imposed penalty
because the said plea of guilt is subject to a condition.
2. The plea of guilt must be done in open court. although X plead guilty to the crime charged of
robbery, in the original crime charged he was alleged
3. The plea of guilt must be done before the to be a principal. His plea of guilty was subject to a
presentation of the evidence for the prosecution. condition that he be charged to be an accomplice.
Therefore, the said plea of guilt is not considered as a
These are the elements of voluntary plea of guilty as a mitigating circumstance.
mitigating circumstance.
Q: X was arrested by the police officers, there was
Q: X is charged and prosecuted for the charge of a complaint against him and so he was arrested by
frustrated homicide. During arraignment, X the police. As he was explaining to the police that
pleaded not guilty to the charge of frustrated he should not be arrested, because of his fear, X fell
homicide. During pre-trial, his counsel moved that on his bicycle and the bicycle fell on him. As the
he be allowed to enter into a valid plea bargaining police officers were helping X get up, the t-shirt of
agreement that X is willing to plead guilty to the X lifted, and the police officers saw a homemade
lesser crime of serious physical injuries. After gun. The police officer asked X, “you have a
getting the consent of the public prosecutor and homemade gun, obviously that is not licensed.
the private complainant, the judge granted the Also, you don’t have permit to carry a firearm.” X
counsel’s motion. Hence, X was re-arraigned. This said yes. And so, the police officers confiscated the
time the information charges X with the lesser homemade gun and arrested X and brought him to
crime of serious physical injuries and X the police station for investigation. X was charged
immediately pleaded guilty. After the prosecution with violation of possession of loose firearms.
was done in presenting the evidence as to the civil During arraignment, X immediately pleaded
aspect of the case, the judge rendered a decision guilty. He pleaded guilty because he know he will
convicting X of serious physical injuries, the lesser not be able to produce any license or permit to
crime to which he pleaded guilty, but in imposing carry because his firearm is merely homemade.
the penalty, the judge did not consider X who The judge found X guilty and in imposing the
voluntarily pleaded guilt as a mitigating penalty the judge did not consider X voluntary
circumstance. Is the judge correct? plead of guilt as a mitigating circumstance. Is the
judge correct?
A: Yes, the judge is correct because X plead guilt not to
the original crim charged. His plea of guilt was not to A: NO, the judge is wrong. Although RA 10591 is a
the original crime charged; therefore, it was not done special penal law, it has the same nomenclature of
spontaneously. The original crime charged was penalties as that of the RPC. Under RA10591, the

- 50 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

penalty for illegal possession of a low caliber pistol is wrong for the court not to have considered the
prision mayor. Since it has the same nomenclature of accused’s plea of guilt as a mitigating
penalties, Article 10 of the RPC applies suppletorily to circumstance”. The Judge denied the said MR. Is
violations of special penal law, especially in this case the judge correct or is it the counsel’s position that
since they have the same expressly provided penalty. is correct?
Therefore, the judge should have considered such as a
mitigating circumstance. A: The judge is correct; the counsel is wrong. In the
case of People v. Mariano, Supreme Court said that
Q: X was found in possession of shabu and was under Art. 365, par. 5, the law expressly provides that,
arrested. He was charged with violation of Section “in the imposition of these penalties, the court shall
11 of RA9165 (Illegal possession of dangerous exercise their sound discretion, without regard to the
drugs). During arraignment, he immediately rules prescribed in Article 64 of the Revised Penal
pleaded guilty. He wanted his penalty to be Code.”
lowered. In its decision, the judge did not consider
X’s voluntary plea of guilt as a mitigating It is Art. 365 on quasi-offenses itself that provides, that
circumstance. Is the judge correct? imposing the penalty for quasi-offenses (reckless
imprudence, simple imprudence, simple negligence),
A: Yes. The judge is correct in not considering the the courts shall exercise sound discretion without
plead of guilty of X as a mitigating circumstance. Under regard to the rules prescribed in Art. 64. Art.64
article 10 of the RPC, the provisions of the revised provides, for the appreciation of mitigating and
penal code shall apply suppletorily to violations of aggravating circumstances in the imposition of
special penal law, unless the special penal law penalties. Supreme Court said, consideration of Art. 64
provides otherwise. RA 9165 is one special penal law will depend on the sound discretion of the Court. They
that provides otherwise. Under section 98 of RA9165 are not mandated to follow the rules in Art. 64. Hence,
provides expressly provides that the RPC shall not whether to appreciate or not mitigating circumstances
apply to violations of RA 9165. Therefore, you cannot will depend solely on the sound discretion of the trial
apply the mitigating circumstance of voluntary plea of court judge, the judge that heard the case, in case of
guilt. quasi-offenses such as in the problem, reckless
imprudence resulting in homicide.
Q: Congressman X and 3 of his subordinates were
all charged with the crime of plunder before the PHYSICAL DEFECT
Sandiganbayan. When Congressman X and the
subordinates heard that there was a warrant of Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The
arrest against them, they immediately went to the following are mitigating circumstances:
police and gave themselves up. Since plunder is a xxx
non-bailable offense, they tayed in jail. The trial of 8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or
the merits ensued after the trial, the otherwise suffering some physical defect which
Sandiganbayan rendered its decision, imposed the thus restricts his means of action, defense, or
penalty considering the mitigating circumstance communications with his fellow beings. xxx
of voluntary surrender. Are the justices correct?
So, this is the mitigating circumstance of physical
A: Yes. Although RA7080 (The Anti- Plunder Act) is a defect. For the mitigating circumstance of physical
special penal law, Section 2 thereof expressly provides defect to lie in favor of the accused and lower the
that mitigating circumstances can be considered. It is imposable penalty, the following requisites must
the law itself that provides that the mitigating and concur:
extenuating circumstances shall be considered. 1. The offender must be suffering from physical
defect;
NOTE: Not including aggravating circumstances 2. The said physical defect has restricted his means of
action, defense, or communications with his fellow
Q: X was driving recklessly going home, he just beings.
came from a party. while X was driving his car, he NOTE: Otherwise stated, the said physical
hit and bumped a pedestrian. Later, he was defect has a relation, has a connection to the
arrested and charged with reckless imprudence crime committed by the said offender, such that
resulting to homicide. Hoping the Imposable it restricted his means of action, defense, or
Penalty during arraignment, he impleaded guilty communications with his fellow beings.
to the charge Reckless Imprudence resulting in
Homicide. After the prosecution has proven the Absent that connection between the accused’s
civil aspect of the case, the judge rendered a physical defect and the crime that he has committed,
decision convicting X of Reckless Imprudence this physical defect will not mitigated the offender’s
resulting in Homicide, but he didn’t considered X’s criminal liability.
voluntary plea of guilt as a mitigating
circumstance. And so the counsel filed a Motion for Q: When X was a boy, he was contaminated with a
Reconsideration. The counsel said, “it is very polio virus. Because of that, his legs were cut. So,

- 51 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

he grew up with no legs. He walked around on She could not defend herself. Therefore, the only way
board a skateboard. He goes from one place to to do that is to hit the said woman, otherwise, said
another on board this skateboard. One time, he woman will not stop. Therefore, in this case, the
was along the Baclaran Church. He saw an old physical defect being suffered by Y has restricted her
woman alighted from a luxurious car. He waited means of action, defense, or communications with her
very near. The moment the woman was already fellow beings. Therefore, it will be considered as a
walking, here was his skateboard. X passed and X mitigating circumstance.
snatched the bag of the said woman. Thereafter, he
ran on board the sadi skate. The woman shouted ILLNESS
and the police arrived. So the police asked the
woman, “can you identify him is you see his Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The
pictures?” The woman said, “Yes, I saw his face following are mitigating circumstances:
very clearly.” So, the woman was invited to the PNP xxx
station, and there the police officer showed a 9. Such illness of the offender as would diminish
gallery of photos of the snatchers in the area. The the exercise of the will-power of the offender
woman immediately identified X as the snatcher, without however depriving him of the
as the culprit. “Siya. Siya po yung kumuha ng bag consciousness of his acts.
ko.” And so, X was arrested, and thereafter, X was xxx
charged with the crime of Theft. One of the
defenses raised by the accused was that he was So in this case, the offender is suffering some illness.
suffering some physical defect, and therefore, The said illness diminishes the exercise of the will
because he has no legs, he is lame, his physical power of the offender; however, the said illness did
defect should be considered as a mitigating not totally deprive him of consciousness of his acts.
circumstance.
He is still aware that he was doing a wrongful act, only
A: X’s physical defect cannot be considered as a he has a diminished self-control to stop the said act.
mitigating circumstance. X’s physical defect has The said illness will be considered as a mitigating
nothing to do with his act of snatching, with his act of circumstance in favor of the said accused.
stealing. It did not restrict his means of action, defense,
or communications with his fellow beings. Therefore, ANALOGOUS CISCUMSTANCES
absent of connection, his physical defect will not
mitigate his criminal liability. Article 13. Mitigating circumstances. – The
following are mitigating circumstances:
Q: There was this argument between these two xxx
parents, two mothers, they were in this school. 10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a
They were attending to their children. Their similar nature and analogous to those above
children were both seven years old. The first mentioned.
mother, X, was informed that the son of the second
mother, Y, bullied the said child, the said son of X. So, any other circumstances, jealousy may be
Because of this, X confronted Y, the mother of the considered as analogous to sudden impulse of passion
said son who bullied his son. He confronted Y, he and obfuscation.
began stating bad words against Y. “Wala kang
kwentang ina. Hindi mo pinalaking maayos ang In the case of Nizurtado vs. Sandiganbayan, the
anak mo, etc.” Unknown to X, Y by reason of an Chairman returned the alleged malversation. The
accident, Y could not speak. Y can hardly hear. She Chairman restituted the alleged amount malversation.
can hear, but malabo, not clearly. And Y cannot The Supreme Court said, such restitution is considered
totally speak. So Y could hear, no matter how as analogous to voluntary surrender, therefore, it
slight, all these malicious and painful words being would be considered as a mitigating circumstance that
hurled against her by X. Y could not do anything. will lower the imposable penalty on the part of the
People were looking around. Y felt so ashamed. Y said offender. So, any other circumstances similar in
felt so hurt. She could not explain herself. She has nature and analogous to those from par. 1-9 of Art.13
to stop this woman X. And so, the said woman Y shall be considered as also mitigating circumstance
took her bag and hit 2 times the head of X with the which will lower the imposable penalty.
use of her bag. The said head sustained injuries.
And so, Y is being prosecuted for slight physical ART. 14: AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
injuries. She raises physical defect so as to
mitigate her criminal liability. Will her physical Article 14. Aggravating circumstances. – The
defect of being deaf mitigate her criminal liability? following are aggravating circumstances:
1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his
A: Yes. Had she not been mute and deaf, she could have public position.
easily acted in self-defense. She could also state, 2. That the crime be committed in contempt or
explain verbally against the said woman X. But since with insult to the public authorities.
she was suffering from deafness and loss of speech.

- 52 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

3. That the act be committed with insult or in 19. That as a means to the commission of a
disregard of the respect due the offended party on crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken.
account of his rank, age, or sex, or that is be 20. That the crime be committed with the aid of
committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if persons under fifteen years of age or by means of
the latter has not given provocation. motor vehicles, airships, or other similar means.
4. That the act be committed with abuse of 21. That the Wrong done in the commission of
confidence or obvious ungratefulness. the crime be deliberately augmented by causing
5. That the crime be committed in the palace of other wrong not necessary for its commission.
the Chief Executive or in his presence, or where
public authorities are engaged in the discharge of Aggravating circumstances are those circumstances
their duties, or in a place dedicated to religious which if present or attendant in the commission of a
worship. felony, would serve to increase the imposable penalty.
6. That the crime be committed in the nighttime, Without however going beyond the maximum penalty
or in an uninhabited place, or by a band, whenever prescribed by law.
such circumstances may facilitate the commission
of the offense. Therefore, no matter how many aggravating
Whenever more than three armed malefactors circumstances have attended the commission of the
shall have acted together in the commission of an crime. The Court cannot impose a penalty, more than,
offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed beyond the maximum penalty prescribed by law. That
by a band. is the limit.
7. That the crime be committed on the occasion
of a conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic Different Kinds of Aggravating Circumstances
or other calamity or misfortune. under Art.14:
8. That the crime be committed with the aid of 1. Generic Aggravating Circumstances – those
armed men or persons who insure or afford which apply to all kinds of crimes, whatever be the
impunity. crime, this generic aggravating circumstance may
9. That the accused is a recidivist. be considered. recidivism.
A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for EXAMPLE: Recidivism applies to all kinds of
one crime, shall have been previously convicted by crimes. It can be considered in all kinds of
final judgment of another crime embraced in the crimes.
same title of this Code.
10. That the offender has been previously 2. Specific Aggravating Circumstances - those
punished by an offense to which the law attaches an which apply only to certain or particular crimes.
equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes EXAMPLE: By express provision of the law,
to which it attaches a lighter penalty. under par. 16 of Article 14, treachery can be
11. That the crime be committed in considered only in crimes against persons.
consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
12. That the crime be committed by means of 3. Inherent Aggravating Circumstances - those
inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a which are considered as elements in the
vessel or international damage thereto, derailment commission of the crime. Hence, their presence
of a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice would no longer increase the imposable penalty
involving great waste and ruin. because they are simply absorbed. They are
13. That the act be committed with evidence considered as inherent elements in the
premeditation. commission of the crime.
14. That craft, fraud or disguise be employed. EXAMPLE: Evident premeditation - The
15. That advantage be taken of superior Supreme Court declared evident premeditation
strength, or means be employed to weaken the is inherent in all crimes against property under
defense. Title X. Therefore, if evident premeditation is
16. That the act be committed with treachery present in robbery, in the crime of person, in all
(alevosia). kinds of crimes against property under Title X,
There is treachery when the offender commits Supreme Court said, it is inherent and can no
any of the crimes against the person, employing longer be considered so as to increase the
means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof imposable penalty.
which tend directly and specially to ensure its
execution, without risk to himself arising from the 4. Special Aggravating Circumstances - those
defense which the offended party might make. which if present in the commission of the crime
17. That means be employed or circumstances would mean the imposition of the maximum
brought about which add ignominy to the natural penalty prescribed by law. Therefore, it cannot be
effects of the act. offset by any mitigating circumstances.
18. That the crime be committed after an
unlawful entry. There is an unlawful entry when an The moment a special aggravating circumstance
entrance is affected by a way not intended for the attended the commission of the crime,
purpose.

- 53 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

automatically, the penalty to be imposed is the because Y has been convicted by final judgment for
maximum penalty prescribed by law. a drug case. Since then Director X had been
EXAMPLE: Quasi-recidivism observing Y. Director X went to Y while Y was
sitting, he told Y “Tayo! And you do 1,000 push
5. Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances – those ups” Y did as instructed. However, Y stopped when
which change the nature of the crime to bring he was so tired already. He could no longer lift his
about a higher crime, a more serious crime with a body. The moment Y stopped, Director X
higher penalty or even without changing the repeatedly hit Y’s body and head with his
nature of the crime, it brings about the imposition truncheon. The head was already bleeding
of a higher penalty. because of the repeated hitting. The other inmates
NOTE: Treachery, Abuse of Superior Strength, were already telling Director X, “Tama na po!
In consideration of a price, reward, or Mamamatay na po, dugong dugo na po.” But,
promise – best examples are found in the Director X continued hitting Y with the said
enumeration under Article 248 for the crime truncheon. He only stopped when the other
of murder. All those enumerated under officers arrived and held him and told him to stop.
Article 248 are circumstances which will By that time, Y was already profusely bleeding. Y
change the nature of the killing from was brought to the nearest hospital. Y perished the
HOMICIDE to MURDER and which will next day. Director X is now being prosecuted for
increase the imposable penalty from the death of Y. It was alleged that the said act of
reclusion temporal for homicide to reclusion killing of Director X took advantage of his public
perpetua to death in case of murder. position in the commission of the crime. Is the
aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of
Whatever be the crime of aggravating circumstance, one's public position present?
whether it be specific, generic, inherent, special,
qualifying, for it to be considered by the court against A: It is present. Had he not been the Assistant Director
the accused it must be both alleged in the Information of the said Bilibid, he would not have been able to
and proven during trial. It has to be alleged in the perform this act of killing the prisoner. Therefore, this
Information because its effect is to increase the aggravating circumstance attended the commission of
imposable penalty. Therefore, the accused must be the crime.
given the opportunity to rebut the presence of the said
aggravating circumstances. Q: How should the court consider it? Is it a generic,
specific, inherent, special, or qualifying
Aggravating circumstances are alleged in the aggravating circumstance?
Information because it is the State, it is the
Prosecution that has the burden of proving A: It is considered as a special aggravating
aggravating circumstances. Justifying, exempting, and circumstance. Although Article 14, par. 1 is merely a
mitigating circumstances are not alleged in the generic aggravating circumstance, if you will look at
Information because these are matters of defenses to Article 62 of the RPC. as amended by R.A 7659, the
be proven by the accused beyond reasonable doubt. heinous crime law. Taking advantage of one’s public
position in the commission of the crime is considered
TAKING ADVANTAGE OF PUBLIC POSITION as a special aggravating circumstance because the law
provides for the maximum penalty to be the one
Article 14. (1) That advantage be taken by the imposed. Therefore, it is a special aggravating
offender of his public position. circumstance.

Only a public officer of a public employee may take Q: What if Police Officer Y arrested X. Allegedly, X
advantage of his position in the commission of the was found in possession of dangerous drugs. After
crime. A public officer is said to have taken advantage her arrest, Police Officer brought her to the police
of his public position in the commission of the crime station. X was placed behind bars. That night,
when he use, misuse, or abuse his public position in Police Officer Y went to the prison cell of X. He
the commission of the crime. The public officer took released X and brought her inside his office. He
advantage of the prestige, ascendancy, or influence raped X by means of violence, force, and
that his position affords him in order to commit a intimidation. X struggled but the police officer was
crime and in order to facilitate the commission of the just too strong for her. After the incident, he
crime. brought back X to her prison cell. X informed her
husband the following day. A case of rape was filed
Q: X was the assistant director at the National against the said police officer. In the Information
Penitentiary at the Bilibid. One time a group of for rape, it was alleged that the said prisoner was
prisoners arrived. Y was among them. Y was in custody of the said PNP station and that after
Director X’s long time enemy in Pampanga. having been arrested, Police Officer Y had carnal
Director X was shocked that Y was in the Bilibid. knowledge of her inside his office against the said
Director X immediately looked into the records of woman. The Information alleged that Police
Y. He realized that Y was brought to the Bilibid Officer Y took advantage of his public position in

- 54 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

the commission of the crime. It was proven during CONTEMPT

the trial of the merits of the case that Y had taken
advantage of his public position in the commission Article 14. (2) That the crime be committed in
of the crime. Had he not been the police officer, contempt or with insult to the public
had he not been in the public position, he could not authorities.
have arrested this woman and brought this
woman inside his office and had carnal knowledge Elements:
of this woman against her will. 1. That the public authority is engaged in the
performance of his function;
Therefore, obviously, the said police officer used, 2. That he is not the person against whom the
misused, and abused his public position in order crime is committed;
to consummate the act of rape. So, since it is 3. That the offender knows him to be a public
alleged and proven, how shall the court consider authority;
it? 4. That his presence did not prevent or deter the
commission of the crime.
A: It shall be considered as a qualifying aggravating
circumstance. It is a qualifying aggravating It is necessary that the offender committed the crime
circumstance because its effect is to change the nature despite knowledge of the presence of public authority
of the crime rape from simple rape to qualified rape in the performance of his function. He knows a public
and to increase the imposable penalty from reclusion authority is there, nevertheless, the presence of said
perpetua to death penalty. Under Art. 266-B of the public authority did not stop/prevent him from
RPC, if the act of rape is committed on one who is in committing the crime. There was this act of lack of
custody of a member of the PNP, a member of AFP and respect, insult on the said public authority. Therefore,
the act of rape was committed by taking advantage of it shows his greater criminality.
their public position, the crime committed is not
simple rape but qualified rape. The penalty is not For this aggravating circumstance to lie against the
merely reclusion perpetua, the penalty is death accused, it is necessary that the public authority is not
penalty. So it is a qualifying aggravating circumstance the victim of the act done by the offender. He must not
which changes the nature of the crime from simple be the victim of the assault because if the public officer
rape to qualified rape and to bring about a higher is the victim of the assault, the crime committed is
penalty from reclusion perpetua to death penalty. Direct Assault and in case of Direct Assault, in
contempt or with insult to the public authorities is
Q: Public Officer X was charged with falsification of inherent. Therefore, it will no longer aggravate the
public document. It was alleged that Public Officer imposable penalty. The second element requires that
X, a notary public, counterfeited the signature of the said public authority is not the person against
the vendor and the vendee in an alleged deed of whom the crime is committed.
absolute sale which never existed. Therefore,
Public Officer notary public X, was charged with Q: The mayor, vice mayor, 3 councilors who
falsification of public document. In the belongs to their party together with a group of
information it was alleged that the said act of bodyguards. Their bodyguards were with them.
falsification was committed by notary public X, by They were walking on the road on the way to the
public officer X by taking advantage of his public public market. They intended to have a surprise
position. Alleged in the information proven during visit on the said public market. When they were
trial. How should the court consider taking passing by the road, suddenly they heard shouts,
advantage of one’s public position in the cries on that house. The mayor knew that house
commission of the crime? belongs to Pedro. It seems there was commotion
and so, the mayor, vice mayor, 3 councilors
A: This is an inherent element of falsification of public decided to go to the house of Pedro. They were at
document under Art. 171 of the RPC. Since it is an the gate of the house of Pedro. At the gate, they
inherent element, therefore, it will no longer be could hear cries. It seems that the wife of Pedro
considered so as to increase the imposable penalty. It was crying aloud and it seems that Pedro was
is considered as an element. In fact, if the said public beating and hurting the wife. The wife was crying
officer did not take advantage of his public position in for mercy and help and so the mayor shouted
the commission of the act of falsification, his liability is “Pedro, anong nangyayari diyan?” Pedro came out
not under Art. 171 of the RPC, his liability is under Art. at the window “Ah mayor ikaw pala, wala personal
172. Therefore, the said act of taking advantage of itong problema mayor. Wag ‘kang mangielam.”
one’s public position in the commission of the crime, And after stating that, Pedro went inside the house
being an inherent element of falsification of public and you again, you can hear the cries of the wife.
documents, shall simply be absorbed. It is an inherent Mayor again shouted “Pedro, wag mong saktan ang
aggravating circumstance which will no longer have si misis. Halika sumama ka sa amin punta kami sa
the effect of increasing the imposable penalty on the palengke mag surprise visit kami.” Pedro was
part of the said offender. mad. He came out and this time he was holding his
knife by the neck of his wife. Pedro told the mayor

- 55 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

“I told you mayor, do not interfere. This is a 1. Disregard of rank;

personal matter.” But the mayor told him ”Do not
hurt your wife.” And Pedro was about to stab the There is disregard of rank as an aggravating
wife when suddenly the bodyguards of the mayor circumstance when the offender deliberately
went upstairs and prevented Pedro from further disrespected, insulted the high social standing of the
hurting the wife. Pedro was arrested and he was victim in society in the commission of the crime.
charged with Attempted Parricide. In the
information, it was alleged that the aggravating 2. Disregard of age;
circumstance in contempt or with insult to the
public authorities is present. Is this aggravating There is disregard of age when the offender in
circumstance present? committing the crime, deliberately insulted,
disrespected either the minor age or the senior age of
A: Yes. All the elements of this aggravating the victim in the commission of the crime.
circumstance are present. First, that the public
authority, the mayor, is in the performance of his 3. Disregard of sex; and
function. It is his function to maintain peace and order
to prevent his constituents from fighting, from hurting There is disregard of sex when the offender in the
one another. That he is not the person against whom commission of the crime, deliberately insulted the
the crime was committed. The mayor was not the state of womanhood of the victim.
person against whom the crime was committed. That
the offender knows him to be a public authority. Pedro NOTE: Disregard of rank, disregard of age, disregard
knows that he is the mayor in fact he said “Mayor, do of sex are aggravating circumstances which may be
not interfere.” And last element, the presence of the considered only in Crimes against Persons and Crimes
public authority did not stop, prevent, or deter the against Honor.
accused from committing the crime. The presence of
the mayor did not stop Pedro from trying to stab or kill Therefore, they can be considered only on the crimes
his wife. Therefore, this aggravating circumstance mentioned/enumerated in Title VIII crimes against
attended the commission of the crime of Attempted persons, and those enumerated provided for Title XIII
Parricide. crimes against honor (libel, slander, oral defamation—
only in these cases.
Q: Same problem, exactly the same facts except
that this time, it is not the mayor but a police 4. The crime be committed inside the dwelling of
officer patrolling in order to maintain peace and the victim.
order who intervened in the fight between Pedro
and his wife. So because of that, Pedro was charged
Dwelling refers to any building which is use for rest
with Attempted Parricide. In the information, it
or comfort by any person. Dwelling is considered as an
was alleged that the act was committed with in
aggravating circumstance if the offender committed a
contempt or with insult to the public authorities.
crime against the victim when the victim is inside his
Is this aggravating circumstance present?
dwelling.
A: This time, the aggravating circumstance Is not
It is an aggravating circumstance because the offender
present. As held by the SC in the case of People v.
in committing the crime violated the privacy of the
Tiongson, a police officer is not a public authority. A
victim ‘s abode and enshrined right in the Constitution
police officer is a mere agent of public authority.
to respect the privacy of the said victim’s abode.
Therefore, SC said this aggravating circumstance of in
Therefore, dwelling will only be aggravating if at the
contempt or with insult to the public authorities
time of the commission of the crime, the victim was in
cannot lie against the accused because the person
his dwelling.
present in the commission of the crime is not a public
authority but a mere agent of public authority.
The law does not require that the perpetrator be also
in the dwelling. He can commit the crime from the
DISREGARD OF RANK, AGE, SEX, AND DWELLING
outside, what is material is the victim was inside his
dwelling at the time the crime was committed because
Article 14. (3) That the act be committed with
there was disregard/disrespect of the privacy of his
insult or in disregard of the respect due the
abode.
offended party on account of his rank, age, or
sex, or that is be committed in the dwelling of the
Instances wherein although the crime was
offended party, if the latter has not given
committed inside the dwelling of the victim,
provocation.
dwelling is not considered as aggravating
circumstance:
There are four aggravating circumstances in this 1. When the said offended party has the one who gave
paragraph: provocation.

- 56 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

2. When both the offended party and offender are Article 14. (4) That the act be committed with
living in the same dwelling. abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness.
3. When dwelling is inherent in the commission of the
crime. The fourth aggravating circumstance that the act be
committed with: (a) abuse of confidence or (b)
In these three instances, even if a crime is committed obvious ungratefulness.
inside the dwelling of the victim, dwelling will not be
considered as an aggravating circumstance. a. ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE

For dwelling can be considered as aggravating There is abuse of confidence as an aggravating

circumstance, ownership is immaterial. The law circumstance when the following elements are
does not require that the victim be the owner of the present:
said dwelling. It suffices that he is the lawful occupant 1. That the offended party has trusted the
of the said dwelling. He may be a bed spacer, border, offender.
a lessee, a tenant— he is the lawful occupant. He is not 2. That the offender abused the trust and
required that he owns for the said dwelling to be confidence.
considered as aggravating circumstance. 3. That the said abuse of trust and confidence
facilitated the commission of the crime.
Q: One morning, Tuesday morning, the mayor and These are the elements of abuse of confidence as an
his party mates were at the veranda of the mayor’s aggravating circumstance.
house. They were there 6 o'clock in the morning,
now it’s 8 o'clock, they were still there. From there, b. OBVIOUS UNGRATEFULNESS
they will go directly to the City Hall. The mayor and
his party mates, the counselor, and his staff were Ungratefulness is considered as an aggravating
brainstorming on new projects to be given to the circumstance when it is obvious, when it is apparent
people. It is the mayor’s third term and his last and evident. Instead of being thankful and gratitude of
term, so according to him, he wanted to be the victim, the offender committed a crime against the
remembered as someone who has given said victim.
development projects for the people. They were
brainstorming what projects to give to the Q: A is a stay out houseboy/a stay out helper in the
constituents. They were eating at the same time house of X and Y. He is a stay out helper because A
working. The mayor at that time was walking back would come to the house of X and Y 5’oclock in the
and forth on the veranda of his house thinking morning, he will do his household chores as the
what other projects to give to the people. houseboy, and then by 5’oclock in the afternoon he
will be leaving the house of X and Y to go to his own
Suddenly, the mayor fell on the floor. There were house. One Sunday, couple X and Y told A that they
two gunshot wounds on his head. He was fired at would be bringing their grandchildren to the mall.
from the outside by W. W fired at the mayor from And then, couple X and Y gave these instructions to
the outside. W was arrested. Prosecuted for the A “If is already 5’oclock in the afternoon and it is
death of said mayor. In the information it was time for you to leave. You can leave just make sure
alleged that the aggravating circumstances of that all doors, all windows are closed and locked.”
disregard of rank and dwelling are present. Are Thereafter, couple X and Y, and 2 grandchildren
these aggravating circumstances present? left. Later in the day, A called his 2 friends. The
Disregard of rank as aggravating circumstance is not moment his 2 friends B and C arrived at the house,
present because the crime committed by W is qualified in connivance, in conspiracy with one another, A,
direct assault with murder. Since the crime committed B, and C robbed the house. After A allow them to
by W is qualified direct assault with murder, disregard enter, A, B, and C robbed the house by breaking all
of rank is considered already as inherent in the the locks of the cabinet and taking all the valuables
commission of the crime. The said mayor was in the that they could take.
performance of his function at the time that he was
shot to death. Therefore, the said disregard of rank After they have already ransacked and taken the
cannot be considered as an aggravating circumstance. valuables and broken all of the cabinets, A, B, and
C were about to leave. However, A heard the
How about dwelling? Is dwelling to be considered arrival of the car of X and Y, they were already
as an aggravating circumstance? here. A, B, and C went into panicked. They could
Yes. The veranda is part of the house of the said mayor. not leave because they will be seen. And so, they
The mayor was at the veranda of the house when the went into hiding. A hid behind the door. B hid
said mayor was shot. Therefore, there was disrespect under the sofa. C hid at the back of a big cabinet.
of the privacy of his abode. They were hiding the moment X and Y, and 2
grandchildren entered the house. A, B, and C came
ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE OR OBVIOUS out from hiding and they immediately axed X and
UNGRATEFULNESS

- 57 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Y, and the 2 grandchildren. Resulting to the death The crime charged in the problem is the special
of X, Y, and 2 grandchildren. complex crime of Robbery with Homicide. It is
a crime against property under Title 10.
At that time, couple X and Y were both 70 years old Therefore, since it is a crime against property
and the grandchildren, their ages were 7 years old under Title 10, you cannot consider Disregard
and 8 years old. A, B, and C are now being of Rank and Disregard of Age
prosecuted for the special complex crime of
robbery with homicide with the aggravating 2. Based on the facts of the problem, there is no
circumstances of abuse of confidence, dwelling, showing that when A, B and C killed couple X
disregard of rank, disregard of age. Are these and Y, that they have the intent to insult or to
aggravating circumstances present? Should it be disregard the rank and age. The facts show that
considered by the court? they panicked and they had to kill the couple
because if not, they will be discovered
A: Abuse of confidence is present. X and Y had trusted
A. A abused the trust and confidence reposed on him. Based on the facts, there was no evidence that
The said abuse of trust and confidence facilitated the they intended to insult or to disregard the rank
commission of the crime. Had not X and Y trusted A, and age of the said victim. Therefore, this
they would not left A alone in the house that gave A the aggravating circumstance cannot be considered
opportunity to call his friends and thereafter robbed against the accused.
the house. Hence, abuse of confidence as aggravating
circumstance attended the commission of the crime. PLACE

Dwelling is present as an aggravating circumstance. Article 14. (5) That the crime be committed in
Dwelling is present as an aggravating circumstance the palace of the Chief Executive or in his
even the crime committed is the special complex crime presence, or where public authorities are
of robbery with homicide. Supreme Court said engaged in the discharge of their duties, or in a
dwelling is not inherent in the crime of robbery with place dedicated to religious worship.
homicide, and it should be appreciated as an
aggravating circumstance because the author of the In the fifth paragraph, there are four aggravating
crime could have accomplished the said heinous act circumstances which are all places”
even without violating the domicile of the victim. a. The palace of the chief executive
NOTE: Dwelling is not inherent in the special b. The place where the President is present
complex crime of robbery with homicide. In fact, c. The place where public authorities are
dwelling is not inherent in all crimes under Article engaged in the discharge of their duties
294, robbery with violence against or intimidation d. The place dedicated to religious worship.
of persons.
These four places, according to law, must be respected.
Dwelling is only inherent in case of robbery by use However, the offender disregarded the said respect by
of force upon things under Article 299 because committing the crime in these places. When the said
under Article 299 in case of robbery by use of force offended disrespected the place, that the law
upon things dwelling is considered as an element commands to be respected, then it shows his greater
but not in cases of Robbery with violence against criminality, it shows his greater perversity.
or intimidation of persons under Article 294 which
includes the special complex crime of Robbery Q: What if there was a cabinet meeting in
with Homicide Malacanang. It was presided by President Marcos
and VP Duterte is also present, the chief legal
Again, the reason given by the SC, the accused/ author counsel, the former senator Enrile and all the
of the crime could have perpetrated or could have cabinet secretaries.
accomplished the heinous deed without having to
violate the domicile of the victim. So, dwelling can be All the cabinet secretaries were given time to
appreciated. present their accomplishments from the start up
to the date.
Q: How about Disregard of Rank and Disregard of
Age? It was now time for the DOJ Secretary Remulla to
present the accomplishment of the DOJ so he was
A: It cannot be considered or appreciated against the saying “These were our conviction, we have so
accused A, B and C for two reasons: many convictions from all the prosecutors all over
1. Disregard of Rank and Disregard of Age can be the Philippines”. And so he was stating other
considered only in crimes against persons, projects.
those under Title 8 and crimes against honor,
under Title 13 While he was showing this accomplishment of DOJ,
the Chief Legal Counsel Enrile made a side
comment “kasama ba sa accomplishment na iyan

- 58 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

ang acquittal ng anak na lulong sa droga?”. a band, whenever such circumstances may
Secretary Remulla looked at Enrile, he was mad facilitate the commission of the offense.
and blushing and he asked Enrile, “Are you
referring to me?” and Enrile said “Did I mention 1. NIGHTTIME
any name? I did not mention any name. Bato bato
sa langit, ang tamaan ay huwag magalit” For nighttime to be considered as aggravating
circumstance, the following elements must be
So because of that, Secretary Remulla kept his considered:
temper. Then others also presented and when a. That the offender deliberately sought the
there was a question raised and Enrile was the one cover of darkness
talking and answering the question and when he b. The purpose of the offender is to facilitate the
was explaining things, suddenly Sec. Remulla said, commission of the crime or to insure or afford
“Ang galing, ang galing dahil sa stem cell”. And so impunity.
because of that, Enrile was shocked and said “Are
you referring to me?” and Secretary Remulla Two possible scenarios:
countered saying “I did not mention any name. 1. For nighttime to be considered as an
Bato bato sa langit, ang tamaan ay huwag magalit” aggravating circumstance, it is necessary that
So they were both exchanging words against each the offender deliberately took advantage of
other. the darkness of the night, to ensure the
commission of the crime. Because of the
Here comes lunch time, before Enrile was about to darkness of the night, no one will be able to
get up on his chair, here comes Secretary Remulla, stop him. Therefore, it will definitely be a
so angry, so mad, went to the old man and punched completed act.
Enrile's face. Because of the strong punch in the 2. Because of the darkness of the night, no one
face, the said old man fell from his seat and the can identify him. Therefore, he cannot be
chair fell over him. arrested, prosecuted and punished.

He was immediately brought to the hospital and Even if the offender deliberately sought the cover of
sustained serious physical injuries. Secretary darkness in the commission of the crime, if at the time
Remulla was charged with Serious Physical of the commission of the crime, the said scene of the
Injuries and in the said complaint filed against crime was illuminated by any light, the SC stated that
Secretary Remulla, it was alleged that the said act whether it is light coming from the moon shining
of SPI was committed with the aggravating brightly, or a light coming from the neighboring
circumstances of (1) in contempt or with an insult houses or from passing vehicles or from the street
to public authorities; and (2) it was committed in lights, night time shall be ruled out. Nighttime is no
the palace of the chief executive and in the longer present as an aggravating circumstance.
presence of chief executive. Are these
circumstances present? 2. AN UNINHABITED PLACE

A: In so far as contempt or with an insult to public It is one which is far from town or from other houses.
authorities is concerned, as well as that the crime was For this aggravating circumstance to be considered
committed in the presence of the Chief Executive, the following elements must be present:
these are both present. 1. There is very little or remote possibility for
the victim to receive any help
President Marcos was there, he was the one leading 2. The offender deliberately took advantage of
the meeting when this incident happened. There was the uninhabited place to facilitate the
disrespect, insult on his presence. Therefore, it shall be commission of the crime
appreciated.
3. BY BAND
However, the aggravating circumstance that a crime
has been committed in the palace of the Chief
The aggravating circumstance of band is present when
Executive cannot be considered. Remulla did not seek
more than three armed malefactors shall have acted
the place in order to box Enrile. He was there in order
together in the commission of the crime.
to attend the cabinet meeting. The cabinet meeting
was held in Malacanang, therefore, it cannot be said
Therefore, there must be at least four armed
that at that time he decided to disrespect the said
malefactors who acted together in the commission of
palace of the Chief Executive.
the crime. In that case, the said crime is attended by
the aggravating circumstance of a band.
NIGHTTIME, UNINHABITED PLACE OR BY A BAND
A, B, C and D were all butchers. After their
Article 14. (6) That the crime be committed in dayworks, A, B, C, and D are now having a drinking
the nighttime, or in an uninhabited place, or by spree and they are all armed and carrying their

- 59 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

butcher’s knife. From 11 o'clock in the evening, But if the crime committed on the occasion of these
many of them were already drunk so they stopped calamities is that of killing a person it is a Qualifying
their drinking spree. They went outside the Aggravating circumstance. Because par. 7 of Art. 14
canteen. They tried to get a ride but all the cars, is included under Art. 248 as one of the qualifying
buses and jeepneys were full. No one would stop at aggravating circumstances for murder.
them. These 4 armed men A,B,C,D decided to just
walk, hoping that when they would go farther, they If the act of killing is done during an earthquake, a
would get a ride. They reached an isolated place. misfortune, or during another calamity, from
A,B,C,D saw a lone big house. It is the only the homicide it will be considered as murder. With an
house in the said place.. They went near the fence, increase in penalty from reclusion temporal to
jumped and went inside the house passing reclusion perpetua to death.
through the window. Once inside, they ransacked
the house by taking everything that they could Also in case of stealing, par. 7 is also a Qualifying
take. They broke the cabinets using their butcher Aggravating Circumstance in the crime of theft as
knife. But later, they were arrested and charged provided for under Art. 310 of the RPC. Under Art. 310,
with the crime of robbery. one of the qualifying circumstance is when the
property was taken on the occasion of a typhoon,
Can nighttime be considered as an aggravating earthquake fire or any other similar calamities.
circumstance?
If during an earthquake or any other calamity, the
A: No. Nighttime is not present. ABCD did not offender took advantage of the said situation in order
deliberately seek the cover of darkness to ensure the to commit the act of stealing, or the act of taking the
commission of robbery. It just so happened that they personal property of another. It will be considered as
passed by the said place at 11PM. Therefore, nighttime a Qualifying Aggravating Circumstance and not merely
cannot be considered as an aggravating circumstance. generic aggravating circumstance.

Can an uninhabited place be considered as AID OF ARMED MEN

aggravating circumstance?
Article 14. (8) That the crime be committed with
A: Yes. The said place is far from town. Incase they do the aid of armed men or persons who insure or
anything to the owners, it would be very remote for afford impunity.
them to receive any help. Obviously, A,B,C,D took
advantage of the said place in order to ensure the In the eighth aggravating circumstance, the aid of
commission of the said. It was very far from other armed men merely aided, merely helped, merely
houses, places therefore they proceeded with the assisted the actual perpetrator in the commission of
crime of robbery. the crime, hence, the armed men are merely
accomplices in the commission of the crime.
Can a band be considered an aggravating
circumstance? Unlike in the case of a band, there must be at least 4
armed malefactors should have acted together in the
A: Yes, because we have here 4 armed butchers. They commission of the crime therefore, in that case they
were armed with their butcher knife. The law requires are all co-conspirators. They are all principals in the
for a band to be present that at least 4 armed commission of the crime.
malefactors shall have acted together to the
commission of the crime. A, B, C,D acted together in the In Par. 8, the armed merely aided, supported, helped,
commission of the crime. Therefore, it is present in the assisted the actual perpetrator in the commission of
commission of the crime. the crime. Therefore, these armed men are merely
accomplices in the commission of the crime. Such may
NATURAL CALAMITY be direct or indirect participation in the commission of
the crime.
Article 14. (7) That the crime be committed on
the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck, In case of the aid of armed men the law does not
earthquake, epidemic, or other calamity or require a number of men unlike in the case of a band
misfortune. which requires at least 4 armed malefactors. Any men
who is armed can give the said act of aid and shall be
The seventh aggravating circumstance is that the considered as an accomplice in the commission of the
crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, crime.
shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic, or other calamity or
misfortune. If the crime is committed on the occasion AID OF ARMED MEN BY A BAND
of these calamities or misfortunes, it will be There is no requisite as The law requires at least
considered as a generic aggravating circumstance. to the number of armed four armed malefactors.

- 60 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

AID OF ARMED MEN BY A BAND document. Therefore, the prosecution need not bring
men who aided the the judge who first convicted him of final judgment.
actual crime.
It is not necessary that It is necessary that the Q: X was convicted of serious physical injuries, he
the armed men acted armed men must have served the sentence, and thereafter, he was
together in the acted together in the released. Upon his release, he tried to live a good
commission of the crime actual commission of life, he was suffered much from behind bars and
because the armed men the crime. did not want to go back. But he was enticed to
merely aided the actual become a member of a gang. One time, this gang of
perpetrator of the which he is a member, had a fight against another
crime, and their gang coming from another town, because thereof,
participation may either X killed members of the said rival gang. The
be direct or indirect footage of the CCTV was presented in order to
participation in the prove that X killed that one person. He was
commission of the charged with homicide. This incident happened 12
crime. years from the time that he was released from
prison for serving physical injuries. He is now in
RECIDIVISM trial for homicide, after the trial he was found
guilty of the crime of homicide and in imposing the
Article 14. (9) That the accused is a recidivist. penalty for homicide, can the judge consider
recidivism as an aggravating circumstance against
A recidivist is one whom at the time of his trial the accused X?
for one crime, shall have previously been convicted
by final judgment of another crime embraced in the A: First element, that the offender is in trial for one
same title of this Code. crime, X is in trial for homicide. Second element, that
at the time of said trial, he was previously convicted by
Elements: final judgment of serious physical injuries. Third
1. That the offender is on trial for one crime; element, that both serious physical injuries and
2. That at the time of said trial, he was homicide are under title 8 (Crimes against Persons) of
previously convicted by final judgment of the RPC. Last element, he is convicted of the new crime
another crime; of homicide. Therefore, recidivism can be considered
3. That both the first and second crimes are by the trial court.
embraced in the same title of the RPC;
4. That the offender is convicted of the second But what about the fact that 12 years have lapsed, in
crime charged. between the first crime for he was convicted by final
judgment and the second crime. Time is of no moment,
Recidivism requires at least two convictions: time is immaterial. In Recidivism, the law does not
a. The first conviction for the first crime committed is require any period of time between the first crime and
a condition by final judgment. the second crime. It has no prescriptive period; it is
b. The second conviction is that which the court will only required that the first crime for which he is
consider the aggravating circumstance of convicted by final judgment is in the same title of the
recidivism. RPC as that of the second crime for which he was
convicted.
It is important for recidivism to be considered against
the accused, that both the first one where the accused Q: X was charged of serious physical injuries, after
was convicted of final judgement and the second one trial on the merits, the MeTC judge convicted X of
for which he is on trial and is found guilty of, must be serious physical injuries and impose upon him the
embraced in same title of the RPC. Otherwise, maximum penalty of 4 years. Since, the maximum
recidivism cannot be considered against the accused. penalty is imposed, the counsel immediately filed
an application for probation on behalf of X. The
Recidivism is a mere generic aggravating judge granted the application for probation. X did
circumstance; therefore, it can be offset a by an not serve his sentence behind the bars. He went
ordinary mitigating circumstance. If not offset, then home very happy, although convicted, he was on
the maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law probation. He tried to do good. However, he was
shall be the one imposed. enticed to be a member of a gang in their
community. Wanting to belong, he joined and
Q: How do you prove recidivism? Is it necessary for became a member of the gang. But a week after he
the prosecution to present the judge that became a member, the said gang had a fight
convicted him by final judgment of the first crime? against a rival gang. In the course of the fight, X
killed a member of the rival gang, and now being
A: No, a mere certification coming from said court will charged with homicide. After the trial of the
suffice, because the said certification is a public merits, the judge found him guilty of homicide. In
imposing the penalty for homicide, can the judge

- 61 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

consider recidivism as an aggravating RPC, so those are the four elements reitaracion
circumstance? or habitability.

A: First element, X was on trial for one crime, which Under the second element, at the time of the said trial,
was the crime for homicide. he previously served sentence. For what? There are
two situations in the second element. He has
Second element, at the time of said trial, he must be previously served sentence for the offense to which
previously convicted by final judgment of another the law attaches an equal or greater penalty.
crime. He was to be convicted of the crime of serious a. When there are only two crimes committed,
physical injuries but he applied for probation which what the law requires is that the first crime for
was granted. That is still equivalent to a conviction by which he had served sentence must carry a
final judgment. The grant of probation means X is no penalty equal to or greater than that of the new
longer appealing his case, X in effect is admitting the crime.
commission of serious physical injuries. X is in effect b. when there are three crimes committed, what
amenable to the penalty imposed on him by the trial the law requires, is that the first two crimes for
court for serious physical injuries. He is no longer which he has been sentenced must carry lighter
questioning the merits of the case and the penalty penalties than that of the new crime.
imposed to him. Therefore, it is the same as a
conviction of a final judgment, the second element is Just like recidivism, in reiteracion, there must be at
present. least two convictions. However, unlike recidivism
wherein a conviction by final judgment in so far as the
Third element, both serious physical injuries and first crime is concerned will suffice, in case of
homicide are embraced in the same title under the reiteracion, what is required is that insofar as the first
RPC. Last element, he was also convicted of homicide. one is concerned, he must have already served
sentence.
Therefore, in imposing the penalty for homicide, the
judge can consider the aggravating circumstance of He must have already been punished, a mere
Recidivism. conviction by final Judgment will not suffice. There
must be service of sentence, there must already be
HABITUALITY punishment. Insofar as recidivism is concerned the
crimes are embraced in the same title of the RPC, in
Article 14. (10) That the offender has been case of reiteracion, the crimes are not embraced in the
previously punished for an offense to which the same title of the RPC.
law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for two
or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter REITERACION RECIDIVISM
penalty. There must be at least two convictions.
It is required that he has It is only required that
Four forms of Habituality: served out his sentence there is a first conviction
1. Recidivism (See Art. 14, par. 9) for the previous crime by final judgment.
2. Reiteracion that he has committed.
3. Habitual Delinquency The crimes must not be The law requires that
4. Quasi-recidivist embraces in the same the two crimes are
Title on the Code. embraces in the same
REITERACION Title of the Code.
Both are generic aggravating circumstances.
The elements of reiteracion are: Therefore, they can be offset with ordinary
1. That the offender is on trial for one crime mitigating circumstances. If not offset, then the
2. At a time of said trial, he has previously served maximum period of the penalty prescribed by law
sentence for an offense to which the law attaches shall be the one imposed.
an equal or greater penalty, or for two or more
crimes to which the law attaches lighter penalties. Q: If X was charged with slight physical injuries. He
3. That he is also convicted of the new crime for was convicted and thereafter X served out his
which he is on trial. sentence. So he was convicted and served out the
4. The crimes are not embraced in the same title of sentence only 30 days. It is arresto menor slight
the RPC. physical injuries. So after 30 days, X was released
NOTE: This element is only found in from prison.
jurisprudence. According to the Supreme Court
in reitaracion, the crimes are not embraced in Upon reaching the house, he tried to look for a job.
the same title of the RPC. So according to the He could not find a job. He used to be a
Supreme Court, in case of reitaracion, the construction worker but now because of his
crimes are not embraced in the same title of the records, nobody will take him as a construction
worker because he has been a convict of slight

- 62 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

physical injuries. He tried to apply for a week but trying to look for a job in order to feed the family
no one would accept him. No one will trust him but he could not find any job. Until one time he
again. The family was in dire need of money. And went to the MRT. He saw a woman wearing a
because of that, he tried to look for a job, not necklace. He tried to grab the necklace of the said
finding a job. woman. The said woman pushed him. The said
woman shouted. Because of that, X had to push this
On his way home one time, he saw that there was woman. The said woman fell and he was able to
this bag on top of the table of their neighbor's grab the said necklace.
house in the terrace. So within this view there was
this bag up on top on the table. So what he did, he So X is now being prosecuted for simple robbery.
jumped over the fence. As he was trying to get the After trial on the merits, the judge found him guilty
bag the owner got out and upon seeing X he of simple robbery. In imposing the penalty, can the
shouted at X. However, X pushed the owner and judge consider the aggravating circumstances of
then thereafter took the bag. The said owner reiteracion?
informed the police and X was arrested. So X is
now being prosecuted for simple robbery under A: First element. He is on trial for one crime. He is on
Article 294 5th paragraph. After trial on the trial for simple robbery. Second element, at the time of
merits, the judge found him guilty of simple said trial, he has previously served sentence for the
robbery. In imposing the penalty for simple offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater
robbery, can the judge consider reiteracion as an penalty or for two or more crimes to which the law
aggravating circumstance. attaches lighter penalties.

A: First element, he is on trial for one crime. He is on Q: Is this present? What was the first crime that he
trial for simple robbery. Second element at a time of committed?
said trial, he has previously served sentence for the
offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater A: The first committed the crime of slight physical
penalty. The second element is absent. Although acts injuries. In the third slight physical injuries, did he
can serve sentence, the penalty for slight physical serve sentence? No he did not. Because based on the
injuries is not equal or greater than that of simple facts of the problem, he applied for probation.
robbery. Therefore, the second element is absent. Therefore, since he applied for probation, he did not
Hence, reiteracion cannot be considered against the serve sentence. Supreme Court said probation is not
said accused. What the law requires is that the first the equivalent to service of sentence. Because the
one committed for which he had served sentence must effect of probation is to suspend the execution of the
carry a penalty equal to or greater than that of the new sentence. The moment you are placed on probation,
crime. you did not serve a sentence. Therefore, the second
element is absent.
Q: X was charged and then thereafter convicted of
slight physical injuries. The penalty imposed by Q: What about insofar as the second situation in
the courts slight physical injuries, it is only 30 the second element. When there are three crimes
days. And so what X did X applied for probation committed?
through his counsel. The judge granted X’s
application for probation hence, he did not serve A: The first two crimes for which he serves sentence
the sentence of 30 days. Thereafter, he tried to must carry lighter penalties than that of the new
look for a job and he could not find a job. crime. Since he did not serve sentence for slight
physical injuries, even if you serve sentence for
One time, he saw these plants outside the house of malicious mischief, the second element will not be
their neighbor Then upon seeing these plants, he considered.
tried to get some of the said plants, but the said
neighbor stopped him and because of that, X Q: What if X was charged with a crime of homicide,
getting mad at the said neighbor, X slapped the and then thereafter he was convicted of homicide.
said neighbor. And not only that, he also caused The judgment became final and executory. X was
damage on the said plants of the said neighbor. brought to Muntinlupa. The maximum of the
penalty was 20 years reclusion temporal. He was
And so he's now being charged with a crime of there for 20 in Muntinlupa. 20 years of his life
Malicious mischief. After trial on the merits, the spent behind bars.
judge found him guilty of malicious mischief. He
served out the sentence for malicious mischief. After 20 years he's now released. Upon his release
The penalty imposed on him a maximum of six the moment he went home, totally a new
months arresto mayor based on the damage that environment. He’s been gone for 20 years. The
he caused. neighbors are already different from their former
neighbors. Others have died, others have left. He
Soon, he served out the sentence of arrestor immediately found attraction to their new
mayor. Thereafter, upon his release he was again neighbor.

- 63 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

The first time he saw that woman, this woman was Elements:
wearing shorts, watering the plants and X was 1. It must be serious physical injuries, less
immediately attracted to the said woman. From serious physical injuries, robbery, theft,
the time that he set eyes on the said woman, he has estafa, or falsification.
always been looking at the said woman with lust. 2. It also requires at least three convictions. He
must be found guilty a third time or oftener.
A week thereafter, a week upon his release from 3. Lastly, there is a prescriptive period of 10
prison he could no longer contain his lust. Upon years from the date of last release or last
seeing the woman again watering the plants in the conviction.
garden, he jumped over the fence and then
thereafter, he grabbed the said woman. He was If recidivism and reiteracion are both generic
trying to get the said woman out and he was able aggravating circumstances, habitual delinquency
to bring the woman to their house. However, under Art. 62 is an extraordinary aggravating
immediately, there were already the police circumstance because its effect is the imposition of an
because the people saw him and the police were additional penalty. If the convict/offender is found to
close. be a habitual delinquent, aside from the penalty
prescribed by law for the crime he has committed, an
So X was arrested the woman was rescued. He's additional penalty will be imposed on him for being a
now being prosecuted for the crime of forcible habitual delinquent.
abduction. After the trial on the merits, the judge
found him guilty of forcible abduction. In imposing The only limitation is that if you add the penalty for the
the penalty of forcible abduction, can the judge crime he has committed, and the additional penalty for
consider reiteracion? being habitual delinquent – they must not exceed 30
years as provided under Art. 62. So habitual
A: First element, he is on trial for one crime. He is on delinquent is an extraordinary aggravating
trial for forcible abduction. At the time of the said trial, circumstance.
he has previously served sentence for homicide. The
homicide carries a penalty equal to forcible abduction. Q: X was charged and thereafter convicted of
There penalties are both reclusion temporal. estafa. He swindled a person for a huge amount of
money involving jewelries. He was convicted of
Third element, he is also convicted of the crime of estafa through misappropriation or conversion
forcible abduction. Last element, both crimes are not under the RPC. He served out the sentence, which
embraced on the same title of the RPC. Homicide is became final and executory. After service of
under Title VIII – Crimes against persons, whereas sentence, he is now released.
forcible abduction is under Title XI – Crimes against
chastity. Therefore, the judge should consider Upon release of X in prison, within 2 years, since
reiteracion as an aggravating circumstance. there family was in need of money and he could
not find any and he could not borrow from anyone,
Just like recidivism, in order to prove reiteracion, the he committed the crime of simple robbery through
judge need not present, nor the prosecution need not intimidation – he took the bag of a woman. As a
present the judge that convicted the accused. The result, he was on trial for the crime of simple
prosecution need not present the Director of Prisons robbery. After the trial on the merits, the judge
to testify that this person has already served sentence. found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt, and
A mere certification, which is coming from the public the judgment become final and executory. He
officer, and therefore considered as a public served out the sentence.
document, suffices in order to prove that this offender
has already previously served sentence for the said Upon release again for simple robbery, within a
crime, which carries a penalty equal to or greater than period of 1 year, he again committed the act of
this new crime. robbery. He grabbed the necklace of a passenger
on board a jeepney, when the said woman tried to
HABITUAL DELINQUENCY put a fight, he slapped the woman and pushed the
woman. Hence, he committed under simple
A person is deemed to be a habitual delinquent if he is robbery. After trial on the merits, again, the judge
found guilty of the crimes of serious physical injuries, found him guilty as charged of simple robbery. He
less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa, or served out the sentence. He was released. Upon
falsification a third time or oftener each within a release, still he did not change. He never change
period of 10 years from the date of last release or last for being a thief/robber. Just within the period of
conviction. 3 years from the date of last release, he committed
the crime of robbery again. Now, he is on trial for
In so far as habitual delinquency is concerned, the the crime. The judge found him guilty of the crime
crimes are specified. of simple robbery for the third time.

- 64 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

In imposing the penalty for the third robbery, can

the judge consider the aggravating circumstance QUASI-RECIDIVISM
of habitual delinquency?
A person is deemed a quasi-recidivist, if after having
A: The judge can consider the habitual delinquency. He been convicted by final judgment, he shall commit a
is a habitual delinquent because he is found guilty of felony while serving the sentence or before serving his
the crime of robbery a third time each within a period sentence.
of 10 years from the date of last release/conviction.
Therefore, the judge can consider habitual Under Art. 160, Book II of the RPC, quasi-recidivism
delinquency. is a special aggravating circumstance because the
law requires the maximum period of penalty
Q: Can the judge also consider the aggravating prescribed by law shall be the one imposed. Hence, the
circumstance of recidivism? Is X a recidivist? moment the offender is a quasi-recidivist,
automatically the maximum penalty prescribed by law
A: X is also a recidivist. At the time of his trial for the shall be the one imposed. It cannot be offset by any
crime of simple robbery, he has been previously mitigating circumstance.
convicted by final judgment of the crime of estafa. Both
estafa and simple robbery are under Title X – Crimes Q: X was convicted of homicide. Judgment became
against property. He is also convicted of the new final and executory. He was brought to Bilibid. One
crime. So, aside from being a habitual delinquent, X is morning, all the inmates were up. They have
also a recidivist. already eaten breakfast. X was still on bed. So,
when his fellow inmates went to X, they held his
Q: Can the judge consider both recidivism and hand and realized that he was very hot. The
habitual delinquency? inmates said to each other “May COVID yan, may
COVID yan! Ang taas ng lagnat!” And so, afraid that
A: As held by the Supreme Court in the case of People the virus will spread in the area, the inmates
vs. Melendrez (see syllabus), the SC said yes. The SC immediately informed the authorities of the
said if the offender was both a recidivist and habitual Bilibid. Medics arrived, and there was this
delinquent, both can be considered against him wheelchair. X is now being lifted from his bed to
because they have different effects in the commission the wheelchair. The moment they lifted X to be
of the crime. For being a recidivist, if recidivism is not brought to the wheelchair, they saw in the
offset against ordinary mitigating circumstance, then beddings of X plastic sachets of shabu. Some were
the penalty for simple robbery shall be imposed on its empty, and some still have contents. Because of
maximum period. this, X was charged with illegal possession of
dangerous drugs under Sec. 11 of RA 9165.
For being a habitual delinquent, the court shall impose
an additional penalty on X, provided if you add the After trial on the merits, the judge found him guilty
penalty for simple robbery and the additional penalty of violation Sec. 11 of RA 9165 – illegal possession
for being a habitual delinquent, they must not exceed of dangerous drugs.
30 years.
Can the judge consider quasi-recidivism as an
RECIDIVISM HABITUAL aggravating circumstance in imposing the penalty
DELINQUENCY for violation of Sec. 11 of RA 9165?
The law requires that The law requires that
there must be at least there must be at least A: No. What the law requires is that the said convict
two convictions three convictions must commit a felony while serving sentence for the
There is no prescriptive There is a prescriptive first crime. Therefore, Art. 160 is specific that the
period between the first period of 10 years from second crime that the said offender must commit must
conviction and second the date of last be a felony in order for him to be considered as a
crime release/conviction quasi-recidivist. In this case, the second crime that X
The law requires that Specific crimes committed while he was serving his sentence is a
the crimes committed is (FRETSeL) Falsification, violation of special penal law – not a felony. Quasi-
embraced on the same robbery, estafa, theft, recidivism cannot be considered before violation of
title of the RPC serious physical Sec. 11 of RA 9165.
injuries, and less serious
physical injuries Q: X was charged and thereafter, convicted of
Mere generic An extraordinary illegal possession of dangerous drugs. Since the
aggravating aggravating judgment became final and executory, X was
circumstance which can circumstance which brought to the bilibid. The moment he arrived at
be offset against by an cannot be offset by any the bilibid, he was being courted by different
ordinary mitigating mitigating circumstance groups, by different gangs to be part of their group.
circumstance So, X belongs now to this first group. Let’s say the

- 65 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

name of the said group was WW Group. X is a part

of WW Group. X was there, having been convicted INUNDATION, FIRE, EXPLOSION, ETC.
by final judgment of illegal possession of
dangerous drugs. Months thereafter, this WW Article 14. (12) That the crime be committed by
Group, to which X belongs, had a fight with another means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
rival group. Inside, there was this riot between stranding of a vessel or international damage
these two groups. In the course of the said riot, one thereto, derailment of a locomotive, or by the
of the inmates belonging to the rival group was use of any other artifice involving great waste and
killed by X. The footage of the CCTV identified X as ruin.
the one who killed the said victim. X is now being
prosecuted for the crime of homicide. After trial on If the crime is committed by any of these means, it will
the merits, the judge found him guilty of the crime be considered as a generic aggravating circumstance.
of homicide. In imposing the penalty for the said
crime, can the judge consider quasi-recidivism as But if the crime is committed by the use of any of these
a special aggravating circumstance? means is that of killing a person, it will not only be a
generic aggravating circumstance, but also a
A: Yes. He was found guilty by final judgment for the qualifying aggravating circumstance under Art. 248. It
crime of illegal possession of dangerous drugs. While qualified the killing to murder.
he was serving his sentence, he committed a felony,
homicide. Therefore, since he committed the felony EVIDENT PREMEDITATION
while serving for a conviction of final judgment, he is a
quasi-recidivist. Therefore, in imposing the penalty for Article 14. (13) That the act be committed with
homicide, the judge will automatically impose the evident premeditation.
maximum period of reclusion temporal, the penalty
prescribed by law for homicide. Hence, it would be Evident premeditation is the stubborn adherence to
reclusion temporal in its maximum period. No commit a crime. It requires deliberate planning on the
mitigating circumstance maybe considered because part of the offender before the actual execution of the
the moment a special aggravating circumstance crime. He deliberately planned it before actually
attends the commission of the crime, the Court will executing the said crime.
immediately impose the maximum penalty prescribed
by law. Elements:
1. The time that the offender has determined to
PRICE, REWARD OR PROMISE commit the crime;
2. An overt ac manifestly indicating that he clung to
Article 14. (11) That the crime be committed in his determination; and
consideration of a price, reward, or promise. 3. A sufficient lapse of time in between the
determination and the actual execution of the
This aggravating circumstance, in consideration of a crime. Time for him to reflect upon the
price, reward or promise, maybe considered both consequences of his acts.
against the person who gave the price, reward or
promise and the person who accepted the price, These are the elements of evident premeditation. It is
reward or promise in order to commit the crime necessary for the prosecution to prove each and every
otherwise stated. of these elements. Otherwise, it cannot be considered.

In consideration of price, reward or promise may be When did there must be evident premeditation
considered both against the said principal by inducing showing? When did the accused decided, determined
the one who gave the price, reward or promise and the to commit the crime? Second, the prosecution must
principal by direct participation, the one who accepted establish, by evidence, what act did he performed to
the price, reward or promise in order to commit the show that he clung to his determination, that he really
crime. So, it can be considered both against the giver intended the commission of the crime? The
and the receiver of the said price, reward or promise. prosecution must also prove how long a time had
lapsed in between his determination and his actual
However, before this aggravating circumstance maybe execution of the crime. Only if these three pieces of
considered both against the giver and the receiver, evidence had been shown and established that evident
both against the principal by inducement and the premeditation can be considered by the court in
principal by direct participation, it is necessary that imposing the penalty against the accused.
the price, reward or promise must be the primary
reason, the main consideration, why the principal by CRAFT, FRAUD, OR DISGUISE
direct participation committed the crime. That if
where not for the said price, reward or promise, he Article 14. (14) That the craft, fraud or
would not have accomplished the said crime. disguise be employed.
Otherwise, this aggravating circumstance cannot be
considered against the accused.

- 66 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Craft refers to cunning and intellectual trickery execution, without risk to himself arising from the
resorted to by the accused so that the victim will defense which the offended party might make.
perform an act that will make the accused carry out his
evil design. There is treachery when the following elements
are present:
Fraud refers to deceit and it is evidenced by insidious 1. That the offender deliberately and consciously
words or machinations resorted to, again, by the adapted the ways, means and methods
accused so that the victim will perform an act that will employed by him in the commission of the
make the accused carry out his evil design. crime; and
2. By reason of the said ways, means and methods,
Disguise refers to means, ways, things used by the the victim was not able to put up any defense.
offender in order to conceal his identity.
In one of the cases assigned to you, the case of People
ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH v. Vicente Vilbar, the SC said that the first element,
that the offender deliberately and consciously adopted
Article 14. (15) That advantage be taken of the ways, means and methods employed by him to
superior strength, or means be employed to commit the crime, SC said it means that the offender
weaken the defense. has reflected, has the time to reflect what means he
shall use in order to ensure the commission of the
The elements of abuse of superior strength as an crime. Therefore, SC said if the said act happened
aggravating circumstance are: impossibly, at the spark of the moment, the first
1. That there exists a notorious inequality of forces element of treachery is absent. Treachery cannot be
between the offender and the offended party; and considered against the accused. He must be given time
2. That the offender took advantage of his superiority to reflect what means shall he use in order to ensure
in order to ensure the commission of the crime. the commission of the crime, leaving the victim
without any defense.
The first element requires that there must be
notorious inequality of forces. This notorious Q: X and Y were exchanging words against each
inequality of forces can be established when: other. X was scolding, maligning, embarrassing Y
a. the offenders are greater in number versus a that people in the neighborhood were there. They
single lone victim; were watching how X maligned Y and they were
b. the offender is armed and the victim has no arm just laughing. Y was so embarrassed. To get even,
(unarmed); he tried to attack X. X evaded the blow and X
c. when the offender is greater in strength – he is laughed very loud. While again trying to attack X,
a big man while the victim is an old woman. X evaded the blow. Not only X but the people
around were laughing. Y felt so ashamed and so
All of this will establish, will reveal, will show the little of himself. He decided to leave. But before
notorious inequality of forces between the offender leaving he gave a stern warning to X that he is
and the victim. going to kill X and take his revenge soon.
Thereafter, Y left.
However, that is only the first element and that will
not suffice because the second element requires that Upon reaching his house, he tried to sleep. The
there must be evidence showing that the said offender laughters of the people and X were all there in his
took advantage of the superiority in strength in order mind. So he went to the public market and bought
to ensure the commission of the crime. Even if the a knife. Sharpened the knife until the wee hours of
offenders are ten and the victim is one, if there is no the morning. He has been for the opportune time
evidence showing that they took advantage of their to get even with X. They were neighbors and their
greatness in number, it will not be considered as an houses were just three houses from each other. So
aggravating circumstance. There must be evidence from the window of the house of Y, you can see
showing in what way? They took advantage of their whenever X would arrive home. Many times he
superiority in strength in order to ensure the attempted to kill X but there were people around
commission of the crime. on the street. Until 2 weeks thereafter, one Sunday
evening, there was heavy downpour of the rain. Y
TREACHERY was looking again at the window of the house and
he saw a car arrive in front of the house of X and X
Article 14. (16) That the act be committed with alighted. There were no people around. There was
treachery (alevosia). a heavy downpour of rain so Y thought that this is
his opportune time. Y ran towards X and while X
There is treachery when the offender commits was opening the gate, Y repeatedly stabbed X and
any of the crimes against the person, employing died.
means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof
which tend directly and specially to insure its Prosecuted for the death of X, the following
aggravating circumstances were alleged in the

- 67 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

information: treachery, abuse of superior present? If they are, how should the court
strength, and evident premeditation. Are all appreciate them?
aggravating circumstance is present? If present,
how shall the court appreciate them? A: Treachery was present based on the facts obviously.
A, B, and C, deliberately the ways, means and methods
A: Treachery is present. Obviously, Y adopted the they will use to kill the victim. They just suddenly
ways, means, and methods he can use in order to kill appeared armed with knives. They deliberately
X. The use of the knife, waiting for the opportune time, adopted the use of knives in order to kill the said
the time there was heavy downfall of rain and there victim. By reason thereof, X was without any defense.
were no people around. By reason thereof, X was Treachery attends the commission of the crime.
totally without any defense. He was opening the gate
of their house. Therefore, treachery was present. Abuse of superior strength was present. There was a
notorious inequality of forces between A, B, and C, and
There was no abuse of superior strength. Although Y X. The three men were greater in number and the
was armed and the victim was unarmed, there was no three men were all armed with knives. The victim was
evidence showing that Y took advantage of his alone and unarmed. So the first element of abuse of
superiority of strength in order to commit the crime. superior strength is present. Second element, that the
offender deliberately took advantage of their
There is evident premeditation. The time that Y superiority and strength in order to facilitate the
determined to commit the crim. The time he was commission of the crime. When X was lying on the
embarrassed and laughed at by the people, he made a ground, after being attacked by A once, all three of
stern warning that he was going to kill X. An overt act them simultaneously stabbed him at the same time,
manifestly indicating that there is evident inflicting fatal wounds all over the body. They took
premeditation is that he bought a knife and sharpened advantage of their superiority and strength in order to
it. Waiting for the best time to kill him. Last element is ensure the death of X.
sufficient lapse of time, 2 weeks have lapsed from the
time he determined to kill X and the time he finally Therefore, both treachery and abuse of superior
executed it. Therefore, treachery is present, evident strength attended the commission of the crime. How
premeditation is present, abuse of superior strength is should the court consider these 2 qualifying
absent. aggravating circumstances?

How should the court consider the two qualifying The court shall convict X of the crime of murder
aggravating circumstances. First, the judge shall qualified by treachery and abuse of superior strength
convict Y of murder qualified by treachery and evident is simply absorbed by treachery.
premeditation is a mere generic aggravating
circumstance. SC said that when both treachery and NOTE: It will not be considered as a generic
evident premeditation attended the crime, treachery aggravating circumstance.
does not absorb evident premeditation. It will be
murder qualified by treachery and evident In the case of People v Feliciano, the SC said it is
premeditation will be considered as a separate and settled whenever both treachery and abuse of
distinct generic aggravating circumstance. superior strength attended the commission of the
crime, treachery absorbs abuse of superior strength.
NOTE: Treachery never absorbs evident Hence, it has no effect on the imposition of penalty
premeditation. If treachery if present together with because it has been absorbed by treachery not a
evident premeditation, treachery will be the one to generic aggravating circumstance.
qualify the crime to murder and evident
premeditation will be considered as generic In the case of People v Dela Pena, the SC said
aggravating circumstance. treachery attends the killing whenever the accused
attacks the victim while the victim was past asleep and
Q: X was walking. A, B, and C suddenly appeared. unable to defend himself. SC said a sleeping victim is
They were all armed with knives. Without any not in the position to defend himself and take flight or
warning, A immediately stabbed X. X was hit above to avoid the assault. Therefore, the fact that the attack
the breast and fell on the ground. When X was was done while the victim was past asleep, this ensure
down on the ground, all three of them, A, B, and C, that the crime will be successfully executed without
with the use of their knives repeatedly stabbed any risk to the attacker. So, killing a sleeping victim
him on the different parts of his body. X sustained will always be qualified by treachery.
18 fatal wounds that caused his immediate death.
In the case of People v Moreno, Mijares was past
A, B, and C were charged as conspirators for the asleep when Moreno entered the house and then
crime of murder. Two qualifying aggravating thereafter hacked the victim. Mijares was able to race
circumstances was alleged in the information: Moreno. Thereafter, he kicked Moreno and pushed
treachery and abuse of superior strength. Are both him outside. However, since he was already hacked,
Mijares fell on the floor and died.

- 68 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

order to kill X, it happened at the spur of the moment

Prosecuted for murder qualified by treachery. The impulsively.
defense argued that there was no treachery since the
victim was able to retaliate. He was able to kick and The first element of treachery did not attend the
push the accused outside. Therefore, since he was able commission of the crime; therefore, treachery cannot
to put up a fight, there is no treachery in the be considered as an aggravating circumstance.
commission of the crime.
Q: X and Y are good friends. X went to the office of
The SC said no. There is treachery that attends the Y. X frequents the office of Y. They usually have
commission of the crime. Moreno is guilty of murder lunch together inside the office of Y or they will go
qualified by treachery. SC said that Moreno’s sudden out. That Friday, X went inside the office of Y. Y was
attack on Mijares while the said victim was past asleep the head of the company. Minutes later, the
inside his house demonstrates treachery in the employees of Y heard 2 gunfires. Then here comes
commission of the crime because at that particular Y rushing to the door shouting to the staff, “call an
moment, Mijares has no inkling of the impending ambulance fast”. X was brought to the hospital but
attack that night. He has no inkling of any penalties died the next day. Y is now being prosecuted for
because he felt secured in his house. SC said that the crime of murder qualified by treachery. Was
although Mijares was able to kick and push Moreno there treachery in the commission of the crime?
outside the room, this did not negate the presence of
treachery. A: No, treachery did not attend the commission of the
crime. In this case, it shall be downgraded to homicide.
NOTE: SC said treachery must still be appreciated even As held in the case of People vs Enriquez, in order for
if the victim was able to retaliate as a result of his treachery to be considered against the accused, it must
reflexes as long as he did not have the opportunity to be present at the inception of the attack. Therefore,
repel the initial assault. Treachery can still be someone must have witnessed the attack commence.
considered in the imposition of the said penalty. In this case, none of the employees saw how the attack
commence. What they heard were only gunfires and
Q: X was going to take a bath but there was no soap then hear comes y rushing to call an ambulance. They
or shampoo. So as early as 6:00am he immediately did not see if prior to the said gunfires, there was an
went to the store. Since there was mudding in the altercation. They did not see if X was able to put up any
area, he was wearing a bota. He was buying soap defense. Therefore, since the witness did not see how
and shampoo. At the store, there was already Y the attack commenced, the witness could not testify if
dressed in his best and he has shiny shoes. Since at at the inception of the attack, the victim is totally
the time X was in a hurry. he was moving and without any defense.
moving, he was so agitated that he did not notice
that his boots stepped on the very clean shiny Q: Can there be treachery in the Special Complex
shoes of Y. Y was mad, “dinumihan mo, nilinis ko Crime of Robbery with Homicide?
‘to.” X was apologetic to Y. However, Y would not
take the said apology. He told X to get a cloth in A: Yes, according to the case of People v. Escote, the
order to wipe the mud and in that moment, Y took SC held that treachery can be appreciated in robbery
a balisong and stabbed X. X died. Y is being with homicide only insofar as the killing is concerned.
prosecuted for Murder qualified by treachery. Was However, since it cannot qualify the killing to murder,
there treachery in the commission of the crime? treachery shall only be considered a generic
aggravating circumstance because there is no crime of
A: There was no treachery in the commission of the Robbery with Murder. Thus, the crime is robbery with
crime. The said case should be downgraded only to homicide with a generic aggravating circumstance of
homicide. Treachery did not attend the commission of treachery insofar as homicide is concerned.
the crime. As held by the SC in the case of People v.
Vilbar and People v. Corpin, when the meeting IGNOMINY
between the parties was casual and the attack was
done impulsively, there is no first element of treachery Article 14. (17) That means be employed or
therefore treachery did not attend the commission of circumstances brought about which add ignominy
the crime. to the natural effects of the act.

When the meeting of the parties wa casual, and the Ignominy is a moral circumstance which adds disgrace
attack was done impulsively, the said offender did not or humiliation, embarrassment, to the injury suffered
have the opportunity to reflect on the ways, means, by the victim.
and methods he will use in order to commit the crime.
In this case, it happened at the spur of the moment. Aside from the act necessary for the commission of the
The meeting between X and Y was casual. Y’s attack on crime. The offender performs another act that brought
X was done impulsively because he was so mad that moral pain, moral suffering, humiliation on the part of
his shoes got dirty. There was no moment for Y to the said victim.
reflect on the ways, means, and methods he used in

- 69 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

In the case of People v. Jose (En Banc). That is the Q: X wanted to kill Y. He saw a bathroom window,
case of the popular actress, Maggie Dela Riva. brok the window open and then killed Y. Is the
Ignominy was appreciated in the case. SC said 19th aggravating circumstance present?
ignominy attended the case because the said act of
forcing her to dance and stripping her of clothing for A: Yes, in order for X to commit the crime he has to
10 minutes before the rape. Supreme Court said that break the said window.
the said act caused her moral pain and they are not
necessary to the commission of the crime. Q: X wanted to rob the house of Y. He saw a
bathroom window, brok the window open and
In the case of People v. Butler (En Banc), the SC then took valuables. What crime is committed?
appreciated ignominy but the said case was dismissed
because of minority. A: The crime committed is Robbery by use of force
upon things and the fact that he broke the window in
SC said that the act of the accused of having anal order to enter the said place, as a means to commit the
intercourse with the victim after killing the victim is crime, it is already absorbed, it is considered an
undoubtedly an outrage of the corpse. T was element.
considered as outraging or scoffing at the corpse is
equivalent to ignominy. The SC believed the testimony Q: Passing through the window, X went inside the
of the doctor who said that the muscles of the anus did bedroom of Y, and had carnal knowledge of Y by
not close and there was spermatozoa in the anal employing force and violence. Is unlawful entry
region. Supreme court said that all of these only attendant in the commission of the crime?
showed that there was anal intercourse after death.
A: Yes, a window is an opening not intended for
In the case of People v. Bumidang, aside from entrance or egress, therefore, the fact that X
dwelling, the Supreme Court also appreciated unlawfully entered and thereafter unlawfully
ignominy as an aggravating circumstance in the crime committed the act of rape, unlawful entry is an
of rape. Ignominy was considered by the SC because aggravating circumstance.
the said accused used a flashlight to examine the
genital of Gloria before raping her and the said act of Q: X saw an open window. He entered through the
examining her genital was done in front of Gloria’s open window. Upon gaining entry, he took
own father who was tied to a chair. The use of valuable and ransacked the house. He broke every
flashlight to examine the genital of the rape victim cabinet, and then thereafter, he took valuables,
befire ravishing done in the presence of the victim’s and left again, passing though the said window. In
own father, only added moral pain, humiliation on the the commission of the crime, is unlawful entry
part of the victim. It is not necessary in order to attendant as an aggravating circumstance?
consummate the crime of rape. Therefore, the SC
appreciated the aggravating circumstance of A: No, it is inherent, because the crime committed was
ignominy. Robbery by use of force upon things under Art.299.

UNLAWFUL ENTRY AID OF MINORS or MOTOR VEHICLE

Article 14. (18) That the crime be committed Article 14. (20) That the crime be committed
after an unlawful entry. with the aid of persons under fifteen years of age or
by means of motor vehicles, motorized watercraft,
(19) There is an unlawful entry when an airships, or other similar means.
entrance of a crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or
window be broken. If the crime is committed by the offender, taking
advantage of a minor, 15 years old or under, at the
Let us relate the 18th aggravating circumstance to the time of the commission of the crime, he took
19th aggravating circumstance. advantage of this minor to commit the crime, it is an
aggravating circumstance. It shows his greater
Under the 18th aggravating circumstance, the crime criminality. He knew these minors, even if arrested,
was committed after the unlawful entry. In the 19th cannot be prosecuted and punished, that reduced his
aggravating circumstance, the very means used by the greater criminality taking advantage of their minority.
accused in order to commit the crime was the breaking
of the wall, roof, floor, door, or window. If the crime is committed by a motor vehicle,
motorized watercraft, airships, or other similar
In the crime however of robbery with use of force means, it will be considered as an aggravating
upon things – the XVIII and XIX are inherent elements. circumstance.
Hence are merely absorbed Art. 299 and 302.
Q: X was on his way home. Nearing the gate of the
house, here comes a motorcycle. A driver and a
backrider of the said motorcycle, the moment they

- 70 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

passed by the said place, before X was able to enter PEOPLE V. LUCAS
the house, when they passed by very fast, the GR No. 80102, Jan. 22, 1990
backrider grabbed the handbag of X and off they
left. The Supreme Court appreciated cruelty against the
accused father. Supreme Court said, cruelty
A: In the commission of the crime, use of a motorcycle attended the act of rape. Cruelty was present
attended. It is considered as an aggravating because the offender, the father raped his very own
circumstance. It facilitated the commission of the daughter, and during the rape, he tied the victim to
crime, the means of committing the crime. It was very the bed, burnt her face with lighted cigarette while
easy for them to take/steal the said bag, because they raping her, and laughing as he was doing all of this
were on board the said motorcycle. It also facilitated to his very own biological daughter. Cruelty
their escape, therefore, the use of the motorcycle shall attended the commission. Burning the face of the
be considered as an aggravating circumstance. said girl while she was being raped is not necessary
to consummate the crime of rape. It only added
What if they’re wearing helmets, the driver and additional physical pain on the part of the said
the backrider? Is there disguise as an aggravating daughter/victim. Cruelty attended the commission
circumstance? of the crime.
A: There is no disguise as an aggravating
circumstance. Absent any other pieces of evidence, Q: The accused axed the victim. After killing the
showing that there is intent to conceal their identity. victim, he divided the body parts of the victim. He
The reason is, we have a law that requires motorcycle dismembered the different parts of the body of the
riders to wear helmets. In fact, if they will not be victim. Did cruelty attended the commission of the
wearing helmets, they can be arrested. The law crime?
requires for them to wear helmets, therefore, there A: Because the victim, at the time that his parts of the
should be an additional evidence to show that there is body were dismembered, he was no longer alive. He
intent on the part of the offenders to conceal their was already dead. Therefore, it cannot be said that
identities. there was additional physical pain dealt by the said
victim.
CRUELTY
Q: What if the bar problem states, a charge of
Article 14. (21) That the wrong done in the Murder was filed against X for killing Y. Solely on
commission of the crime be deliberately augmented the basis of a finding that Y sustained more than 75
by causing other wrong not necessary for its wounds, only 2 of which were fatal. Is the charge of
commissions. murder correct?
A: No, the charge of murder is incorrect. The mere fact
Cruelty refers to physical suffering of the victim, that the victim sustained 75 stab wounds only 2 of
purposely intended by the offender, therefore, the which were fatal, does not reveal the qualifying
wrong must be done on the victim while he is still aggravating circumstances of Abuse of Superior
alive. Strength and Cruelty. Even if the victim had 75 stab
wounds, the mere fact that he sustained 75 stab
If in ignominy, another act was done by the offender, wounds will not reveal that the said accused was
in order to bring about moral pain and humiliation on superior in strength than that of the victim. Likewise,
the part of the victim. In case of cruelty, the offender the mere fact that he sustained 75 stab wounds will
performs another act that brought about additional not reveal that there was cruelty. The stab wounds
physical suffering which is not necessary to may have inflicted while he was already dead. For
consummate the crime. cruelty to arise, there must be evidence showing that
the victim was still alive.
Test in appreciating cruelty as Aggravating
Circumstance ART. 15: ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES
a. Whether the accused deliberately and sadistically
augmented the suffering of the victim. Article 15. Their concept. – Alternative
NOTE: There must be proof that the victim was circumstances are those which must be taken into
made to agonize by the infliction of additional consideration as aggravating or mitigating
pain which is not necessary in order to according to the nature and effects of the crime and
consummate the crime. the other conditions attending its commission. They
b. The wrong must be done when the victim was still are the relationship, intoxication and the degree of
alive. instruction and education of the offender.
c. It must be shown that the accused enjoy and
delighted in making the victim suffer slowly and The alternative circumstance of relationship
gradually, causing him unnecessary physical pain shall be taken into consideration when the offended
in the consummation of the crime. party in the spouse, ascendant, descendant,
legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or sister, or

- 71 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

relative by affinity in the same degrees of the Either the prosecution shall prove it as an aggravating
offender. circumstance or the defense shall prove it as a
mitigating circumstance.
The intoxication of the offender shall be taken
into consideration as a mitigating circumstance 3. Degree of Instruction or Education
when the offender has committed a felony in a state
of intoxication, if the same is not habitual or Low Degree of Instruction
subsequent to the plan to commit said felony but GENERAL RULE: A low degree of instruction, being
when the intoxication is habitual or intentional, it unlettered, uneducated, will be considered as a
shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance. mitigating circumstance.
EXCEPTION: This is not applied when the crime
There are three Alternative Circumstances committed by the said unlettered, uneducated,
ignorant man, is a crime which is inherently evil or
1. Relationship wrong. Because a crime which inherently evil or
When the offended party in the spouse, ascendant, wrong is as wrong to an ignorant man as to a
descendant, legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or learned man.
sister, or relative by affinity in the same degrees of the
offender. The said unlettered man, having an argument with his
neighbor because of a certain piece of land, the said
As a mitigating and exempting Circumstance unlettered, uneducated man, who doesn’t even know
As a rule, relationship is considered as a mitigating how to sign or doesn’t even know the alphabet, never
circumstance in crimes under Title X: Crimes against been to school, doesn’t know how to read, in the
Property. course of said argument, he repeatedly stabbed the
REASON: Under Art.332, in 3 crimes against said neighbor. The neighbor was already dead. Still, he
property (theft, swindling/estafa and malicious stabbed him ensuring that the said neighbor was dead.
mischief), relationship is an absolutory cause; Even if he is ignorant, he knows that it is wrong to take
relationship is an exempting circumstance. another person’s life. It is inherently evil or wrong.
Therefore, if in this 3 crimes against property,
relationship is an absolutory cause, then, in all A high degree of education will be considered as an
other crimes against property, relationship is aggravating circumstance if the offender took
considered as a mitigating circumstance. This is to advantage of his high learnings in order to facilitate
ensure harmony in the family, according to the the commission of the crime.
Supreme Court. EXAMPLE: A lawyer committing estafa thru
falsification of public documents by counterfeiting
As an Aggravating Circumstance the signature of the vendor and the vendee in the
In case of crimes against persons, Relationship is deed of absolute sale. Obviously, he used his high
considered as aggravating circumstance if the learnings in law in order to ensure the commission
offended party is of a higher degree than that of the of the crime. Therefore, it will be considered as an
offender, and the crime committed is serious physical aggravating circumstance.
injuries and less serious physical injuries, it will be
considered as an aggravating circumstance. Q: Atty. X was on his way home, he was stopped by
his neighbor Y. It was Y’s birthday and he was
NOTE: Relationship is inherent in the crime of inviting Atty. X to have dinner in the house. Atty. X
Parricide said that he will only bring the car home and then
he will go to the neighbor’s house. When Atty. X
2. Intoxication went to the house of the neighbor, the neighbor
Intoxication can either be mitigating or aggravating introduced him to the other guest. Atty. X seldom
circumstance. drinks, he has no liking for liquors. However, that
night, he kept on pouring drinks. When he was
As a Mitigating Circumstance already drunk, he became annoying. He would
It is necessary for the defense to show that: touch the arms of a woman. He also touched the
a. the intoxication is not habitual, not subsequent to buttocks of the woman who passed by.
a plan to commit a felony.
b. the accused’s drunkenness affected his mental The people in the area told the birthday celebrant
facilities. Y, “Y yung guest mo, bastos. Yung lawyer na
pinakilala mo samin bastos nanghihipo” Y
As an Aggravating Circumstance observed Atty. X and saw that he keeps on
If the prosecution will be able to prove that the said chancing women who will passed by and this
accused is a habitual drinker or the said accused women will be irritated. But out of respect of Y,
deliberately take liquor before the consummation of they will only ignore it. Y went to X “Aty. X, pare,
the crime. uwi na tayo. Let me accompany you home.”
However, Atty. X said “No, why will you bring me

- 72 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

home? You invited me here then you will take me INSTIGATION ENTRAPMENT
home? I want to stay.” Y together with 2 guests and the public officer
lifted him up and they were trying to accompany only trap him in the act
him outside. of committing the crime.

Atty. X saw a table knife, he took it and stabbed the EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES
neck of Y. Y was brought to the hospital. It was not Those circumstances which have the effect of lowering
a deep wound or a serious wound. X was arrested. the imposable penalty just like a mitigating
He is prosecuted for attempted homicide. The circumstance.
information filed by the office of the public EXAMPLE: Concealment of dishonor only in crimes
prosecutor alleged the alternative circumstance of infanticide under Art. 255 and intentional
of intoxication and high degree of education. Both abortion under Art. 256 and Art. 258.
the prosecution and the defense were trying to
prove. For the prosecution, that it was aggravating. In case of infanticide, if it is the woman herself who
For the defense, that it was mitigating. Based on kills her child less than three days old or less than 72
the facts, how should the judge appreciate hours, such concealment of dishonor will lower the
intoxication and high degree of instruction and imposable penalty by two degrees. It is an exempting
education? circumstance akin to a privileged mitigating
A: Based on the facts, Atty. X is not a habitual drinker. circumstance.
He did not take liquor subsequent to the plan to
commit a crime. He has no intention to wound Y. It In case of intentional abortion, if it is the pregnant
happened at the spur of the moment. Therefore, his woman herself who expelled the fetus from her womb,
being drunk shall be considered as a mitigating wanting to kill the said fetus in order to conceal her
circumstance. His high degree of education cannot be dishonor. Concealment of dishonor is akin to an
considered as aggravating because it has nothing to do ordinary mitigating circumstance which will lower the
with the act of stabbing Y. X being a lawyer did not imposable penalty by periods.
facilitate the commission of the crime. Therefore, it
cannot be considered an aggravating circumstance. ART. 16: WHO ARE CRIMINALLY LIABLE

ABSOLUTORY CAUSES Article 16. Who are criminally liable. – The

Those circumstances which exempt the offender from following are criminally liable for grave and less
criminal liability but not from civil liability. They are grave felonies:
like exempting circumstances. They will absolve the 1. Principals.
offender from criminal liability. 2. Accomplices.
EXAMPLE: Instigation, desistance in the attempted 3. Accessories.
stage, mistake of fact, accessories in light felonies.
The following are criminally liable for light
Instigation is different from entrapment. felonies:
1. Principals
INSTIGATION ENTRAPMENT 2. Accomplices.
The mens rea or criminal The mens rea or criminal
intent originated from intent originated from Art. 16. The offenders who can be criminally liable for
the mind of the public the offender himself and the commission of a felony - for grave and less grave,
officer. The public the public officer merely the principals, the accomplices and the accessories; for
officer merely lured or devised ways and light felonies, only principal and accomplices, while
induced the offender in means in order to trap the accessories are absolved from criminal liability.
order to commit the and capture him in
crime so that he will flagrante delicto or in PRINCIPALS
have someone to arrest. the actual act of
committing the crime. Article 17. Principals. – The following are
Since the public officer Since it is the offender considered principals:
merely lured the who uttered the 1. Those who take a direct part in the execution
offender, by reason of criminal intent, it will of the act;
public policy, the said not absolve him from 2. Those who directly force or induce others to
offender is not criminal liability. He commit it;
criminally liable. becomes criminally 3. Those who cooperate in the commission of
Instigation absolves his liable. The public officer the offense by another act without which it would
criminal liability. arresting him is not not have been accomplished.
Rather, it is the officer criminally liable
who will be liable as a because the said Who are the principals?
principal by induction. offender uttered and 1. Principal by direct participation – the one who
committed the crime directly commits the crime.

- 73 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

2. Principal by inducement – the one who forces or 1. By profiting themselves or assisting the
induces the other to commit the crime offender to profit by the effects of the crime.
3. Principal by indispensable cooperation – the one 2. By concealing or destroying the body of the
who participates in the commission of the crime by crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in order
another act, without which the crime would not to prevent its discovery.
have been accomplished. 3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the
escape of the principal of the crime, provided the
A principal by direct or participation and by accessory acts with abuse of his public functions or
indispensable cooperation are present at the scene whenever the author of the crime is guilty of
of the crime. Without them, the crime would not have treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to take the
been accomplished. life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other crime.
A principal by induction or inducement may or may
not be present at the scene of the crime. Even if he is While a principal authors the community of criminal
absent at the scene, he can still be liable as principal if design, and an accomplice concurs with the principal’s
the following concur: criminal design, the accessory is not in any way part
a. the inducement must be made directly with of the criminal design. What he knows is that a crime
deliberate intent of procuring the commission of has already been committed by the principal and
the crime; and accomplice. And despite knowledge that a crime has
b. the inducement is the primary reason why the been committed, he takes part subsequent to its
crime has been committed. commission. Therefore, the participation of the
accessory is after the crime has already been
Just like in movies, the mastermind usually does not accomplished and consummated.
appear at the scene of the crime but rather give only
commands. Without the commands, the crime would Art. 19 (1): By profiting themselves or assisting the
not have been committed. offender to profit by the effects of the crime.

ACCOMPLICES Either he directly profited or he assisted the offender

to profit, he is liable as an accessory.
Article 18. Accomplices. — Accomplices are
those persons who, not being included in article 17, This is different from fencing punished under PD
cooperate in the execution of the offense by 1612. Fencing is present when the following elements
previous or simultaneous acts. are present:
1. that a crime of robbery or theft was committed.
Accomplices are those who, without being principals, 2. that the offender who is neither a principal or
cooperate in the execution of the crime by previous or accomplice in the crime of robbery or theft was
simultaneous acts. For one to be liable as an found in the possession of any article, item, object,
accomplice, the following must be present: or anything of value which is the proceeds of
1. there exists a community of design; robbery or theft.
2. the offender performs acts previous or 3. that the offender knows or should have known that
simultaneous with the crime; and the thing in his possession is the proceeds of
3. there is a direct relation between the act of robbery or theft.
the principal and those attributed to an 4. Lastly, there is on the part of the offender intent to
accomplice. gain either for himself or for another.

There is a community of design the moment the said Accessories under Art.
offender concurs with the criminal design authored by 19 (1) Fencing
the principal. That moment he concurs and after The crime committed by It is necessary that the
concurring, he commits previous and simultaneous the principal may crime committed by the
giving assistance to the said consummation of the involve any crime. principal is either
crime which are directly related to the acts done by the robbery or theft.
principal. The law requires that he The law does not
must have actual require that he must
ACCESSORIES knowledge as to the have actual knowledge
commission of the crime of the theft or robbery
Article 19. Accessories. — Accessories are those by the principal and/or committed by the
who, having knowledge of the commission of the the principal. It is the principal and the
crime, and without having participated therein, burden of the State to accomplice. Under
either as principals or accomplices, take part prove such knowledge; Section 12 of PD 1612,
subsequent to its commission in any of the mere presumption will the law creates a prima
following manners: not suffice. facie presumption of
fencing that any person

- 74 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Accessories under Art. individual the law requires that the said
19 (1) Fencing principal:
found in possession of a. must be guilty of treason, parricide,
any article, item or murder, an attempt to take the life of
object of anything of the chief executive, or
anything of value which b. is known to be habitually guilty of
is deposits of robbery or some other crime.
theft, he is liable for
fencing. ACCESSORIES WHO ARE EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL
LIABILITY
EXAMPLE: A very expensive ballpen was lost, which is
found in possession of X. In such a case, X can be Article 20. Accessories Who are Exempt from
charged for the crime of fencing. Criminal Liability. – The penalties prescribed for
accessories shall not be imposed upon those who
Art. 19(2); By concealing or destroying the body of are such with respect to their spouses, ascendants,
the crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted
order to prevent its discovery. brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity within
the same degrees, with the single exception of
It is necessary that the act of concealing or destroying accessories falling within the provisions of
the body of the crime, or the effects or instruments is paragraph 1 of the next preceding article.
for the purpose of preventing its discovery.
NOTE: Although he concealed or destroyed the Requisites of relationship as an exempting
body of the crime, if his purpose is not for the circumstance of the criminal liability of an
purpose of preventing its discovery , then he is not accessory
liable as an accessory under Art. 19(2). 1. The said accessory is related to the principal as a:
a. spouse,
Body of the crime b. ascendants,
- Also called substance or the crime or corpus c. descendants, legitimate, illegitimate or adopted
delicti brothers and sisters or
- Refers to the fact that a crime was committed d. relative by affinity within the same degree,
by someone. 2. The crime that the accessory has committed
pertains to the second and third act of an accessory
Two elements of a body of the crime: under Art. 19
1. Proof of the occurrence of a certain event that NOTE: This exemption will not apply despite
a crime has been committed. a relationship to a relative who will act as an
2. Proof of a person’s criminal responsibility accessory by profiting from the effects of the
therefor. crime. So under the first act of an accessory,
relationship will not absolve the criminal
Art. 19(3); By harboring, concealing, or assisting in liability of the accessory.
the escape of the principal of the crime, provided
the accessory acts with abuse of his public Does it mean that the accessory who committed
functions or whenever the author of the crime is the second and the third act of Art. 19 is totally
guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt absolved from criminal liability?
to take the life of the Chief Executive, or is known A: NO. He is absolved from liability as an accessory
to be habitually guilty of some other crime. under Art. 19, however, he may be prosecuted and
held liable for PD 1829: Obstruction of Justice,
There are two kinds under Art. 19(3), which are because his act of concealing and/or destroying the
either: body of the crime too prevents its discovery, or his act
1. A public officer of assisting the escape of the principal hampers and
If he is a public officer, the crime committed frustrates the arrest of the offender and the
by the principal can be any crime provided investigation and prosecution of the crime. Therefore,
that in his act of harboring or concealing or he can be liable under PD 1829.
assisting in the escape of the principal the said
public officer acted within his public function. PEOPLE v DULAY
The law requires that in doing so, he must G.R. No. 193854, 24 September 2012
have taken advantage of his public position
and function. Dulay was charged as a principal by indispensable
cooperation in the crime of rape.
2. A private individual
If, however the offender who harbors, ISSUE: Whether or not Dulay is guilty in the crime
conceals, or assists in the escape of the of rape as a principal by indispensable cooperation.
principal happens to be a mere private

- 75 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

RULING: NO, he is not a principal by indispensable People v. Gurro People v. Octa

cooperation in the crime of rape. The reasoning Supreme Court, is after
given by the Supreme Court is that the said girl may the commission of the
be brought to Speed not necessarily by Dulay but by crime hence, Gurro was
any person. Supreme Court said that even of only held liable as an
another person brought that girl to Speed, even if accessory to the
the girl presented herself to Speed, he will still be commission of the
raped. Therefore, the act done by Dulay is not crime.
indispensable to consummate the act of raping
the said girl. Q: X was in a restaurant, he smelled marijuana so
X went outside, he was looking for police, he
The Supreme Court held Dulay liable under Section wanted to report that someone was smoking
5(b) of RA 7610 because she acted as a procurer or marijuana inside the restaurant and he found one
pimp of child prostitute. in the carpark, and he told, “Sir, someone is
smoking marijuana inside. Amoy na Amoy!” And so
PROSEC: If you will read the case, you will notice that because go that, police officer Y immediately went
media judgmental dito yung Supreme Court. Inassume inside. Upon entering, police officer Y could
niya na yung bata ay child prostitute. Supreme Court already smell marijuana and they saw these two
said that the child can present herself to Speed and still men, A and B, there, in one of the tables, obviously
rape be committed so in assume ng Supreme Court, engaged in using marijuana in a public place. So
based on evidence that this girl is involved in child police offer Y went to them and told,
prostitution. Sanay siya, business ng bata ang mag “Nagmamarijauan kayo sa public place pa. Wala
engage in prostitution and Dulay only happens to kayoing katakot takot!” and police officer Y held
bring her to Speed. If you will read the case, that is both hands of A and B. Police officer held the left
what the Supreme Court was trying to say because the hands of A and the of hands of B. At that particular
Supreme Court said that this Dulay is a pimp, a moment, A got his knife and then thereafter, he
procurer of child prostitute therefore, Supreme Court stabbed police officer Y. PO Y tried to get his
was saying that the said girl was a child prostitute service pistol as an act of defense. However, B
because it may happen that she will still present restrained the hands of PO Y from getting service
herself to Speed and still Speed will commit the act of pistol. As a result, PO Y was not [ZA1] able to get
rape against her. his service pistol to defend himself and A was able
to repeatedly stab him until PO Y died.
People v. Gurro People v. Octa
Gurro was held liable as Estanley Octa was liable In the commission of the crime, what is the
an accessory. as a co-conspirator. criminal liability of B? Is B a principal by
Excel Gurro was the one The act done by indispensable cooperation or is B an accomplice?
who withdrew from the Estanley Octa is almost
ATM the ransom money the same as the act done A: B is a principal by indispensable cooperation.
and ward it to the by Excel Gurro. Without B’s acts of restraining the hands of the PO Y,
principal in the the PO could have taken, gotten his pistol and he could
commission of the Octa was the man have defended himself and not be killed. At that
crime. wearing red hat on particular moment, an implied conspiracy was
whom the said wife gave between A and B. Although it was A who stabbed the
the ransom money for victim, B showed that he has the same unity of
the release of her purpose, unity of criminal design, that is to kill the
husband. police officer by retraining the hands of the said police
At the time Gurro At the time Octa officer. Therefore, B shall be criminally liable as a
withdrew the money received the money, the principal by indispensable cooperation, a co-
and ward it to the said kidnapped victim conspirator.
principal, the child is was still being held by
already dead. The child the said kidnapper. Q: X, Y and Z wanted to kill W. Brothers X, Y, and Z
has been killed. Kidnapping was wanted to get rid of W. They have this land dispute.
Therefore, the crime has ongoing. X, Y, and Z said this land belongs to them. W said
already been no since said land was inherited by him so they
consummated. have this land dispute and X, Y, and Z wanted to get
rid of W. They went to the place of W, but they did
Nevertheless, Gurro not know where he lives. They knew someone, by
knew its consummation, the name of A and so they went to A and they
still, he withdrew that informed A their intent, they wanted to kill W and
said amount of money since A has also bad blood against W. When X, Y,
so his participation, and Z told A, “Can you draw sketch. We don’t know
according to the where he lives. Can you draw a sketch that will lead

- 76 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

us to his house?” And so A drew a sketch. By reason When the woman looked at the back of the store
of the said sketch, X, Y, and Z was able to determine and she saw that there were already police
the location of the house of W. Upon reaching the officers. Afraid that they were after her, she told
place, they immediately killed W. the owner, “Give me your P50,000. All these pieces
of jewelry are yours.” Then the mother hurriedly
What is the criminal liability of A? Is A principal by left. The store owner was so happy to but a jewelry
indispensable cooperation or is A an accomplice in appraised at P2M and she was only able to buy it at
the commission of the crime? P50,000. However, when she was about to put it in
display, the police arrived. The police said, “The
A: A is mere an accomplice in the commission of the woman who left, what is her name?” The store
crime. A’s act of drawing a sketch in order to locate the owner gave the name as introduced by the said
house of W is not indispensable in the commission of woman. The police officer called the owner of the
the crime. The said act may be done by another person jewelry. The said owner said, “Those were the
and even without the said sketch, X, Y, and Z can find jewelry stolen by my household helper.” The store
a way to determine the house and kill W. Therefore, owner was arrested. What are the criminal
since the act of A is not indispensable to the act of liabilities of X, the mother and the jewelry store
killing, therefore his criminal liability is only that of owner?
accomplice. He is not a principal by indispensable A: X is liable as the principal by direct participation in
cooperation. the crime of robbery. Shee employed force in breaking
the lock cabinet in order to take the valuables stored
Q: X is a domestic helper in the house of Y and Z. Y therein. She was the one who directly executed the
and Z were out for two days. X ransacked the house crime of robbery. Therefore, she is liable as principal
and took valuables from the house. He broke the by direct participation in the crime of robbers.
cabinet and took the valuables therein.
Thereafter, she placed them inside her bag and As for the mother. The first act done by the mother was
hurriedly went home. She told her mother, what to assist. But since the mother is a private person, for
she did. Her mother was shocked. The mother was her to be liable as an accessory under the third act, it
so afraid that her daughter will be arrested by the is necessary that the daughter must be guilty of
police. The moment the said act of stealing was treason, parricide, and murder. In this case, the crime
discovered, the mother knew her daughter will be committed is robbery. Therefore, the mother will not
arrested and the daughter is the only one she has. be liable as an accessory under the third act of Article
The mother told the daughter to go to another 19.
town, to a friend who will harbor her, who will
conceal her. Because of that, the mother called the The next act done by the mother was to conceal the
friend. X went to the friend and indeed she was money. Which is the passage of the said crime, the said
harbored. mother conceals the money by giving it to the friend
saying she won in the lotto. In order to prevent its
Meanwhile, the said mother, who was given the discovery. Therefore, in that case, the said woman is
said money and valuables taken by the daughter. liable as an accessory. However, she is exempted by
The mother hid it under the bed that night. reason of her relationship with her own daughter. She
is the ascendant of her own daughter. Therefore, by
The following morning, the said mother went to a reason of Article 20, she is absolved of criminal
friend and told the friend, “Friend, I won in the liability. However, in both instance she is liable for
lotto. Here is a box of money. Please keep this until violation of PD 1829 Obstruction of Justice.
I arrived. Do not show it to anyone. Baka
makibalato, so please keep this. Only you know On the third act done by the mother, the said mother
that I won in the lotto.” So she gave the said box to sold the jewelry to the store. No matter how little she
the friend. profited from the effects of the crime, she gained
P50,000 from the said jewelry. She is liable as an
Thereafter, she went from one place to another accessory under the first act of Article 19 and this time
until she was able to reach the City of Valenzuela. Article 20 exemption will not lie against.
Upon reaching, she tried to look for a jewelry
store. The jewelry store owner said, “Ma’am these As far as the jewelry store owner is concerned, he is
are real diamonds. Big carats. I don’t think my liable under PD 1612 on Fencing. The elements of
store has the money to buy it. You can go to fencing are present. First, that the crime of robbery or
another jewelry store. I liked it but I do not have theft has been committed. Here, there is robbery.
the money. ” The mother told the said store owner,
“How much money do you have?” The owner said, Second, that the offender who is neither a principal
“It’s early in the morning. I only have here nor an accomplice in the said crime of robbery or theft
P50,000. But your jewelry, will cost about P2M. I is found in possession of any article, item, object of any
don’t have the money, Ma’am. Go to another store.” item of value which is the passage of robbery or
thievery. The store owner was found in possession of
the jewelry which is the passage of robbery.

- 77 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

the house of the friend of General W. Is General W

That the offender knows or should have known that liable as an accessory?
the thing in his possession is passage of robbery or
thievery. He should have known who on heart would A: General W is liable under the 3rd act. He is a public
sell jewelry worth P2 million for only P50,000. Only officer hiding, concealing and assisting in the escape
when the said jewelry are passage of the crime. of his son. Obviously, he took advantage of his public
Therefore, that should have been known to him. Third function and public position. Therefore, he is an
element is present. accessory under the 3rd act.

Last element, there was an intent to gain either for However, he is related to his son. Therefore, the
himself or for another. Obviously, by the said act of exemption of Article 20 applies to it. By reason of
buying shows there is an intent to gain. Therefore, he relationship. But the said father can be held liable for
can be liable for fencing. PD 1829 for Obstruction of Justice.

Q: What if in the same situation. The police officer PENALTY

arrested the moment the owner pointed “those are
my jewelries”. The police officer arrested the store Penalties – punishment imposed by lawful authority
owner. Placed handcuffs on him. In Flagrante upon a person who has committed an intentional
Delicto. He was caught in possession of the stolen felony or a culpable felony.
jewelry. He was boarded on the police officer car.
And then thereafter, they were in Valenzuela City Under Article 21. Only penalties prescribed by law
and the said store owner was brought to Manila, prior to the commission of the crime may be imposed.
where the said act of robber was taken. And there, Otherwise, there would be a violation of the
the said store owner was charged of fencing before Constitutional prohibition against ex post facto laws.
the office of the public prosecutor. The police NOTE: penalties prescribed by law enacted by
officer found the complaint for Fencing, violation Congress. Judges only impose the penalties as
of PD 1612, against the store owner before the prescribed by law in case of conviction. Therefore,
office of the public prosecutor of Manila. Judges cannot go against what the law prescribed
or provided.
What should be the resolution of the fiscal of
Manila? Article 25 lists down the Principal and Accessory
Penalties which may be imposed by the court.
A: The public prosecutor of Manila must dismiss the
case because they do not have the jurisdiction over Article 25. Penalties which may be imposed. - The
the said crime of Fencing. Fencing is not a continuing penalties which may be imposed according to this
or transitory offense. Therefore, fencing can only be Code, and their different classes, are those included
filed on the before the courts where the person was in the following:
found in possession of the said stolen items. The store
owner was found in possession of the stolen jewelry Scale
in Valenzuela City. Therefore, the case of Fencing must Principal Penalties
only be filed before the office of public prosecutor of Capital punishment:
Valenzuela City and it can only be heard by the trial Death.
courts of Valenzuela City. Because it is not a Afflictive penalties:
continuing or transitory offense. According to the SC, Reclusion perpetua,
Fencing is a crime that involves moral turpitude Reclusion temporal,
because Robbery and Thievery are crimes involving Perpetual or temporary absolute
moral turpitude. disqualification,
Perpetual or temporary special
In the case of Ong v. People, the SC said fencing is a disqualification,
crime malum prohibitum. Not a crime malum in se Prision mayor.
because it is a violation special penal law, therefore, Correctional penalties:
criminal intent is immaterial. Prision correccional,
Arresto mayor,
Q: X committed murder, he escaped and went to Suspension,
his father. His father, General W, was the chief PNP Destierro.
of a certain town. The father was shocked when he Light penalties:
saw his son out and escaped. X told his father “help Arresto menor,
me, hide me”. His father used his connections in Public censure.
order to hide his son. However, the authorities Penalties common to the three preceding
went to General W and the authorities were classes:
looking for his son. General W denied having Fine, and
knowledge. But later, based on a tip from a reliable Bond to keep the peace.
informant, it was discovered that X was living in

- 78 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Accessory Penalties
Perpetual or temporary absolute Only death cannot be imposed by reason of RA 9346.
disqualification, The Supreme Court said that if there is disqualification
Perpetual or temporary special disqualification, he should have been sentenced with Death Penalty.
Suspension from public office, the right to vote
and be voted for, the profession or calling. AFFLICTIVE PENALTIES
Civil interdiction,
Indemnification, Article 27. Reclusion perpetua. - Any person
Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and sentenced to any of the perpetual penalties shall be
proceeds of the offense, pardoned after undergoing the penalty for thirty
Payment of costs. years, unless such person by reason of his conduct
or some other serious cause shall be considered by
Two kinds of penalties: the Chief Executive as unworthy of pardon.
1. Principal penalties – prescribed by law and
imposed by the court Reclusion temporal. - The penalty of reclusion
2. Accessory penalties – follow the principal penalties temporal shall be from twelve years and one day to
as a matter of law. Need not be staged in the twenty years.
judgment of the court. Automatically, an accessory
penalty follows the principal penalty to which it Prision mayor and temporary disqualification. -
attaches. The duration of the penalties of prision mayor and
temporary disqualification shall be from six years
Penalty Duration and one day to twelve years, except when the
Reclusion perpetua 20 years and 1 day to 40 penalty of disqualification is imposed as an
years accessory penalty, in which case its duration shall
Reclusion temporal 12 years and 1 day to 20 be that of the principal penalty.
years
Prision mayor and 6 years and 1 day to 12 Reclusion perpetua
temporary years
disqualification Reclusion Perpetua is not the same as Life
Prision correccional, 6 months and 1 day to 6 Imprisonment. Reclusion Perpetua and Life
suspension, years Imprisonment are two separate and distinct penalties
destierro hence the Supreme Court said that they should not be
Arresto mayor 1 month and 1 day to 6 used interchangeably.
months
Arresto menor 1 day to 30 days Reclusion Perpetua Life Imprisonment
Bond to keep the For such period of time as Is a penalty imposed Is a penalty imposed
peace the court may determine. under the RPC prescribed by SPL
Now has a fixed Has no fixed duration
PRINCIPAL PENALTIES duration, under Art. 27
as amended by R.A.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT 7659, it is 20 years and 1
day to 40 years.
Death Penalty Carries with it Has no attached
It is the penalty prescribed by law for heinous crimes accessories penalties accessory penalties
under RA 7659.
EXAMPLE: Qualified Rape. The penalty prescribed Based on these distinctions, it is evident that the two
by law is the death penalty. are separate and distinct penalties and they should
never be used interchangeably.
However, by reason of RA 9346, DP cannot be imposed
at the moment. Even they are found to be guilty Reclusion Perpetua, although it has now fixed
beyond reasonable doubt of those heinous crimes, the duration under Art. 27 as amended by Section 21 of
judge cannot impose the death penalty. According to RA 7659 having 20 years and 1 day to 40 years,
RA 9346, it has to be reduced to Reclusion Perpetua or Supreme Court said that Reclusion Perpetua remains
life imprisonment if it is a violation of RPC, or SPL, to be an indivisible penalty because according to the
respectively SC there is nothing in RA 7659 which shows that the
Congress has the intention to alter, to change the
Under Sec. 3, RA 9346, if the penalty has been reduced nature of RP from Indivisible to Divisible hence it
to reclusion perpetua, the penalty to be imposed shall remains to be an indivisible penalty. Whenever
be reclusion perpetua without the benefit of parole. It Reclusion Perpetua is imposed as a penalty, the
is necessary to state reclusion parole without Judge need not state its duration.
eligibility for parole in order to show that this convict
should have been sentenced with death.

- 79 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Reclusion temporal Prision correcional

Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, the
Under Art. 27, it has a duration of 12 years and 1 day duration of the penalties of prision correccional shall
to 20 years. be from six months and one day to six years.

Disqualifications Arresto mayor

Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, the
Disqualification whether absolute or special can either duration of the penalties of arresto mayor shall be
be perpetual or temporary. Perpetual disqualification from one month and one day to six months.
is effective during the lifetime of the convict and even
after service of his sentence whereas temporary Suspension
disqualification is effective only during the term of the Suspension is both a principal penalty and accessory
sentence and it is removed after service of sentence penalty. If suspension is imposed as a principal
except the right to hold public office or employment penalty, under Art. 27, it is the same duration as prison
and the right to wages and other special benefits correccional which is six months and one day to six
retirement pay for offices previously held. years.

PERPETUAL TEMPORARY If suspension is imposed merely as an accessory

ABSOLUTE ABSOLUTE penalty, it merely follows the duration of the principal
DISQUALIFICATION DISQUALIFICATION penalty to which it attaches.
Effective during the Disqualification lasts
lifetime of the convict during the term of the Destierro
even after the service of sentence, and is Destierro is a penalty which does not involve
the sentence removed after the imprisonment or being placed behind bars. If a person
service of the sentence, is sentenced with destierro he is not placed behind
except: bars or not incarcerated however he is prohibited
1. Right to hold public from entering the places designated in the judgment of
office or employment the court.
2. Loss of Rights to
Wages and other special Therefore, destierro involves deprivation of liberty
benefits and retirement although partial in nature because that person
pay for offices convicted and sentenced with destierro cannot enter
previously held. the place designated in the judgment of the court.

Disqualification, particularly temporary If he enters the said prohibited place, he becomes

disqualification can be imposed either as a principal liable for evasion of service of sentence under Art. 157.
penalty or accessory penalty. If temporary
disqualification is imposed as a principal penalty, Art. 157. Evasion of Service of Sentence. — The
its duration is 6 years and 1 day to 12 years. If penalty of prisión correccional in its medium and
temporary disqualification is imposed as an maximum periods shall be imposed upon any
accessory penalty it merely follows the duration of convict who shall evade service of his sentence by
the principal penalty to which it attaches. escaping during the term of his imprisonment by
reason of final judgment. However, if such evasion
Prision mayor or escape shall have taken place by means of
Prison Mayor under Article 27 has the duration of 6 unlawful entry, by breaking doors, windows, grates,
years and 1 day to 12 years. walls, roofs, or floors, or by using picklocks, false
keys, disguise, deceit, violence or intimidation, or
CORRECTIONAL PENALTIES through connivance with other convicts or
employees of the penal institution, the penalty shall
Article 27. xxx be prisión correccional in its maximum period.
Prision correccional, suspension, and destierro. -
The duration of the penalties of prision LIGHT PENALTIES
correccional, suspension and destierro shall be
from six months and one day to six years, except ARRESTO MENOR
when suspension is imposed as an accessory Under Article 27 of the Revised Penal Code, the
penalty, in which case, its duration shall be that of duration of the penalty of arresto menor shall be from
the principal penalty. one day to 30 days.

Arresto mayor. - The duration of the penalty of PUBLIC CENSURE

arresto mayor shall be from one month and one day Is an indivisible penalty since you cannot put duration
to six months. on a mere reprimand therefore it is indivisible and it
has no fixed duration.

- 80 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

PENALTIES THAT APPLY TO ALL CIVIL INTERDICTION

ART. 26. Fine.- When afflictive, correctional, or ART. 34. Civil Interdiction. — Civil interdiction
light penalty.- A fine, whether imposed as a single shall deprive the offender during the time of his
or as an alternative penalty, shall be considered an sentence of the rights of parental authority, or
afflictive penalty, if it exceeds P1,200,000; a guardianship, either as to the person or property of
correctional penalty, if it does not exceed any ward, of marital authority, of the right to
P1,200,000) but is not less than P40, 000; and a manage his property and of the right to dispose of
light penalty, if be less than P40, 000. such property by any act or any conveyance inter
vivos.
FINE
Is a pecuniary penalty imposed upon a person It is an accessory penalty that follows the principal
convicted of a crime. Fine can be either afflictive, penalty of Death, if it is not executed, and the penalties
correcional, or light. Under Art. 26 as amended by RA of Reclusion Perpetua and Reclusion Temporal.
10951: Therefore, the moment a person is convicted of a
1. Fine is afflictive if it Exceeds P1,200,000. crime and the penalty imposed upon him is Reclusion
2. Fine IS correccional if it is between P40,000 Perpetua, automatically he is civilly interdicted. The
to P1,200,000. law and court need not state it in the Judgment,
3. Fine is light if it is less than P40,000. because automatically civil interdiction follows
reclusion perpetua as the principal penalty.
ART. 35. Effects of Bond to Keep the Peace. — It
shall be the duty of any person sentenced to give If a person is convicted of a crime and sentence with
bond to keep the peace, to present two sufficient Reclusion Perpetua, he is civilly interdicted and
sureties who shall undertake that such person will therefore he is prevented to exercise any of the rights
not commit the offense sought to be prevented, and enumerated under Art. 34 of the RPC. He cannot
that in case such offense be committed they will pay exercise the following rights:
the amount determined by the court in its a. Rights of parental authority;
judgment, or otherwise to deposit such amount in b. Guardianship, either as to the person or
the office of the clerk of the court to guarantee said property of any ward;
undertaking. c. Marital authority,
d. The right to manage his property; and
The court shall determine, according to its e. The right to dispose of such property by any
discretion, the period of duration of the bond. act or any conveyance inter vivos.

Should the person sentenced fail to give the So he is deprived of all these rights under Article 34
bond as required he shall be detained for a period the moment the said offender is sentenced with
which shall in no case exceed six months, if he shall Reclusion Perpetua and Reclusion Temporal because
have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave civil interdiction automatically attaches to Reclusion
felony, and shall not exceed thirty days, if for a light Perpetua and Reclusion Temporal as penalty.
felony.
Q: Usually it is asked, can the said person who is
BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE civilly interdicted prepare a last will and
If imposed on a person convicted of a crime, that testament?
person is required to present two sureties who shall
see to it that he shall appear in court and he shall not A: Yes, a last will and testament although prepared by
commit the crime. If he failed to present these two the testator, there is lifetime or inter vivos, the disposal
sureties, then he shall be detained six months in grave of the property is not during his lifetime but after his
or less grave felonies and 30 days in case of light death or mortis causa therefore he can.
felonies.
Donation may also be made by the offender provided
ACCESSORY PENALTIES that it shall take effect after death or mortis causa.

1. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification, FORFEITURE AND CONFISCATION OF THE

2. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification, INSTRUMENTS AND PROCEEDS OF THE CRIME
3. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and
be voted for, the profession or calling. ARTICLE 45. Confiscation and Forfeiture of the
4. Civil interdiction, Proceeds or Instruments of the Crime. — Every
5. Indemnification, penalty imposed for the commission of a felony
6. Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and shall carry with it the forfeiture of the proceeds of
proceeds of the offense, the crime and the instruments or tools with which
7. Payment of costs. it was committed.

- 81 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Pecuniary Penalties are different from Pecuniary

Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be Liabilities. PL as stated under Article 38 include
confiscated and forfeited in favor of the reparation of damage caused, indemnification of
Government, unless they be the property of a third consequential damages, fine, and costs of the
person not liable for the offense, but those articles proceedings.
which are not subject of lawful commerce shall be
destroyed. Under Article 38, if a convict is imposed with
pecuniary liabilities and he does not have much
Under Article 45, this accessory penalty follows all property and much funds in order to answer for all the
kinds of principal penalties. Whatever be the principal pecuniary liability, Article 38 provides for the order of
penalty imposed on the offender whether it is as high payment therefore, the law requires that those which
as Reclusion Perpetua or as low as Arresto Menor, all must be given to the private complainant must be
the proceeds, all the effects, and all the instruments given priority in payment than those which would go
used in the commission of the crime shall be forfeited. to the State or the Government.

It shall be forfeited in favor of the State EXCEPT if it Q: If X is charged with a crime of homicide. The bail
belongs to an innocent third person. But even if it fixed by the Court is 200,000 pesos and X was a
belongs to an innocent third person, if it is outside the poor man. He has no money to post the said
commerce of men, it has to be destroyed. 200,000 pesos bail. What will happen to him?
A: While his case is ongoing trial, X will be placed
So forfeiture and confiscation of the instruments, behind bars. X will undergo Preventive Imprisonment
proceeds, and effects in the commission of the crime, while his case is ongoing.
it is an accessory crime that follows all kinds of
principal penalties. PREVENTIVE IMPRISONMENT

PAYMENT OF COSTS Preventive Imprisonment is the detention of the

Costs refers to expenses of litigation and costs shall accused while his case is pending trial either because
include fees and indemnities in the course of the the crime, he committed is non-bailable offense and
judicial proceedings, whether they be fixed or evidence of guilt is strong or the crime he committed
unalterable amounts previously determined by law or is a bailable offense but he does not have the money to
regulations in force, or amounts not subject to post the bail fixed by the Court. In order to assure that
schedule. he will not escape, he will be placed in the city jail,
provincial jail or the municipal jail. And the purpose is
As a rule, if a convict or offender, the court will include to prevent him from escaping.
in its judgment that this convict shall pay the costs of
proceedings however if the said accused is acquitted Article 29. Period of preventive imprisonment
of the crime charged, the Court will sate that the cost deducted from term of imprisonment. - Offenders
of proceedings shall be borne by both parties, which is who have undergone preventive imprisonment
the private complainant and the accused. shall be credited in the service of their sentence
consisting of deprivation of liberty, with the full
Q: Who shall pay the cost? time during which they have undergone preventive
imprisonment, if the detention prisoner agrees
A: If an accused is convicted of a crime, cost shall be voluntarily in writing to abide by the same
adjudged against him. However, in case of acquittal, disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted
each party must bear his own loss. prisoners, except in the following cases:
1. When they are recidivists or have been
PECUNIARY LIABILITIES convicted previously twice or more times of any
crime; and
Under Article 25, we have two pecuniary penalties 2. When upon being summoned for the
which are Fine and Cost of Proceedings. execution of their sentence they have failed to
surrender voluntarily.
Article 38. Pecuniary liabilities; Order of
payment. - In case the property of the offender If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide
should not be sufficient for the payment of all his by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon
pecuniary liabilities, the same shall be met in the convicted prisoners, he shall be credited in the
following order: service of his sentence with four-fifths of the time
1. The reparation of the damage caused. during which he has undergone preventive
2. Indemnification of consequential damages. imprisonment.
3. The fine.
4. The cost of the proceedings. Whenever an accused has undergone
preventive imprisonment for a period equal to or
more than the possible maximum imprisonment of
the offense charged to which he may be sentenced

- 82 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

and his case is not yet terminated, he shall be year, when his counsel saw it they immediately
released immediately without prejudice to the filed a petition for habeas corpus moving for the
continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding immediate release of X from jail because
on appeal, if the same is under review. In case the according to his counsel under Art. 29, the
maximum penalty to which the accused may be moment a detention prisoner has undergone
sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after 30 preventive imprisonment for the period equal to
days of preventive imprisonment. the maximum penalty which may be imposed to
the accused, he shall immediately be released
Under Article 29 as amended by RA 10592, the period without the prejudice to the continuation of the
of preventive imprisonment that a detention prisoner trial against him and without prejudice to his
has undergone may be deducted from his final appeal to the cases against him.
sentence. There should be full credit, if the detention
prisoner voluntarily agrees in writing to abide by the The charge was attempted homicide, the penalty
same rules and regulations imposed on convicted for attempted homicide is prision correccional and
felons. There should only be 4/5 credit if the said the maximum is 6 years. The accused has
detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the undergone preventive imprisonment for 6 years.
same rules and regulations imposed on convicted Even if he will be convicted, he will be order to be
felons. released because he has already timed his service,
the said penalty for 6 years. Therefore, the counsel
Article 29 has been amended by RA 10592, the was correct in filing a petition for habeas corpus.
amendment specifies that an effect that disagreement Because of the circumstance, the judge
or non-agreement should be in writing, in a presence immediately granted the said petition for habeas
of a counsel, after his chosen counsel has explained to corpus and X was released.
him the consequences. In case the said detention
prisoner agrees to abide by the same rules and Two weeks thereafter on the next date of trial, the
regulations of the convicted felons, his counsel must judge notice that X was absent during the hearing,
have explained the consequences of his act and it must the Judge asked where is X, the lawyer replied I
always be reduced in writing, in the presence of the lost contact with him and that time he was
said counsel of his choice. In case he does not want to released I could not locate him. The lawyer tried
abide, it must still be in writing, in the presence of his calling him a number of times but no one
counsel after the counsel has explained to him the answered. The lawyer also sent a messenger to his
consequences of his non-agreement. It must be aways house, the lawyer needed to confer to him but
reduced into writing, done in the presence of his however the house is already empty. The lawyer
counsel after the explanation of the consequences. does not know where to find the accused.

Q: X and Y were caught in flagrante delicto by the The judge immediately issued an order of an
wife, while they are engaging in sexual intercourse arrest. The police officers armed with a warrant of
in a scandalous manner. The husband and the arrest issued against X, went his house and it was
concubine was arrested and was placed behind empty. The neighbors said “matagal ng wala,
bars. A charge of concubinage was filed. They are matagal na umalis”. The Police officers tried to
now 30 days behind bars, what should the counsel locate him. After talking from one person to
of concubine do? another, the police officers learned that X has a
sister who was living in another town. The police
A: The counsel of the concubine must immediately file officers went to the said town and true enough, the
a petition for habeas corpus and move for the removal found X in the house of his sister. They served the
of the said concubine from jail. The said concubine warrant of arrest to him and brought X behind
must be immediately released from jail because under bars. Is the said Judge correct in issuing the
Art. 29 as amended. If the maximum penalty warrant of arrest? Did X already served 6 years
imposable is destierro. The said detention prisoner behind bars which is the maximum penalty
must be immediately released after 30 days of imposable on him for attempted homicide?
preventive imprisonment. A penalty for a concubine in
case of concubinage is only destierro. Therefore, she A: The judge is correct. The said warrant issued by the
can only be placed behind bars undergoing preventive judge is called a bench warrant. It is not a warrant for
imprisonment for a period of 30 days. Beyond that he the crime that he has committed. It was a warrant
shall be immediately released without prejudice to the issued because he violated the rules because he has to
continuation of the trial against her. appear in the succeeding hearings of the case.
Therefore, he was placed behind bars based on the
Q: The accused was charged with attempted warrant of arrest not because of the crime that he has
homicide, he is a poor man, he does not have 6,000 committed but because he violated the said rules and
pesos to cost his bail under the MeTC. While his failed to appear.
case of attempted homicide was ongoing trial he
was still behind bars at the city jail. From the time Remember that, even if he was released, he has the
of his arrest up to the date, it was already the 6th obligation to appear in trial because his release does

- 83 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

not mean the termination of his case. It is without Q: X was convicted, the penalty imposed on him
prejudice to the continuation of the trial against him. was arresto mayor and fine. The judge stated
He has still to continue to attend trial. Even if the case therein that in case of insolvency to pay the fine he
is already in appeal, it is not the termination of his shall suffer subsidiary penalty. That was the
case. Even if reached the SC and was convicted, he dispositive portion. X appealed to the CA, the CA
cannot be placed behind bars because he has already affirmed in toto of the decision. X was amenable to
served the maximum sentence. the decision of the CA, he no longer wanted to
appeal to the SC. He then served his sentence. What
SUBSIDIARY PENALTY about the subsidiary penalty? What would be the
basis?
ARTICLE 39. Subsidiary penalty. - If the convict
has no property with which to meet the fine A: The basis would be the highest minimum wage
mentioned in paragraph 3 of the next preceding prevailing in the Philippines at the time the trial court
article, he shall be subject to a subsidiary personal rendered its decision. Not at the time the CA rendered
liability at the rate of one day for each eight pesos, its decision thereafter.
subject to the following rules:
1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision Under Art. 39 as amended, the following are the
correccional or arresto and fine, he shall remain rules in imposing subsidiary penalty:
under confinement until his fine referred in the
preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary Principal penalty Rules on subsidiary
imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the imposed penalty
term of the sentence, and in no case shall it continue Prision He shall remain under
for more than one year, and no fraction or part of a correccional or confinement until his fine is
day shall be counted against the prisoner. arresto and fine satisfied, but his subsidiary
2. When the principal penalty imposed by only a imprisonment shall not
fine, the subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed exceed 1/3 the term of the
six months, if the culprit shall have been prosecuted sentence, and in no case shall
for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed it continue for more than one
fifteen days, if for a light felony. year, and no fraction or part
3. When the principal penalty imposed is higher of a day shall be counted
than prision correccional no subsidiary against the prisoner
imprisonment shall be imposed upon the culprit. Only a fine If prosecuted for a grave or
4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be less grave felony – the
executed by confinement in a penal institution, but subsidiary imprisonment
such penalty is of fixed duration, the convict, during shall not exceed six months
the period of time established in the preceding
rules, shall continue to suffer the same deprivations If prosecuted for a light
as those of which the principal penalty consists. felony – shall not exceed
5. The subsidiary personal liability which the fifteen days
convict may have suffered by reason of his Higher than prision no subsidiary imprisonment
insolvency shall not relieve him from the fine in correccional shall be imposed upon the
case his financial circumstances should improve. culprit.
Not to be executed The convict, during the
Under Art. 39 we have subsidiary penalty, subsidiary by confinement in period of time established in
penalty is imposed on an offender in case fine is a penal institution, the preceding rules, shall
included in his penalty and he happens to be insolvent but such penalty is continue to suffer the same
to pay the fine imposed by the court. of fixed duration deprivations as those of
which the principal penalty
Subsidiary penalty is a penalty in lieu of fine. consists.
Therefore, before an offender made to suffer NOTE: The subsidiary personal liability which the
subsidiary penalty: convict may have suffered by reason of his
a. It is necessary that he was sentenced of a fine insolvency shall not relieve him, from the fine in
b. The said subsidiary penalty must be expressly case his financial circumstances should improve
stated in judgment of the court that in case of
his insolvency to pay a fine he shall suffer NOTE: Subsidiary penalty can only be imposed if the
subsidiary penalty. penalty imposed on the said offender includes fine.
Either fine alone or fine with any of those penalties
The rate is one day imprisonment equals to the highest enumerated in article 39.
minimum wage rate prevailing in the Philippines at
the time of the rendition of judgement by the trial Subsidiary penalty of imprisonment is a substitute
court. penalty for fine in case of insolvency of the accused.
However, it is not automatic that when a convict is

- 84 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

insolvent, he must undergo subsidiary penalty. It is confinement in a penal institution and is without fixed
only imposed if there is an expressed statement of Duration. Therefore, even if X is insolvent to pay the
subsidiary penalty by the court. fine, he cannot be made to suffer subsidiary penalty.

Limitations of Subsidiary Penalty Q: What if X was sentenced with a penalty of fine.

Subsidiary penalty cannot be imposed on the Because of his insolvency to pay the fine, he was
following instances: made to suffer the subsidiary penalty. A month
1. If the judgment of the court did not impose thereafter his financial circumstances improved
fine as a penalty but he has already served the subsidiary penalty.
2. If the judgment of the court did not expressly A month after his release, after suffering, after
state that in case of nonpayment of fine, the being incarcerated because of the subsidiary
convict shall suffer subsidiary penalty imprisonment, he became rich. Can the state still
3. If the principal penalty that goes with fine go after him to pay the fine imposed on him as a
exceeds prision correccional or higher than 6 penalty as provided for under Article 39 as
years amended?
4. If the principal penalty that goes with fine
does not have fixed duration A: Yes. Even if the said offender has already suffered
5. If what the convict thinks to pay is not fine but subsidiary penalty by reason of insolvency. The State
damages and cost. can still go after him to pay the fine imposed on him in
case his financial circumstances shall improve. Based
Q: X was charged and then thereafter convicted by on the facts, a month from his release, his financial
the trial court for the crime of perjury, as circumstances improved therefore, the State can go
amended. And so the judge convicted him and the after him in order to pay the fine already imposed.
judge imposed upon him the penalty of prision
mayor and fine. COMPLEX CRIMES

In the dispositive portion, the judge also stated Article 48. Penalty for complex crimes. – When a
that in case of insolvency of X to pay the fine, he single act constitutes two or more grave or less
shall suffer the subsidiary penalty. Is the judge grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary
correct? means for committing the other, the penalty for the
most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be
A: The judge is wrong. The prinicipal penalty that he applied in its maximum period.
imposed together with fine is prision mayor, It is
higher than prision correctional. It is more than six Two kinds of complex crime:
years. Therefore, even if X is insolvent to pay the fine, 1. Compound Crime - present when the
he cannot be made to suffer the subsidiary penalty. offender performs a single act which
constitutes to two or more grave or less grave
Q: X was charged and the thereafter convicted by felonies.
the Metropolitan trial court of slight physical 2. Complex Crime Proper - present when the
injuries. offense is a necessary means commit the
Penalties imposed are arresto menor and fine. another offense.

The judge stated in case of X’s insolvency to pay the COMPOUND CRIME
fine, he hall suffer subsidiary penalty. Is the judge
correct? There is a compound crime, when a single act
produces two or more grave of less grave felonies.
A: Yes, the Judge is correct, Based on the first rule, if
the principal penalty imposed is at arresto and fine The elements are:
subsidiary penalty shall not exceed 1/3 of the term of a. That the offender performs a single act
the sentence but in no case shall it be more than one b. That the single act produces two or more
year. grave or less grave felonies

Q: X was convicted by the Metropolitan Trial Court If an offender is charged and thereafter convicted of a
for reckless imprudence causing damage to compound crime, the penalty for the most serious
property. crime in its maximum period shall be the one imposed.
It is beneficial to the accused. Instead of being charged
Penalty imposed on him fine and public censure. and convicted of different counts and be given
In the dispositive portion, the judge stated in case multiple sentences, he is charged only and convicted
of X’s insolvency to pay the fine, he shall suffer of one crime. A complex crime and he will be imposed
subsidiary penalty. Is the judge correct? only with one penalty. It is for the most serious crime
in its maximum period.
A: The judge is wrong. The principal penalty imposed
together with fine is not to be accepted by

- 85 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

In the case of People vs Nelmida, the Supreme Court perpetrators of the crime armed with high powered
said the basis of a compound crime is singularity of act firearms and all of them peppered with bullets the said
not singularity of impulse. Therefore, it is necessary convoy. Therefore, a number of bullets came out from
for a compound crime to rise, that the offenders the different barrels of the gun. The SC said, there are
performs a single act and the said single produces two as many crimes committed as there are persons killed.
or more grave or less grave felonies. In this case, it is The moment there are many perpetrators and
the singularity of act. Singularity of impulse is not different bullets came out from the barrels of many
written in the law. guns, there are as many crimes committed as there are
persons killed or wounded. The SC convicted each one
Q: Family of X vs Family of Y. Influential, political of the accused with two counts of murder and seven
families. One of the members of the family of Y counts of attempted murder, imposing upon them
dared try to molest a granddaughter of the family multiple sentences, not just a single sentence but
of X. Of course, the family of X was mad. They multiple sentences. So, each of them are convicted of
wanted to get even. One night. X went to the said two counts of murder and seven counts of attempted
house of Y. Seeing that the window was open, X murder.
threw a grenade inside the said house in the said
window. The grenade exploded. As a result, Y, his In the case of People v. Tabaco, the Supreme Court
wife, his 3 children and the 3 helpers died. What said that if the weapon used is a high powered
crime/s is/are committed by X? machine gun, high powered submachine gun, M 16
rifle M 14 rifle high powered firearms such that by one
A: X committed 7 acts of murder. But since these 7 acts pull of the trigger, different bullets will come out.
of murder were a product of a single act of throwing a Supreme Court said you do not take into consideration
grenade, he should only be charged with one crime. It the singularity of pulling the trigger. What you take
is only based on one Information and it is the complex into consideration is the number of bullets that come
crime of multiple murder. So, People v. X for the out that killed and wounded people. In that case, there
complex crime of multiple murder. The said single act are as many crimes committed as there as many
produces 7 grave felonies. 7 murders so it will be persons killed or wounded.
multiple murder.
In the case People vs Punzalan, Punzalan was charged
Q: What if in the same problem when X threw a with double murder with multiple attempted murder.
grenade on the said window. The grenade The SC said Punzalan is correctly charged and
exploded. Y died, His wife died, their 3 children convicted of the complex crime of double murder with
sustained fatal wounds but survived. The two multiple attempted murder. The SC said Punzalan
helpers sustained non-fatal wounds and of course performed a single act, stepping on the accelerator of
they survived. What crime/s should be filed his vehicle, turning to the right and ramming over the
against X? Navy personnel resulting to two deaths and the
wounding of others. Hence, the Supreme Court said
A: X performed a single act and these single produces since Punzalan performed a single act, he is correctly
seven grave felonies. Two murders, three frustrated charged and convicted of double murder with multiple
murders, two attempted murders. Therefore, X shall attempted murder. Compound crime under Art. 48
be prosecuted based on one information with a applies.
complex crime of double murder with multiple
frustrated murder and double attempted murder. COMPLEX CRIME PROPER

In the case of People vs Nelmida, they ambushed There is a complex crime proper when an offense is a
Mayor Tawan Tawan. The moment the convoy passed necessary means to commit the other offense.
by Nelmida and Ricardo Ajok peppered with bullets
the said convoy of Mayor Tawan tawan. As a result, The elements of complex crime proper are:
two of the police escorts died, five others were a. There be two or more offenses that one or more of
wounded, two were unhurt and another police escort the offenses is a necessary means to commit the
was unhurt. other;
b. That the same offense is punished by the statute
When Nelmida, Ajok their cohorts were arrested, they
were charged with a complex run of double murder, When an offense is a necessary means to commit the
with multiple frustrated murder and double other, the Supreme Court said the phrase necessary
attempted murder. RTC convicted, CA affirmed. When means to commit the other doesn’t mean that an
it reached the SC, the SC said, no. They are not liable offense is indispensable to commit the other. It only
for a complex one, because article 14 does not apply. means that an offense is necessary to facilitate the
commission of the crime of another offense.
SC says Article 48 does not apply, because article 48
applies only if there is singularity of act done by an Q: X wanting to rape Y, forcibly abducted Y against
offender. In this case, the Supreme Court said based on the will of Y, at the outset there was lewd design.
the facts and evidence, there were several And he brought Y in a secluded place, and there he

- 86 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

had carnal knowledge of Y by employing violence the proper charge is estafa because the falsification
and force. of private documents is merely incidental.

A: X is liable of forcible abduction or rape through But if estafa cannot be committed without falsifying
forcible abduction. The Forcible Abduction was a the private document, the proper charge is
necessary means in order to commit, to consummate falsification of private documents because estafa is
the crime of rape. a mere consequence.

BATULANON vs. PEOPLE That is the rule on what is to be charged, according

G.R. 139857; 15 September 2006 to the Supreme Court.

In one of the cases assigned to you. In the case of So in that case, in so far as the three non-
People v. Batulanon. There are many issues in this cooperative members are concerned, Batulanon
case. Batulanon was an agent of the Polomolok was held liable for three counts of falsification of
Cooperative and then, she issued cash vouchers, private documents because without the falsification
allegedly, for persons obtaining loans, including her of the cash voucher, estafa cannot be committed. So,
son but in reality this persons have no right to she was convicted of three counts of falsification of
obtain the loan from the said cooperative. And so, private documents. In so far as her son is concerned,
he was charged with four counts of Estafa through she was convicted of estafa because the falsification
falsification of commercial documents. of said cash voucher was merely incidental.

First issue: Is a cash voucher a commercial Aside from these two crimes under Art. 48, we have a
document? compound crime or complex crime, and we have the
The Supreme Court said, the CA is correct. Supreme complex crime proper. We have a third kind of
Court said, the Court of Appeals is correct in saying complexity of crime and that is known as the special
that a cash voucher is not a commercial document. complex crime.
A cash voucher is not a commercial document
because it is not defined and regulated by any SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME
commercial or mercantile law. So the Supreme
Court said, the CA is correct in saying that a cash A special complex crime is one where in reality, the
voucher is a mere private document. offender committed two or more crimes, but in the
eyes of the law there is only one crime committed.
So, since a cash voucher is a mere private document,
does it mean that the crime to be charged and the In case of a special complex crime, it is the law that
crime to which Batulanon will be convicted would combines the crime, and it is the law that provides for
be Estafa through falsification of private a particular specific penalty for these combined
documents? The Supreme Court said no because crimes.
there is no such crime. Supreme Court said, you
cannot complex estafa with falsification of private Example of a special complex crime:
documents because these two crimes require 1. Special complex crime of robbery with
damage as elements. Estafa without damage cannot homicide under Art. 294: When by reason or on
be Estafa. Falsification of private documents occasion of robbery the crime of homicide is
without damage, without injury, cannot be committed. The law provides for a specific penalty
falsification of private documents. Both theses two reclusion perpetua to death
crimes require as elements, damage, prejudice, or 2. Special complex crime of kidnapping with
intent to cause damage, without that the crime will homicide Under Art. 67: When the victim is killed
not be consummated. or dies as a consequence of the kidnapping or
detention. The prescribed penalty is death.
So since according to the Supreme Court, both
Estafa and falsification of private documents So, it is the law that combines the crimes, and the law
require damage as elements, you cannot complex provides for a specific particular penalty for these
them because a person cannot be convicted twice combined crimes.
for the said damage. Hence, the Supreme Court said,
there is no such crime as estafa through falsification Special Complex Complex Crime
of private documents. Crime Proper
The law specifies the Crimes are general
So, what should be the charge? Should it be crimes which are
Estafa? Should it be falsification of private combined
documents? Law provides for the The penalty for the most
penalty serious crime is
According to the Supreme Court, if Estafa can be imposed in the
committed without falsifying the private document, maximum period

- 87 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Special Complex Complex Crime those tasked to sell the units. X has sold many
Crime Proper units. One time X was in need of money. He could
Light felonies are Light felonies not borrow from anyone and so, Sunday morning
absorbed committed is a separate he decided to go to this condominium building. He
and distinct charge went five unit owners, on whom he was the one
who told them to buy from this company. He
CONTINUOUS CRIME (DELITO CONTINUADO) represented to them (unit owners A, B, C, D, and E)
that he was now the one entrusted by the
We have a fourth kind of complexity of crimes. The corporation to collect their monthly payments,
fourth kind of complexity of crimes is the so-called their monthly installment of P20,000 each. This A,
continued crime or delicto continuado, which is also B, C, D, and E believed. Although in truth the said
called continuous crime. company never authorized X in order to get their
NOTE: The bar examiner may use different names. monthly installments. So, these five unit owners
It could be continued crime, delicto continuado, believed and they gave X P20,000, their monthly
or continuous crime, they mean one and the same. installments. When X was asked of the official
receipt, X said that the moment that he had
Going back, when you say special complex crime the remitted the money, it was the time the company
bar examiner may call a special complex crime as will give the Official Receipts.
a single indivisible offense or a composite crime,
one and the same. Special complex crime also They believed and gave P20,000 each to X. X
known as composite crime, also known as a single however, never remitted the money to the said
indivisible offense. The other one is continued crime company. When this was discovered, the 5 unit
also known as delicto continuado, also known as owners filed a case of estafa under Art. 315 2(a),
continuous crime. They are one and the same. against X. Five counts, A, B, C, D, and E. So, they filed
five cases of estafa under Art. 315 2(a) against X.
A continued crime is one where in the offender The case was filed before the Office of the Public
impelled by a single criminal impulse, commits a Prosecutor.
series of overt acts in about the same time, in about the
same place, violated one and same provision of the If you were the investigative public prosecutor,
law. would you indict X as charged, 5 counts of Estafa
by means of false pretense under Art. 315 2(a)?
So, if in case of a compound crime under Art. 48, the
base is singularity of act. In case of a continued crime A: No. It should only be one count of estafa. It is a
or delito continuado, the basis is singularity of impulse. continued crime or delicto continuado. X was impelled
The offender is impelled by a singular criminal by a single criminal impulse to deceive these 5 unit
impulse, and he committed a series of overt acts, in owners. He committed a series of overt acts when he
about the same time, in about the same place, violating took P20,000 from each of them. In about the same
one and the same provision of the law. time, in about the same place, violating one and the
same provision of the law. Art. 315 2(a) estafa by
SANTIAGO vs. GARCHITORENA means of false pretense. Therefore, he should be
G.R. L-109266; 02 December 1993 indicted only of one count of estafa. Under Art. 315
2(a) because it is a continued crime or delicto
So, according to the Supreme Court in the case of continuado.
People v. Garchitorena, in the case of Santiago v.
Garchitorena, the following are the elements of a Q: What about the other owners?
delito continuado:
1. there must be plurality of acts. A: All of them are included in the body of the
2. there must be unity of the penal provision information, that he was able to deceive A, B, C, D and
violated. E and so, the civil liability will belong to all of them. All
3. there must be unity of criminal intent and of them will get their particular civil liability if proven.
purpose. Only this affects the criminal liability instead of being
prosecuted for five counts and, therefore, imposed
If these elements are all present, there is continued with multiple sentences, it will only be one charge
crime. It is beneficial to the accused, because imposed only with one sentence. It is beneficial on the
instead of being prosecuted for each of the act part of the said offender.
committed by him, he shall be prosecuted only of
one crime, and only one penalty shall be imposed on CONTINUING CRIME/TRANSITORY OFFENSES
him. But of course, the civil liability will be on the
different offended party or different victims. We have discussed four forms of complexity of crimes.
The last kind is more on remedial law but this has also
Q: There was this high-rise condominium building been asked in criminal law once. We have the so-called
being almost finished along Ortigas. X was among continuing crime, otherwise known as transitory
offenses.

- 88 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

nakapagtataka. Tingnan ninyo.” Because of that,

Not all crimes are continuing. Not all crimes are the said police officers of Valenzuela, together
transitory offenses. Examples of transitory offenses or with the owner of the tricycle, went to Meycauayan
continuing crimes: treason, rebellion, evasion of police station and X immediately identified, “That
service of sentence, estafa by postdating a check under is my tricycle. That was the tricycle taken by Y.” He
Art 215 (2)(d), kidnapping and serious illegal showed all the evidence showing that that is his
detention, carnapping, violation of BP 22. These are tricycle.
just some examples of continuing or transitory
offenses wherein the offender can be prosecuted Because of that, Y was arrested and was charged
before the courts of the place where any of the with carnapping before the office of the public
elements of the crime happened. Provided, the prosecutor of Meycauayan. The case went into
moment that he is already charged in one court, he can trial. The RTC of Meycauayan, Bulacan convicted X
no longer be charged with the same offense in another of carnapping. Case went into the CA. CA affirmed
court. the conviction. When the case reached the SC, case
dismissed.
Q: In payment of his obligation, X issued a check to
Y in Manila. Y deposited the check to his A: The Court of Meycauayan, Bulacan has no
depositary bank in QC. The drawee bank in jurisdiction to hear and try the case. SC said that
Mandaluyong dishonored the check. Notice of although carnapping is a transitory or continuing
dishonor was sent to X. He did not make good of offense, it is still necessary that all the elements of the
the check despite the lapse of five banking days. crime must take place in any of these places.
Where should Y file the case against X?
In this case, the SC said that none of the elements of
A: Y can file the case either before the MTC of Manila carnapping took place in Meycauayan, Bulacan. The
where the issuance of the check occurred or before the elements of carnapping, that there be actual taking of
MTC of QC where the check was deposited or before motor vehicle. It took place in the public market of
the MTC of Mandaluyong where the check was Venezuela. The act of taking the motor vehicle must
dishonored. In any of the courts of these places where belong to another person. It belongs to X who was in
the elements of the crime happened. Venezuela. The act of taking must be done with intent
to gain. The act of taking with intent to gain was done
X is a tricycle driver in the public market of in Venezuela. Lastly, the taking was done without the
Venezuela City. His tricycle was in the public consent of the owner or with violence against or
market toda. So, nakapila siya. His tricycle was the intimidation of persons or by use of force upon things.
first in line at the time and here comes a The taking was done in Venezuela.
passenger. However, at that particular moment,
his wife called and his wife is asking him SC said none of the elements of carnapping took place
immediately to buy something from the public in Meycauayan, Bulacan. Meycauayan Court has no
market. He was torn between bringing this jurisdiction to hear and try the case. Therefore, case
passenger to his place of destination or obeying dismissed. Pagkahaba-haba ng panahon bago
his wife in buying something from the public nakarating sa SC, cased dismissed pala. Sayang yung
market. pera. Sayang yung lahat ng efforts, money, all the time
involved because no jurisdiction to hear the case. In
Another tricycle driver by the name of Y saw his the end, the SC dismissed the case. It is necessary that,
dilemma. Because of that, Y told X , “X, sige na. although it is a transitory or continuing offense, the
Bilhin mo na yung utos ni misis. Ako na ang case may only be filed before the courts of the place
magdadala sa pasahero mo, sa tricycle mo. Ako where any of the elements of the crime happened.
na.” So, X was grateful to Y. The passenger boarded
the tricycle of X and Y brought the passenger to his ARTS. 50-57: PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED
place of destination. However, Y never returned
the tricycle of X. X looked for his tricycle. The Article 50. Penalty to be imposed upon principals
tricycle was never returned by Y. He looked at the of a frustrated crime. - The penalty next lower in
house of Y. It was empty. X, failing to find his degree than that prescribed by law for the
tricycle and failing to find Y, had him blottered. consummated felony shall be imposed upon the
principal in a frustrated felony.
The police officers helped him in looking for his
lost tricycle but to no avail. They could not find the Article 51. Penalty to be imposed upon principals
tricycle. A month thereafter, the police station of of attempted crimes. - A penalty lower by two
Venezuela City received a call coming from the degrees than that prescribed by law for the
police station of Meycauayan, Bulacan. The police consummated felony shall be imposed upon the
of Meycauayan told the PNP of Valenzuela, “Di ba principals in an attempt to commit a felony.
may na carnap sa inyong tricycle?” Venezuela
police said yes. Meycauayan police said, “Meron Article 52. Penalty to be imposed upon
ditong tricycle binebenta, murang mura accomplices in consummated crime. - The penalty

- 89 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for

the consummated shall be imposed upon the Article 56. Penalty to be imposed upon
accomplices in the commission of a consummated accomplices in an attempted crime. - The penalty
felony. next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for
an attempt to commit a felony shall be imposed
Article 53. Penalty to be imposed upon upon the accomplices in an attempt to commit the
accessories to the commission of a consummated felony.
felony. - The penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall Article 57. Penalty to be imposed upon
be imposed upon the accessories to the commission accessories of an attempted crime. - The penalty
of a consummated felony. lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law
for the attempted felony shall be imposed upon the
Article 54. Penalty to imposed upon accomplices accessories to the attempt to commit a felony.
in a frustrated crime. - The penalty next lower in
degree than prescribed by law for the frustrated Article 58. Additional penalty to be imposed upon
felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in the certain accessories. - Those accessories falling
commission of a frustrated felony. within the terms of paragraphs 3 of Article 19 of this
Code who should act with abuse of their public
Article 55. Penalty to be imposed upon functions, shall suffer the additional penalty of
accessories of a frustrated crime. - The penalty lower absolute perpetual disqualification if the principal
by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the offender shall be guilty of a grave felony, and that of
frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the absolute temporary disqualification if he shall be
accessories to the commission of a frustrated guilty of a less grave felony.
felony.

Crime committed Principals Accomplices Accessories

Consummated crime The penalty prescribed by penalty next lower in penalty lower by two
law for the offense degree than that degrees than that
prescribed by law for the prescribed by law for the
consummated (Art. 52) consummated felony (Art.
53)
Frustrated crime next lower in degree than penalty next lower in penalty lower by two
that prescribed by law for degree than prescribed by degrees than that
the consummated felony law for the frustrated prescribed by law for the
(Art. 50) felony (Art. 54) frustrated felony (Art. 55)
Attempted crime penalty lower by two penalty next lower in penalty lower by two
degrees than that degree than that degrees than that
prescribed by law for the prescribed by law for an prescribed by law for the
consummated felony (Art. attempt to commit a attempted felony. (Art. 57)
51) felony (Art. 56)

From Art. 50-57, the law provides for the penalty to be What if the felony is in the frustrated stage?
imposed in case of a frustrated felony, in case of an
attempted felony, if the offender is a mere accomplice, A: Frustrated homicide. You go one degree lower from
if the offender is a mere accessory. reclusion temporal. It will be prision mayor.

Let us say the crime committed is homicide under What if the felony is in the attempted stage?
Art. 249. The penalty for homicide is reclusion
temporal. That reclusion temporal prescribed by A: You go two degrees lower from reclusion temporal.
law for homicide can only be imposed in the It will be prision correccional.
principal of homicide and can only be applied in a
consummated homicide. What if the offender is a DIVISIBLE/INDIVISBLE PENALTIES
mere accomplice?
When you say degree of penalty, it is the penalty
A: You go one degree lower from reclusion temporal. prescribed by law and imposed by the Court in case of
We have prision mayor. conviction. It can either be divisible or indivisible
penalties.
What if the offender is a mere accessory?
When you say period of penalty, it is the subdivision
A: You go two degrees lower from that of reclusion of a divisible penalty into three periods. The first one-
temporal. It would be prision correccional. third portion is known as the maximum period. The
second one-third portion is known as the medium

- 90 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

period. The last one-third portion is known as the d. If there are both mitigating and aggravating
minimum period. Only divisible periods can be divided circumstances present in the commission of the
into minimum, medium and maximum periods. crime, you offset the two and then, apply the
rules.
INDIVISIBLE PENALTIES
DIVISIBLE PENALTIES
Indivisible penalties, having no fixed duration cannot
be divided into these periods. Hence, they cannot be Article 64. Rules for the application of penalties
divided into periods which contain three periods. - In cases in which the
EXAMPLES: death, reclusion perpetua, perpetual penalties prescribed by law contain three periods,
absolute disqualification, perpetual special whether it be a single divisible penalty or composed
disqualification, public censure. These are some of three different penalties, each one of which forms
examples of indivisible penalties.. a period in accordance with the provisions of
Articles 76 and 77, the court shall observe for the
Article 63. Rules for the application of indivisible application of the penalty the following rules,
penalties. - In all cases in which the law prescribes a according to whether there are or are not mitigating
single indivisible penalty, it shall be applied by the or aggravating circumstances:
courts regardless of any mitigating or aggravating 1. When there are neither aggravating nor
circumstances that may have attended the mitigating circumstances, they shall impose the
commission of the deed. penalty prescribed by law in its medium period.
In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty 2. When only a mitigating circumstance is
composed of two indivisible penalties, the following present in the commission of the act, they shall
rules shall be observed in the application thereof: impose the penalty in its minimum period.
1. When in the commission of the deed there is 3. When an aggravating circumstance is present
present only one aggravating circumstance, the in the commission of the act, they shall impose the
greater penalty shall be applied. penalty in its maximum period.
2. When there are neither mitigating nor 4. When both mitigating and aggravating
aggravating circumstances and there is no circumstances are present, the court shall
aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall reasonably offset those of one class against the
be applied. other according to their relative weight.
3. When the commission of the act is attended 5. When there are two or more mitigating
by some mitigating circumstances and there is no circumstances and no aggravating circumstances
aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall are present, the court shall impose the penalty next
be applied. lower to that prescribed by law, in the period that it
4. When both mitigating and aggravating may deem applicable, according to the number and
circumstances attended the commission of the act, nature of such circumstances.
the court shall reasonably allow them to offset one 6. Whatever may be the number and nature of
another in consideration of their number and the aggravating circumstances, the courts shall not
importance, for the purpose of applying the penalty impose a greater penalty than that prescribed by
in accordance with the preceding rules, according law, in its maximum period.
to the result of such compensation. 7. Within the limits of each period, the court
shall determine the extent of the penalty according
The law provides for the rules for the imposition of to the number and nature of the aggravating and
indivisible penalties. Under Art. 63, the following are mitigating circumstances and the greater and lesser
the rules for the imposition of indivisible penalties: extent of the evil produced by the crime.
1. If the penalty prescribed by law is a single
indivisible penalty, it shall be imposed regardless Under Art. 64, the following are the rules for the
of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances; imposition of divisible penalties:
2. If the penalty prescribed by law consist of two 1. If the commission of the crime is attended by no
indivisible penalties, you consider the following mitigating and no aggravating circumstances, the
rules: penalty shall be in its medium period;
a. If an aggravating circumstance attended the 2. If the commission of the crime is attended by one
commission of the crime with no mitigating, the mitigating with no aggravating circumstance, the
greater penalty shall be the one imposed; penalty shall be in its minimum period;
b. If only a mitigating circumstance attended the 3. If the commission of the crime is attended by one
commission of the crime with no aggravating aggravating with no mitigating circumstance, the
circumstance, the lesser of the two indivisible penalty shall be in its maximum period;
penalty shall be the one imposed; 4. If the commission of the crime is attended by both
c. If there are no mitigating, no aggravating mitigating and aggravating circumstances, then,
circumstance present in the commission of the you offset the two and apply the rules;
crime, the lesser of the two indivisible penalty
shall be the one imposed; and
- 91 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

5. If there are two or more mitigating circumstances If these are present, that prisoner can apply for parole
with no aggravating circumstance, lower the and he should be granted parole.
penalty by one degree in its proper period.
EXAMPLE: The former husband of Senator Loren
NOTE: When there are two or more mitigating Legarda who was charged with homicide was granted
circumstances with no aggravating circumstance, parole.
lower the penalty by one degree, it is known as a
special mitigating circumstance because its effect is to Disqualifications under the ISLaw:
lower the penalty by one degree in its proper period. The following persons are disqualified to be given an
The moment that there is so called privilege mitigating indeterminate sentence:
circumstance, apply it first before computing the 1. Persons convicted of offenses punished with
penalties. life-imprisonment or reclusion perpetua;
2. Convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal
INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW (ISLaw) to commit treason;
3. Convicted of misprision of treason, rebellion,
Whenever we talk of Article 61, we relate it Act 4103, sedition or espionage;
as amended, otherwise known as the Indeterminate 4. Convicted of piracy;
Sentence Law (IS Law). 5. Those who are habitual delinquents;
6. Those who have escaped from confinement or
The IS Law modified the imposition of penalties under evaded sentence;
the RPC and under Special Penal Laws. 7. Those who having been granted conditional
pardon by the Chief Executive shall have
Under the IS Law, the courts are mandated to provide violated the terms thereof;
for the maximum term of the sentence and a minimum 8. hose whose maximum term of imprisonment
term of the sentence. does not exceed one year, not to those already
sentenced by final judgment at the time of
What is the purpose? approval of this Act, except as provided in
So that the moment the offender has already served Section 5 hereof.
the minimum term of the sentence, he becomes
eligible for parole. He need not serve the entire These are the persons who will be imposed with
sentence behind bars. He can be immediately released straight penalties. They cannot be given indeterminate
the moment he has served the minimum term of the penalties. Therefore, there is no way they can go in
sentence. parole.

Bar Q: What is the purpose of the IS Law? And how Since they are disqualified to be given an
is this purpose achieved? indeterminate sentence, what sentence should be
The following are the objectives of the Indeterminate given them?
Sentence Law;
1. Uplift and redeem valuable human material; A: They shall be given a straight penalty.
2. Avoid unnecessary and excessive deprivation
of liberty. What is the difference between an indeterminate
sentence and a straight penalty?
These objectives are achieved when the moment the
offender becomes eligible to apply for parole and he A: An indeterminate sentence has a maximum term
may be able to serve sentence out of jail. and a minimum term. The moment the offender has
served the minimum term, he can apply for parole.
What is parole?
Parole is the conditional release of a prisoner after A straight penalty has no maximum term and
conviction and after serving the minimum term of his minimum term. Therefore, there is no way that
sentence and after he has found to have reformed. offender can avail of parole. He will serve the entire
sentence, the entire straight penalty.
Requisites for the grant of parole:
1. It is necessary that the offender is serving an X was found guilty. The prosecution was able to
indeterminate sentence and exceeds 1 year. prove that he is a habitual delinquent. The judge
2. It is necessary that he has already served the has to impose a straight penalty. He cannot be
minimum term of this sentence. given an indeterminate sentence. X was convicted
3. The board of pardons and parole found that based on the evidence. He is a recidivist, a quasi-
he has already reformed and that upon his recidivist, or he is a habitual criminal reiteracion.
release, he will be a law abiding citizen and Can he be given an indeterminate sentence?
that his release will not be inconsistent with
the interest and welfare of the state. A: Yes. Only a habitual delinquent is disqualified.

- 92 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

X was serving his sentence at the bilibid. He saw an Situation 1:

opportunity and escaped. 2 years thereafter he Presence of Maximum Minimum
was found. He was charged with evasion of service AC and MC Penalty term
of sentence. After trial on the merits, he is found No AC; No MC Reclusion Prision mayor
guilty. Can he be given indeterminate sentence? Temporal in its in its medium
medium period
A: No. He is one of those disqualified. period

X was convicted. Malakas ang tatay. He was In order to get the maximum term of the sentence, take
granted by the president conditional pardon. But, into consideration the penalty prescribed by law,
upon release, he violated certain conditions of the which is reclusion temporal. Under Article 64, if there
said pardon. Thus, he was charged with evasion of are no mitigating and no aggravating circumstance,
service of sentence by violation of condition of the penalty will be in its medium period. Therefore,
pardon. Convicted. Can he given indeterminate reclusion temporal in its medium period shall be the
sentence? maximum term of the sentence.

A: No because a violation of condition of pardon is How do you get the minimum term of the
among those disqualified from indeterminate sentence?
sentence. Under Act 4103, as amended, the minimum term is the
penalty lower by one degree and the range depends on
X was convicted of rape. Penalty imposed was the sound discretion of the court. Since the maximum
reclusion perpetua. Can he be given indeterminate term of the sentence is in the medium period, let us
sentence? make prision mayor in the medium period. Therefore,
the minimum term of the sentence is prision mayor in
A: No because he is among those disqualified as the its medium period.
penalty imposed upon him is reclusion perpetua.
So, the court will rule finding the accused guilty
How do you compute the penalties? How do you beyond reasonable doubt of homicide. He is hereby
compute the maximum and minimum term of the sentenced to suffer a penalty, the minimum sentence
sentence? of which is prision mayor in its medium period to
reclusion temporal in its medium period as the
A: To get the maximum term of the sentence, you take maximum term of the sentence.
into consideration the penalty prescribed by law and
the rules provided for under Article 64 as to the Situation 2:
presence of mitigating and aggravating circumstances. Presence of Maximum Minimum
AC and MC Penalty term
To get the minimum term of the sentence, you go 1 No AC; 1 MC – Reclusion Prision mayor
degree lower from the maximum term of the sentence. voluntary Temporal in its in its minimum
In going 1 degree lower, you should no longer consider surrender minimum period
mitigating and aggravating circumstances. period

What if the crime committed is a violation of To get the minimum term of the sentence, again you
special penal law? lower it by one degree, that is Prision Mayor.

A: If the crime committed is a violation of special penal The range depends upon the sound discretion of the
law, the penalty, the indeterminate sentence court since the maximum term is in the minimum
maximum must not exceed the maximum prescribed period, the minimum term of the sentence also in its
by law, and the minimum must not be less than the minimum period. Therefore, the minimum term is
minimum prescribed by law. Prision Mayor in its minimum period.

EXAMPLE: Illegal possession of dangerous drugs. 12 Situation 3:

years and 1 day to 20 years. The judge can impose a Presence of Maximum Minimum
penalty anything in between provided it must not AC and MC Penalty term
exceed 20 years and must not be less than 12 years 1 AC - Reclusion Prision mayor
and 1 day. dwelling; No Temporal in its in its
MC maximum maximum
HOMICIDE = RECLUSION TEMPORAL period period

Let us say that X committed a crime of homicide. X What if X killed Y inside his dwelling. Therefore,
killed Y. The penalty for homicide under Article 249 is there is one Aggravating circumstance of dwelling,
reclusion temporal. no mitigating circumstance attended the

- 93 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

commission of the crime. How do you get the The said act of killing was not attended by any
indeterminate sentence? Aggravating Circumstance but there were two
mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender
A: First, we get the penalty prescribed by law that is and praeter intentionem. How do you get the
Reclusion Temporal. Under art. 64, if there is one penalty?
Aggravating then no mitigating, the penalty shall be in
its maximum period. That is the maximum term of the A: You take into consideration the crime prescribed by
sentence, to get the minimum term of the sentence, law in homicide which is Reclusion Temporal. Under
you lower it by 1 degree which shall be Prision Mayor Article 64, 5th paragraph, when there is no
and the term will depend on the sound discretion of aggravating circumstance but there are two or more
the court. Since the maximum term is in its maximum mitigating circumstances, you lower the penalty by
period, let us make the minimum term also in the one degree, this is called special mitigating
maximum period. circumstance.

Therefore it will be, Prision mayor in its maximum It is special mitigating circumstance because it lowers
period as the minimum term of the sentence. the penalty, not just by period, but by one degree. So
Reclusion Temporal because of the special mitigating
Situation 4: circumstance becomes prision mayor in its medium
Presence of Maximum Minimum period because no modifying circumstance is left
AC and MC Penalty term which is the maximum term of the sentence.
1 AC - Reclusion Prision mayor
dwelling; 1 MC Temporal in its in its medium To get the minimum term of the sentence, you lower
– voluntary medium period by one degree that is prison mayor, the range depends
surrender period on the sound discretion of the court. Since the
maximum term is in the medium period, I will make
Let us say that when X killed Y, again he was the minimum term also in the medium period.
charged with the crime of Homicide, the killing Therefore, the minimum term will be, prison
took place inside the dwelling of the victim. After correccional in its medium period.
killing, X surrendered to the police authorities. So
we have one aggravating circumstance of dwelling Situation 6:
and one mitigating circumstance of voluntary Presence of Maximum Minimum
surrender. How do you get the indeterminate AC and MC Penalty term
sentence? No AC; 3 MC – Prision mayor Prision
voluntary in its minimum correccional in
A: Under article 64, when there are mitigating and surrender, period (one its minimum
aggravating circumstance, what will you do? You praeter degree lower, period
offset the two, and then you apply the rules. So you intentionem special MC)
offset the Aggravating circumstance of dwelling with and passion or
the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. obfuscation
After offsetting, no mor modifying circumstances
attended the commission of the crime. Therefore, it What if, the said act of killing was not attended by
should be Reclusion Temporal in its medium period. any aggravating circumstance but three mitigating
circumstances were alleged in court.
That is the maximum term of the sentence. To get the
minimum term of the sentence, you lower by one You take into consideration the crime prescribed by
degree that is prison mayor, the range depends on the law in homicide which is Reclusion Temporal. Under
sound discretion of the court. Since the maxmimum Article 64, 5th paragraph, when there is no
term is in the medium period, I will make the aggravating circumstance but there are two or more
minimum term also in the medium period. Therefore, mitigating circumstances, you lower the penalty by 1
the minimum term will be, Prison mayor in its medium degree, this is called special mitigating circumstance.
period. You only need 2 mitigating circumstance to appreciate
the special mitigating circumstance.
Situation 5:
Presence of Maximum Minimum But there remains one more mitigating circumstance.
AC and MC Penalty term
No AC; 2 MC – Prision mayor Prision What is the effect of the third mitigating
voluntary in its medium correccional in circumstance?
surrender and period (one- its medium
praeter degree lower, period A: It means that the penalty shall be in its minimum
intentionem special MC) period. We have here, Prision Mayor in its minimum
period which is the maximum term of the sentence.

- 94 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

To get the minimum term of the sentence, you lower Situation 8:

by 1 degree that is prison correccional, the range Presence of Maximum Minimum
depends on the sound discretion of the court. Since the AC and MC Penalty term
maximum term is in the minimum period, I will make 1 AC - Reclusion Prision mayor
the minimum term also in the minimum period. dwelling; 4 MC Temporal in its in its minimum
Therefore, the minimum term will be, Prison mayor in – voluntary minimum period
its minimum period. surrender, period
praeter
Situation 7: intentionem,
Presence of Maximum Minimum passion and
AC and MC Penalty term obfuscation
No AC; 4 MC – Prision mayor Prision and
voluntary in its minimum correccional in intoxication
surrender, period (one its minimum
praeter degree lower, period What if, the said act of killing was attended by 1
intentionem, special MC) aggravating circumstance and four mitigating
passion and circumstances were alleged in court.
obfuscation
and A: You offset 1 AC with 1 MC, after offsetting, there
intoxication remains 3 more MC. Therefore, the penalty shall be in
its minimum period.
What if, the said act of killing was not attended by
any aggravating circumstance but 4 mitigating Special MC will only apply when there is no AC. Even if
circumstance were alleged in court. in this case there are 4 MC, you cannot reduce the
penalty by 1 degree because here is the presence of 1
A: You take into consideration the crime prescribed by AC as stated in par. 4 of Art. 64.
law in homicide which is Reclusion Temporal. Under
Article 64, 5th paragraph, when there is no NOTE: Despite the number of MCs, the penalty cannot
aggravating circumstance but there are two or more be reduced by 1 degree. The Special MCs do not apply
mitigating circumstances, you lower the penalty by 1 when there is an AC.
degree, this is called special mitigating circumstance.
You only need 2 mitigating circumstance to appreciate Situation 9:
the special mitigating circumstance. But there remains Presence of Maximum Minimum
two more mitigating circumstance of passion or AC and MC Penalty term
obfuscation and intoxication. PMC: RT less 2 degrees - PMC (Art. 69)
Incomplete = PC less one degree (Special MC)
Are you going to lower it by another degree? Self Defense - = AM medium period - straight
UA + Lack of penalty
A: The answer is no. You can not lower the penalty two SP
times, only once based on special mitigating 2 OMC: VS +
circumstance. PI

So, what is the effect? ISLAW does not apply to those whose maximum
term of imprisonment does not exceed 1 year
A: There are two more mitigating circumstance, which
means that it shall be in its minimum period. Since two elements of Self Defense are present, there
is PMC. We have 2 ordinary MC.
To get the minimum term of the sentence, you lower
by one degree that is prison mayor, the range depends The moment you see a privilege mitigating
on the sound discretion of the court. Since the circumstance, it takes preference over all other things.
maximum term is in the minimum period, I will make Therefore, since there is a privilege mitigating
the minimum term also in the minimum period. circumstance of Incomplete Self-Defense, you lower
Therefore, the minimum term will be, prision the penalty. How Many degrees?
correccional in its minimum period.
Under Art.69, if majority of the elements are present,
Note: The Special mitigating circumstance can only be you lower it by 2 degrees. Therefore, from Reclusion
appreciated once. The penalty can only be reduced by Temporal, lower it to Prision Mayor, and then, to
one degree, regardless of the number of mitigating Prision Correccional. 2 Degrees because of the
circumstances. The other remaining MC shall only be incomplete mitigating circumstance of self-defense,
taken so as to reduce the penalty to its minimum incomplete self-defense.
period.

- 95 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

And, after lowering it to 2 degrees (Prision

Correccional), there are 2 Ordinary Mitigating Under the Supreme Court Administrative Circular 15-
Circumstances, with No Aggravating Circumstance: 08-02, released on Aug. 4, 2015, the Supreme Court
you apply Art.64, Par.5, Special Mitigating said that, in cases where death penalty is imposable,
Circumstance, when there are 2 or more mitigating but the same is reduced to reclusion perpetua because
with no aggravating. Lower it by one degree, so of RA9346, the phrase “without eligibility for parole”
Arresto Mayor. This is the maximum term of the shall be used to qualify reclusion perpetua in order to
sentence. Arresto Mayor in its Medium Period because emphasize that the accused should have been
we have considered already all mitigating sentenced to suffer the death penalty had it not been
circumstances. You can no longer lower it in order to for RA9346, which prohibits the imposition of death
get the minimum term of the sentence. penalty. Therefore, in this case, the penalty for death
shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua but without the
Reason: Arresto Mayor is a penalty which does not benefit of parole as provided for under Sec.3 of
exceed 1 year, so the ISLAW does not apply. Hence, X’s RA9346 in relation to the Supreme Court
penalty will be a straight penalty of Arresto Mayor in Administrative Matter.
its Medium Period. The ISLAW does not apply to those
whose maximum term of imprisonment does not C. MURDER QUALIFIED WITH TREACHERY =
exceed one year. RECLUSION PERPETUA TO DEATH (Two
indivisible penalties)
ILLUSTRATIONS ART. 63: INDIVISIBLE PENALTIES
Presence of AC and MC Penalty
A. SIMPLE RAPE = RECLUSION PERPETUA No AC; No MC Reclusion perpetua
(The lesser penalty)
Q: What if the crime committed is Simple Rape? No AC; 1 MC – voluntary Reclusion perpetua
The penalty for simple rape is reclusion perpetua, surrender (The lesser penalty)
which is a single indivisible penalty. The said act of 1 AC – evident Death (the greater
X of raping the woman was attended by 2 premeditation; No MC penalty) but reduced to
mitigating circumstances – voluntary surrender Reclusion perpetua
and voluntary plea of guilt. However, there was the without eligibility for
aggravating circumstance of nighttime because he parole under Section 3.
took advantage of the darkness of the night, in RA 9346
order to rape the said woman. 1 AC – evident Offset, then:
premeditation; 1 MC – Reclusion perpetua
How do you compute the penalty? voluntary surrender (The lesser penalty)
No AC; 2 MC – voluntary Reclusion perpetua
A: The penalty should be as is – Reclusion Perpetua, surrender and (The lesser penalty
because under Art.63, if the penalty prescribed by law voluntary plea of guilt
is a single indivisible penalty, it shall be imposed
regardless of any mitigating or aggravating Situation: The crime committed by X is Murder
circumstances. Therefore, the moment the penalty Qualified by Treachery. The penalty prescribed for
prescribed by law is a single indivisible penalty like Murder under Art. 248 is reclusion perpetua to
reclusion perpetua, you do not consider any mitigating death. Reclusion Perpetua is indivisible. Death
or aggravating circumstances. The penalty shall be Penalty is indivisible. Therefore, the penalty for
imposed as is there is reclusion perpetua. murder consists of 2 indivisible penalties. In the
act of killing, murder qualified by treachery, there
B. QUALIFIED RAPE = DEATH was no aggravating circumstance, no mitigating
circumstance. What penalty would you impose?
Q: What if the crime committed is qualified rape?
Under Art.266-B. The father raped his own A: Under Art.63, if there’s no mitigating and no
daughter. The daughter was a minor. It was proven aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty,
that they are biological father and daughter reclusion perpetua, should be the one imposed.
relationship. Under Art.266-B, Par.1, minority and
relationship are special aggravating circumstance Q: What if the act of killing was not attended by any
which qualify the penalty to death. So we have aggravating circumstance, but the offender
qualified rape, the prescribed penalty by law is voluntarily surrendered, therefore, there’s 1
death penalty. What should be the penalty to be mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender.
imposed by the Court? What penalty shall you impose?
A: The penalty prescribed by law is death, but you A: Under Art.63, the lesser penalty, which is reclusion
cannot impose death penalty by reason of R.A.9346. perpetua shall be the one imposed.
Under Sec.3 of RA9346, you have to reduce the penalty
to reclusion perpetua without the benefit of parole.

- 96 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Q: What if X’s act of killing Y was attended by 1 Presence of Maximum Minimum

aggravating circumstance of evident AC and MC Penalty term
premeditation with no mitigating circumstance. voluntary plea
The Supreme Court said, if both treachery and of guilt
evident premeditation attended the commission No AC
of the crime, treachery qualifies the killing to
murder and evident premeditation shall be Q: What if the crime committed is simple rape. The
considered as a mere generic aggravating penalty for simple rape is reclusion perpetua, a
circumstance. How do you get the penalty? single indivisible penalty. The offender was a
minor. He was only 17 years old, and he acted with
A: Under Art.63, if there is 1 aggravating with no discernment. And there were 2 mitigating
mitigating, the greater penalty death shall be the one circumstances. He voluntary surrendered and
imposed. However, you cannot imposed death penalty voluntarily pleaded guilty. There was no
by reason of RA9346. Therefore, it has to be reduced aggravating circumstance. What penalty would
to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole as you impose?
provided for under Sec.3 of RA9346.
A: The penalty for simple rape is the single indivisible
Q: What if the murder, X act of killing Y resulting to penalty of reclusion perpetua. Therefore, under
Murder qualified by Treachery was also attended Art.63, if the penalty prescribed by law is a single
by the aggravating circumstance of evident indivisible penalty, you do not take into consideration
premeditation and the mitigating circumstance of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances, except,
voluntary surrender. What penalty would you when the mitigating circumstance present is a
impose? privilege mitigating circumstance like minority.
Because a privilege mitigating circumstance takes
A: Under Art.63, if there is 1 aggravating and 1 preference over all other things. Hence, in this case,
mitigating circumstances, you offset the 2 and then even if Art.63 provides that a single indivisible penalty
apply the rules. Therefore, you offset the generic shall be imposed as is, when there is a privilege
aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation mitigating circumstance, it can defeat that rule.
with the ordinary mitigating circumstance of Therefore, from reclusion perpetua, you lower it by
voluntary surrender. After offsetting the 2, you apply one degree to reclusion temporal. From an indivisible
the rules, no more aggravating , no more mitigating, penalty governed by Art.63, it is now a divisible
therefore, the lesser penalty reclusion perpetua shall penalty governed by Art.64 in relation to ISLAW. So
be the one imposed. you lower it, it becomes reclusion temporal, now a
divisible penalty.
Q: What if the said act of murder was not attended
by any aggravating circumstance, but there are 2 There are two mitigating, with no aggravating. Under
mitigating circumstances. X immediately Art. 64, these are considered special mitigating
surrendered and X immediately pleaded guilty to circumstance which you lower the penalty to one
the crime of murder. What penalty shall be degree, therefore we have prision mayor. You already
imposed? considered everything. Nothing is left. No modifying
circumstances left, therefore, it will be Prision Mayor
A: The lesser penalty which is reclusion perpetua. in its Medium Period, that is the maximum term of the
Even if there are 2 mitigating circumstances of sentence.
voluntary surrender, and there’s no aggravating
circumstance, the rule provided for in Art.64 for To get the minimum term of the sentence, you lower it
special mitigating circumstance does not apply in case by one degree, prision correccional. The range
of Art.64. Therefore, the fact that there are 2 depends on the sound discretion of the Court. Since
mitigating with no aggravating would only mean the the maximum term is in the medium period, I make the
lowering of the penalty, which is the lesser penalty, minimum term also in the medium period. So the
reclusion perpetua. minimum term of the sentence is Prision Correccional
in its Medium Period.
D. SIMPLE RAPE with Minority as a privilege
mitigating circumstance = RECLUSION ILLISTRATIONS ART. 64: DIVISIBLE PENALTIES
PERPETUA
DIRECT ASSAULT with HOMICIDE (Art. 48 –
Presence of Maximum Minimum penalty for the most serious crime in its maximum
AC and MC Penalty term period) = RECLUSION TEMPORAL
1 PMC – RP – 1 degree Prision
minority = RT – 1 period correccional in
2 MC – = PM in its its medium
voluntary medium period
surrender and period
- 97 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Presence of Maximum Minimum degree. Prision Correcional. The range depends upon
AC and MC Penalty term the sound discretion of the court. I also make it the
No AC; 1 MC - RT in its PM in its maximum period. That is the minimum term of
voluntary maximum maximum sentence.
surrender period period
1 PMC – RT – 1 degree PC in its Q: How do you get the Indeterminate Sentence in
minority, 1 = PM in its maximum case of Special Penal Laws?
OMC – maximum period
voluntary plea A: Under Act. 4103, if the said SPL does not have the
of guilt same nomenclature as that of the RPC, the maximum
term of the sentence shall not go beyond the penalty
Q: What if the crime committed by the offender is prescribed by law and the minimum term shall not be
a complex crime. X committed a crime of direct less than that prescribed law. But, if the penalty
assault with homicide. It is a complex crime. Under prescribed in the SPL has the same nomenclature of
Art.48, in case of a complex crime, the penalty for that of the RPC, you consider the rules provided for in
the most serious crime in its maximum period the RPC.
shall be the one imposed. So, in this case, what is
the most serious crime? Q: X was found in possession of .02 grams of shabu.
Under Section 11 of R.A. 9165, if the shabu found
A: Homicide is the most serious crime. The penalty in in possession of the accused is less than 5 grams,
homicide in its maximum period shall be the one the penalty is 12 years and 1 day to 20 years. He
imposed. Reclusion Temporal. was proven guilty. How do you get the penalty, if
you are the judge convicting him?
Q: Let us say that the act of killing was not attended
with any aggravating circumstance but with one A: The penalty should be anywhere between 12 years
mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender. and 1 day to 20 years. It should not be less than 12
How do you get the penalty for direct assault with years and 1 day and it should not be more than 20
homicide? years. Therefore, if I were the judge, I would impose
12 years and 1 day as the minimum term of sentence
A: Homicide is the most serious crime. The penalty in and 14 years and 8 months as the maximum term of
homicide in its maximum period shall be the one sentence. It is not less than the minimum term
imposed. Reclusion Temporal. What about the prescribed by law and it is not more than the
mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender? You maximum term prescribed by law.
do not consider it, because the moment it is a complex
crime under Art. 48, the maximum period of the most Q: X was found in possession of an unlicensed
serious penalty shall be the one imposed. Therefore, firearm. There is illegal transfer of firearms.
you do not consider mitigating circumstances. Under Section 41 of R.A 10591, in case of illegal
Therefore, it is Reclusion Temporal in its maximum transfer of firearms, the penalty is prision
period. To lower the penalty by one degree, Prision correcional.
Mayor, the range depends upon the sound discretion
of the court. I make it the maximum period because the A: Therefore, it has the same nomenclature of the RPC.
maximum term of a sentence is also the maximum. Hence, in order to get the indeterminate sentence, you
Prision Mayor in its maximum period. This will be the take into consideration the rules provided for under
minimum term of the sentence. the RPC. The said illegal transfer of firearms is prision
correcional. No mitigating and aggravating, it shall be
Q: This time the crime of direct assault with in its medium period. That is the maximum term of the
homicide was committed by a 17-year-old minor sentence. To get the minimum term of sentence, you
and he immediately pleaded guilty. How do you get lower it by one degree. Arresto mayor, the range
the penalty for the complex crime? depends on the sound discretion of the court. I make it
also the medium period. That is the minimum term of
A: You take the penalty for the most serious crime in the sentence.
its maximum period. Homicide - Reclusion Temporal.
There’s one privileged mitigating and one ordinary SUCCESSIVE SERVICE OF SENTENCE
mitigating. Since there is a privileged mitigating
circumstance of minority, it should be considered first Art. 70. Successive service of sentences. — When
before the rules in Art. 48. Therefore, Reclusion the culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he
Temporal should be lowered by one degree because of shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the
the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority. It penalties will so permit; otherwise, the following
now becomes Prision Mayor and under Art. 48, it is the rules shall be observed:
maximum period. Therefore, the minimum sentence is
Prision Mayor in its maximum period. To get the In the imposition of the penalties, the order of
minimum term of the sentence, you lower it by one their respective severity shall be followed so that

- 98 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

they may be executed successively or as nearly as

may be possible, should a pardon have been THREE-FOLD RULE
granted as to the penalty or penalties first imposed,
or should they have been served out. Under Art. 70, in case of successive service of sentence,
there is a limitation. The said limitation is called the
For the purpose of applying the provisions of Three-fold Rule. Under the three-fold rule, the
the next preceding paragraph the respective maximum duration of a convict shall not exceed three
severity of the penalties shall be determined in times the length of the most severe penalty, but in no
accordance with the following scale: case to exceed 40 years.
1. Death,
2. Reclusion perpetua, Q: X was charged with 11 counts of unjust vexation.
3. Reclusion temporal, All 11 Information were filed in the MTC. After the
4. Prision mayor, merits of the case, the MTC judge found X guilty of
5. Prision correccional, all 11 counts of unjust vexation. The judge
6. Arresto mayor, convicted X of 11 days of arresto menor for each
7. Arresto menor, count of unjust vexation. How shall he serve the
8. Destierro, sentence?
9. Perpetual absolute disqualification
10. Temporal absolute disqualification. A: If there is no application of the three-fold rule.
11. Suspension from public office, the right to 11counts of unjust vexation times 11 days, he will be
vote and be voted for, the right to follow a serving the sentence for 121 days or 4 months. That is
profession or calling, and without application of the three-fold rule. But, if you
12. Public censure. apply the three-fold rule, you take into consideration
the most severe penalty, which is 11 days. The most
Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next severe penalty shall be multiplied by 3 because the law
preceding, the maximum duration of the convict's provides the maximum duration of sentence shall not
sentence shall not be more than threefold the length exceed 3 times the length of the most severe penalty.
of time corresponding to the most severe of the Therefore, 11 times 3, 33 days. Hence, applying the
penalties imposed upon him. No other penalty to three-fold rule, instead of serving sentence for 4
which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the months, he will only be serving for 33 days or 1 month
sum total of those imposed equals the same and 3 days. That is the effect of the three-fold rule.
maximum period.
Q: X killed 3 persons (A, B, and C). He also inflicted
Such maximum period shall in no case exceed a fatal wound on D, but D survived because of
forty years. immediate medical intervention. Therefore, X was
charged with 3 counts of homicide and one count
In applying the provisions of this rule the of frustrated homicide. The RTC judge found X
duration of perpetual penalties shall be computed guilty as charged. For 3 counts of homicide, the
at thirty years. RTC imposed upon X, 15 years of reclusion
temporal per count of homicide. In case of
Q: A convict was given multiple sentences. The frustrated homicide, the judge imposed upon X, 10
father raped his daughter 5 times. He was charged years of prision mayor. How shall X serve these
with 5 counts of rape. The daughter was 25 years multiple sentences?
old and the father had carnal knowledge with his
own daughter. The judge imposed upon him the A: If we will not apply the three-fold rule, we have 3
penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count of counts of homicide (15years x3 = 45) and then we’ll
rape. How should the father serve the sentence of have 1 count of homicide, weh have 10 years. X shall
5 reclusion perpetua? be serving 55 years behind bars. Applying the three-
fold rule, you take into consideration the most severe
A: Under Art. 70, if the convict is imposed with penalty. Therefore, X shall be serving 55 years behind
multiple sentences. He shall served them bars but let us apply the 3-Fold Rule. Applying the 3-
simultaneously or sabay sabay. That is if the nature of Fold Rule you take into consideration the most severe
the penalty allows simultaneous service of sentence. penalty. The most severe penalty shall not exceed 3
Penalties which can be served simultaneously for times the length of the most severe penalty therefore,
example are imprisonment and fine, imprisonment (15 x 3= 45 years). Is he going to serve 45 years? No,
and suspension, imprisonment and civil interdiction, because under Art. 70, the 3-Fold Rule shall not exceed
they can be served at the same time, but if the 40 years. The maximum duration of the convict
penalties are all imprisonment, the offender cannot sentence shall not exceed 3 times the length of the
serve it at the same time. The offender has only one most severe penalty but in no case to exceed 40 years.
body he cannot be placed in 5 different detention cells. Therefore, the limit is 40 years. Hence, since applying
He shall serve the penalty Art. 70 successively or the 3-Fold Rule, it is still beyond 40 years. He will be
sunod sunod. only serving 40 years behind bars. That is the limit.

- 99 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Barangay on the ground that the latter was

PROBATION convicted by final judgment of the crime of
Arbitrary Detention and was sentenced to suffer
The Probation Law has been amended R.A. 10707. So, imprisonment of Four (4) Months and One (1) Day
R.A. 10707 is the new Probation Law that has to Two (2) Years and Four (4) Months by the
amended P.D. 968. Regional Trial Court, Branch 28 of Catbalogan,
Samar on August 27, 1998.
Probation is a disposition under which a person after
having been convicted and sentenced is released Moreno filed an answer averring that the petition
subject to conditions imposed by the court and the states no cause of action because he was already
supervision of a probation officer. granted probation. Allegedly, following the case of
Baclayon v. Mutia, the imposition of the sentence of
Probation has the following purposes: imprisonment, as well as the accessory penalties,
1. To promote the correction and rehabilitation of was thereby suspended. Moreno also argued that
an offender; under Sec. 16 of the Probation Law of 1976
2. To provide an opportunity for the reformation (Probation Law), the final discharge of the
of a penitent offender; probation shall operate to restore to him all civil
3. To prevent further commission of crimes; rights lost or suspended as a result of his conviction
4. To decongest the jails; and to fully discharge his liability for any fine
5. To save the Government funds which will be imposed. The order of the trial court dated
incurred if that person is placed behind bars. December 18, 2000 allegedly terminated his
probation and restored to him all the civil rights he
Probation is not a matter of right. It is a mere privilege. lost as a result of his conviction, including the right
Not all persons can avail of the benefit of probation. to vote and be voted for in the July 15, 2002
elections.
DISQUALIFICATIONS
The following are disqualified to avail probation; ISSUE: WON Moreno be disqualified from running
1. Those whose maximum term of imprisonment for Punong Barangay after having placed under
is more than 6 years; probation.
2. Those who have been convicted of subversion
and crimes against national security; RULING: No. The resolution of the present
3. Those who have previously been convicted by controversy depends on the application of the
final judgment of an offense punished by phrase "within two (2) years after serving
imprisonment of more than six (months and sentence" found in Sec. 40(a) of the Local
one day and/or a fine of more than P1,000. Government Code, which reads:
4. Those who have already availed the benefit of Sec. 40. Disqualifications. – The following persons
probation; are disqualified from running for any elective local
5. Those who have perfected an appeal from position: (a) Those sentenced by final judgment for
judgment of conviction; an offense involving moral turpitude or for an
6. Those convicted of an election offense under offense punishable by one (1) year or more of
the Omnibus Election Code; imprisonment, within two (2) years after serving
7. Those convicted of drug trafficking or drug sentence; [Emphasis supplied.]
pushing;
8. Those who filed a malicious report that a In Baclayon v. Mutia, the Court declared that an
person is committing a violation of Anti-money order placing defendant on probation is not a
laundering law and was convicted because of sentence but is rather, in effect, a suspension of the
such malicious filing. imposition of sentence. We held that the grant of
probation to petitioner suspended the imposition of
NOTE: Probation can only be availed once. the principal penalty of imprisonment, as well as
the accessory penalties of suspension from public
MORENO v. COMELEC office and from the right to follow a profession or
G.R. NO. 168550, August 10, 2006 calling, and that of perpetual special
disqualification from the right of suffrage. We thus
Crime Charged: Disqualification from running for deleted from the order granting probation the
Punong Barangay on the ground of conviction paragraph which required that petitioner refrain
COMELEC 1st Division: Disqualified from continuing with her teaching profession.
COMELEC En Banc: Disqualified (basis is Sec. 40 of
the LGC) Applying this doctrine to the instant case, the
SC: NOT Disqualified accessory penalties of suspension from public
office, from the right to follow a profession or
FACTS: Norma L. Mejes (Mejes) filed a petition to calling, and that of perpetual special
disqualify Moreno from running for Punong disqualification from the right of suffrage, attendant

- 100 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

to the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum special statute, will ordinarily not affect the special
period to prision correccional in its minimum provisions of such earlier statute.
period imposed upon Moreno were similarly
suspended upon the grant of probation. Probation is not a matter of right. Since it is a matter
of privilege, even if the offender is not among those
It appears then that during the period of disqualified based on the enumeration earlier, the
probation, the probationer is not even moment the court deems it proper that the said
disqualified from running for a public office application for probation must be denied, then he
because the accessory penalty of suspension cannot be granted probation. The ground for denial for
from public office is put on hold for the duration the application of probation depends on the sound
of the probation. Clearly, the period within discretion of the trial court that heard the case.
which a person is under probation cannot be
equated with service of the sentence adjudged. Q: Where do you apply an application for
Sec. 4 of the Probation Law specifically provides probation?
that the grant of probation suspends the
execution of the sentence. During the period of A: You apply an application for probation before the
probation, the probationer does not serve the court that heard the case and convicted the accused.
penalty imposed upon him by the court but is
merely required to comply with all the Q: When should you file an application for
conditions prescribed in the probation order. probation?
Those who have not served their sentence by
reason of the grant of probation which, we reiterat A: the application for probation must be filed within
e, should not be equated with service of sentence, the period for perfecting an appeal.
should not likewise be disqualified from running for
a local elective office because the two (2)-year Section 4. Grant of Probation. Subject to the
period of ineligibility under Sec. 40(a) of the Local provisions of this Decree, the court may, after it
Government Code does not even begin to run. shall have convicted and sentenced a defendant and
upon application at any time of said defendant,
The fact that the trial court already issued an order suspend the execution of said sentence and place
finally discharging Moreno fortifies his position. the defendant on probation for such period and
Sec. 16 of the Probation Law provides that "[t]he upon such terms and conditions as it may deem
final discharge of the probationer shall operate to best.
restore to him all civil rights lost or suspended as a
result of his conviction and to fully discharge his Probation may be granted whether the sentence
liability for any fine imposed as to the offense for imposes a term of imprisonment or a fine only. An
which probation was granted." Thus, when Moreno application for probation shall be filed with the trial
was finally discharged upon the court's finding that court, with notice to the appellate court if an appeal
he has fulfilled the terms and conditions of his has been taken from the sentence of conviction. The
probation, his case was deemed terminated and all filing of the application shall be deemed a waiver of
civil rights lost or suspended as a result of his the right to appeal, or the automatic withdrawal of
conviction were restored to him, including the right a pending appeal.
to run for public office. It is important to note that
the disqualification under Sec. 40(a) of the Local An order granting or denying probation shall
Government Code covers offenses punishable by not be appealable.
one (1) year or more of imprisonment, a penalty
which also covers probationable offenses. In spite Q: If probation is granted, what is the effect?
of this, the provision does not specifically disqualify
probationers from running for a local elective office. A: As stated by the SC in the case of Moreno v.
This omission is significant because it offers a COMELEC, and as provided for under Sec. 4 of P.D. 968
glimpse into the legislative intent to treat as amended by R.A. 10707, the effect of probation is to
probationers as a distinct class of offenders not suspend the execution of the sentence and nothing
covered by the disqualification. more.

Probation Law should be construed as an exception Under Sec. 4 of P.D. 968 as amended by R.A. 10707, it
to the Local Government Code. While the Local is provided that the court may, after it shall have
Government Code is a later law which sets forth the convicted and sentenced a defendant for a
qualifications and disqualifications of local elective probationable penalty and upon application by the
officials, the Probation Law is a special legislation defendant within the period for perfecting an appeal,
which applies only to probationers. It is a canon of suspend the execution of the sentence and place the
statutory construction that a later statute, general defendant on probation for such period and upon such
in its terms and not expressly repealing a prior terms and conditions as the court may deem best.
Therefore, clearly under Sec. 4 of P.D. 968 as amended,
- 101 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

the only effect of probation is to suspend the execution the decision and imposed upon him a maximum
of the sentence. He shall be placed under probation for penalty of 6 years, a probationable penalty. So, now,
a period and upon such terms and conditions as the based on the decision in Colinares v. People put into
court may deem best. law under RA 10707, amending Sec. 4 of PD 968, X can
now go back to the trial court and apply for
Q: What if X was charged with a crime of frustrated probation— because it is only the appellate court that
homicide after trial on the merits, the judge found granted him a probationable penalty. Therefore, he
X guilty of frustrated homicide and the judge can now apply for probation.
imposed upon X because of the mitigating
circumstance – may privileged mitigating Q: But, what if in the same problem, X was
circumstance, may special mitigating convicted of frustrated homicide— maximum
circumstance. So the maximum penalty imposed penalty imposed by the RTC, 8 years. He appealed
by the court on X who has been convicted of to the CA. The CA downgraded the crime only to
frustrated homicide is 6 years maximum of prision attempted homicide and imposed upon him a
coreccional. X appealed to the CA. In his appeal to maximum penalty of 6 years, probationable
the CA, CA downgraded the crime of X only to penalty. But he did not apply for probation,
attempted homicide and imposed upon him a instead, X appealed further to the Supreme Court.
maximum penalty of 4 years. Can he go back to the The Supreme Court convicted X of the same
trial court and apply for probation? charge— attempted homicide. However, the
Supreme Court downgraded the crime to only 4
A: No. He cannot go back to the trial court and apply years imprisonment. Can X go back to trial court
for probation. Under Sec. 4 of P.D. 968 as amended, no and apply for probation?
application for probation shall be entertained or
granted if the defendant has perfected an appeal from A: No, X cannot go back to the trial court and apply for
a judgment of conviction. In this case, X was convicted probation.
by the trial court of frustrated homicide and he was
imposed of the penalty of 6 years. 6 years is a Under Sec. 4 of PD 968, as amended by RA 10707, it
probationable penalty. When instead of applying for was provided that the accused shall lose the benefit of
probation, X appealed to the CA, he loses the right to probation should he seek a review of a modified
apply for probation because appeal bars probation decision which already imposes a probationable
and probation bars appeal. No application for penalty.
probation shall be entertained or granted if the
defendant has perfected an appeal from a judgment of The CA already modified the decision. From a non-
conviction. X perfected an appeal from a judgment of probationable penalty, the CA imposed upon him only
conviction which imposes a probational penalty. 6 years which is a probationable penalty but he was
Therefore, he loses the right to apply for probation. not satisfied. He appealed further to the Supreme
Court. When he appealed further to the SC, the said
Q: What if X is charged and thereafter convicted of probationable penalty, he loses the benefit of
the crime of frustrated homicide. The judge probation. He waives his right, his privilege of being
imposed upon him the maximum penalty of 8 granted probation. Therefore, he can no longer apply
years of prision mayor. X cpuld not accept the for probation, even if the Supreme Court lowered the
judgment. X appealed to the CA. The CA affirmed imposable penalty only for 4 years imprisonment.
the conviction however downgraded the crime to
attempted homicide and imposed him the Q: What if there are many offenders— A, B, C, D,
maximum penalty of 6 years. Can X go back to the and E. They were all conspirators in the crime of
trial court and apply for probation? frustrated homicide. They were all charged for
frustrated homicide. After trial on the merits, the
A: Yes. Based on the decision of the SC in the case of judge imposed upon them the maximum penalty of
Colinares v. People which was put into law under R.A. 10 years of prision mayor—frustrated homicide.
10707 amending Sec. 4 of P.D. 968. The new law So, all of them appealed to Court of Appeals. The
provides that when a judgment of conviction imposing Court of Appeals downgraded the crime only to
a non-probationable penalty is appealed or reviewed attempted homicide and imposed upon them a
and such judgment is modified through the imposition maximum penalty of 6 years. Two of them, A and B,
of a probationable penalty, the defendant shall be decided to appeal further to the Supreme Court.
allowed to apply for probation based on the modified However, C, D, and E are already amenable with
decision before such decision becomes final. based on the decision. C, D, and E decided that they wanted
the modified decision before such decision becomes to apply for probation. Can they go back to the trial
final. court and apply for probation even if the other 2
co-conspirators went up to the Supreme Court for
In this case, X was imposed by the RTC with a non- a further appeal?
probationable penalty of 6 years. He appealed the said
non-probationable penalty to the CA. The CA modified

- 102 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

A: Yes, under Sec. 4 of PD 968, as amended by RA Q: If a person is granted probation, so the offender
10707. In case there are many offenders, should has been convicted, penalty imposed on him is
anyone of them decide to further appeal, the others within the probationable penalty of 6 years or
can still apply for probation. The law does not prohibit below 6 years, and he applied for probation, what
co-conspirators from taking different (response?). are the conditions attached to the grant of
One appealing to the higher court and the other one probation?
will be going back to the trial court to apply for
probation because he is already amenable. A: We have this so called general or mandatory
condition, and we have discretionary conditions.
PERIOD OF PROBATION The general or mandatory condition is reporting to
the probation officer within 72 hours; or based on
Sentence Period of probation every month or every week depending on the
Those sentenced of Probation shall not conditions attached to the grant of probation. It
imprisonment of not exceed 2 years depends on the probation officer—it could be every
more than 1 year week, it could be every month, it could be every two
Those sentenced with Probation shall not months.
imprisonment of more exceed 6 years.
than 1 year Likewise, attached to the grant of probation is the so-
Those sentence with Probation shall not be called discretionary conditions, where the court can
fine and the offender is less than or more than impose any conditions provided that it is not
made to serve twice the total number prejudicial to said accused. E.g., you have to plant
subsidiary of days of subsidiary trees, you have to be living a good life, you have to be
imprisonment in case of imprisonment as loyal to your wife, you cannot engage in drugs, you
insolvency computed at the rate of cannot engage in drunkenness, etc. The court can
the highest minimum impose any conditions provided that it is not
wage rate prevailing in prejudicial to the welfare of the said probationer that
the Philippines at the is the accused in this case.
time of the rendition of
judgment by the trial Q: What if X was charged with reckless
court. imprudence resulting in homicide. X was driving
when he bumped someone, and he killed that
Q: What is the period of probation? For how long someone and so X was charged with reckless
shall probation be? imprudence resulting in homicide. After trial on
the merits, the judge convicted X of reckless
A: Those sentenced in term of imprisonment of not imprudence resulting in homicide. The judge
more than 1 year, probation shall not exceed 2 years. imposed upon him a maximum penalty of 4 years.
Those sentenced with imprisonment of more than 1 Since it is within the probationable penalty, X
year, probation shall not exceed 6 years. immediately applied for probation and the
Metropolitan Trial Court judge granted X
Q: The moment probation is less than 1 year, how application for probation. However, although X
long is probation? application for probation was granted, X
thereafter filed a notice of appeal. X wanted to
A: maximum of 2 years. appeal the civil indemnities imposed on him by the
Metropolitan Trial Court. The moment the judge of
Q: Those sentence with penalty of more than 1 MeTC (learned?) “You are filing a notice of appeal?
year? I already granted your probation”, and so the
judge denied to give due course to X.
A: Probation shall not exceed 6 years.
The judge denied to give due course to X notice of
Q: What about sentence with fine? appeal because of the reasoning given by the
judge, “I have already granted your application for
A: Those sentence with fine and the offender is made probation, therefore you can no longer appeal”. Is
to serve subsidiary imprisonment in case of the court correct in denying X notice of appeal— in
insolvency, probation shall not be less than or more denying to give due course to X notice of appeal?
than twice the total number of days of subsidiary
imprisonment as computed at the rate of the highest A: The judge is wrong. X can definitely appeal the civil
minimum wage rate prevailing in the Philippines at aspect of the case because probation has nothing to do
the time of the rendition of judgment by the trial court. with civil liability. Probation only affects the offender’s
criminal liability because as I said based on Sec. 4 the
CONDITIONS IMPOSED UPON OFFENDER UNDER only effect of probation is to suspend the execution of
PROBATION the sentence. Probation cannot touch civil liability
because civil liability is personal to the private

- 103 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

offended party. Only the private offended party, only 968 states “It shall totally extinguish his criminal
the victim can waive the civil liability but it cannot be liability as to offense for which the probation was
touched by probation, it cannot be touched by parole. granted” This is the effect of Order of Final Discharge.
Hence, in the case, the court was wrong in denying X
notice of appeal in so far as the civil aspect, the civil ARRESTO MENOR
liability imposed on him is concerned.
Article 88. Arresto menor. - The penalty of
Q: X was charged and thereafter he was convicted. arresto menor shall be served in the municipal jail,
The penalty imposed on X is only arresto mayor or in the house of the defendant himself under the
maximum of 6 months. X applied for probation. surveillance of an officer of the law, when the court
The judge granted X application for probation. so provides in its decision, taking into consideration
Attached to the said grant of probation, one of the the health of the offender and other reasons which
conditions is that X cannot change his place of may seem satisfactory to it.
residence. Since the penalty imposed on X is a
maximum of arresto mayor 6 months, it is less Q: Where do you serve arresto menor?
than 1 year. Therefore, his probation period shall
not exceed 2 years. So, for 2 years, X complied with A: Either in:
the said condition. X did not change his place of 1. Municipal jail
residence. However, after 2 years, the moment the 2. House of the defendant
2-year period of probation had lapsed, X
immediately changed his place of residence. X However, he must be under surveillance by an officer
wanted to live a new life. X wanted to live in a new of the law.
environment where the people didn’t know that
he was once a convict and so he changed his place Art. 88 has been amended by R.A. 11362, The
of residence together with his family. The Community Service Act, by inserting Art. 88a which
probation officer learned of what X had done. He provides for community service.
changed his place of residence and so because of
that the said probation officer became very mad. RA 11362: COMMUNITY SERVICE IN LIEU OF
The probation officer filed before the court a IMPRISONMENT
motion to revoke X probation. The judge granted
the motion to revoke the probation filed by the Section 3. Community Service. - Article 88a of
probation officer. Thereafter, after revoking the the Act No. 3815 is hereby inserted to read as
probation granted on X, the judge issued a warrant follows:
of arrest. X was arrested. X was placed behind
bars. Is the judge correct? "ART. 88a. Community Service. - The court in
the discretion may, in lieu of service in jail, require
A: Yes, the judge is correct because the lapse of period that the penalties of arresto menor and arresto
of probation does not ipso facto mean the termination mayor may be served by the defendant by
of probation. Before probation may be terminated, the rendering community service in the place where
judge must first issue an order of final discharge. the crime was committed, under such terms as the
court shall determine, taking into consideration the
Q: How will the judge issue this order of final gravity of offense and the circumstances of the case,
discharge? which shall be under the supervision of a probation
officer: Provided, That the court will prepare an
A: First, after the lapse of the period of probation, the order imposing the community service, specifying
probation officer will submit to the court a report that the number of hours to be worked and the period
this probationer complied with all the rules and within which to complete the service. The order is
regulations. The judge will review it. After reviewing then referred to the assigned probation officer who
that this person complied with all the rules and shall have responsibility of the defendant.
regulations attached to the grant of probation, the
judge will now issue an order of final discharge. "The defendant shall likewise be required to
undergo rehabilitative counseling under the social
Q: What is the effect of an order of final discharge? welfare and development office of the city or
municipality concerned with the assistance of the
A: Under Sec. 16 of PD 968 as amended by RA 10707, Department of Social Welfare and Development
an order of final discharge shall operate to restore all (DSWD). In requiring community service, the court
civil rights lost or suspended as a result of his shall consider the welfare of the society and the
conviction and shall totally extinguish criminal reasonable probability that the person sentenced
liability as to the offense for which the probation was shall not violate the law while rendering a public
granted. as to the offense for which the probation was service.
granted. It is one of the modes for totally extinguishing
criminal liability because R.A. 10707 amending PD

- 104 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

"Community service shall consist of any actual 3. Apply that the penalty be served by him by
physical activity which inculcates civic rendering community service in the place
consciousness, and is intended towards the where the crime was committed.
improvement of a public work or promotion of a
public service. The Supreme Court also said in the guidelines that in
cases the accused chooses to appeal the conviction,
"If the defendant violates the terms of the such resort bars any application for community
community service, the court shall order his/her re- service or probation. If among the three choices given
arrest and the defendant shall serve the full term of to him, he chooses to appeal his conviction and was
the penalty, as the case may be, in jail, or in the insisting on his innocence, that bars him to apply for
house of the defendant as provided under Article community service, that bars him to apply for
88. However, if the defendant has fully complied probation. SC said that the benefit of community
with the terms of the community service, the court service shall be given to the accused only once.
shall order the release of the defendant unless
detained for some other offenses. If the accused has undergone preventive
imprisonment, the period shall be deducted from the
"The privilege of rendering community service term of his community service. However, community
in lieu of service in jail shall be availed of only once." service shall not be allowed of the accused is a habitual
delinquent.
R.A. 11362 allows courts in the exercise of their
discretion to require community service and In the said guidelines, SC said that in case the trial
rehabilitative counseling in lieu of jail time if the court denies the accused’s application for community
penalty imposed upon the offender is either arresto service, and the period to file an appeal has not yet
mayor or arresto menor. lapsed, the said accused may still choose to appeal the
said judgment or he can choose to apply for probation.
So, if a person is convicted of a crime and the penalty An accused who has applied and who has been granted
imposed on him is either arresto mayor or arresto probation, in a previous case, is not disqualified to
menor, he can opt for community service instead of jail apply for community service in a subsequent case.
time.
TOTAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
Community service is any actual physical activity
which inculcates civic consciousness and is intended Article 89. How criminal liability is totally
towards the improvement of public work or the extinguished. – Criminal liability is totally
promotion of public service. extinguished:
1. By the death of the convict, as to the
Under the law if the convict violates the terms of the personal penalties and as to pecuniary penalties,
community service, he shall serve the full term of the liability therefor is extinguished only when the
penalty in jail or he shall be placed in house arrest if death of the offender occurs before final judgment.
the penalty is arresto menor. Conversely, if he 2. By service of the sentence;
accomplished the terms of the community service, the 3. By amnesty, which completely
court shall order his release unless he is detained for extinguishes the penalty and all its effects;
any other offense that he has committed. 4. By absolute pardon;
5. By prescription of the crime;
By virtue of this law on community service, the 6. By prescription of the penalty;
Supreme Court issued an Administrative Matter which 7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as
provides for the guidelines on the imposition of provided in Article 344 of this Code.
community service in lieu of imprisonment. Based on
these rules promulgated by the SC, it is stated that DEATH
after promulgation of a judgment or order where the
imposable penalty for the crime committed is either Death is the permanent cessation of life.
arresto mayor or arresto menor, the court shall
announce in open court that the accused has three Death extinguishes criminal liability at any stage of the
options within 15 calendar days from the proceedings – be it during trial, before conviction, or
promulgation of judgment. It is the Court who shall after conviction. The moment he dies his criminal
announce that this accused convicted of a crime liability is totally extinguished.
wherein the penalty is either arresto mayor or arresto
menor, he has three options and he has to choose Q: When does death extinguish civil liability?
within 15 calendar days which one will he opt to serve. A: Death extinguishes civil liability if the offender dies
before conviction by final judgment. If the offender
He can either: dies after conviction by final judgment, his civil
1. File an appeal or liability survives. But since he is dead, the private
2. Apply for probation or
- 105 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

complainant can recover from the administrator of the and based on the medico-legal report and based
estate of the said deceased convict. on the autopsy report, he died of a heart attack
while sleeping. In the said letter of the Director of
Death of the offender extinguishes civil liability if he Prisons, attached therein, they said, medical-legal
dies before conviction by final judgment. So the report, autopsy report, everything given by the
moment he dies before conviction by final judgment, doctor with regards to the death of X.
his civil liability is totally extinguished. This civil
liability that is extinguished the moment the offender What is the effect of X’s death on his criminal and
dies before conviction by final judgment is civil civil liability?
liability ex delicto in senso strictiore, it is the civil
liability arising from and is based solely on the crime A: Since X died, before conviction or by final judgment
committed. and since X died before the Supreme Court has decided
on his case, his death extinguishes both his criminal
Even if the convict dies before conviction by final and civil liability. In that case, since he died while his
judgment, his civil liability survives, if the said civil case was pending appeal before the Supreme Court
liability arises from other sources of obligation such as had rendered a decision, his death extinguished both
law, contracts, quasi-contracts and quasi-delict. his criminal and civil liability.

PEOPLE v. BAYOTAS X was convicted of Qualified Rape, he appealed before

G.R. No. 102007, September 2, 1994 the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court rendered a
decision finding X guilty of Qualified Rape and
In the case of People v. Bayotas, the SC laid down imposing upon him the penalty of reclusion perpetua
the rules on the extinction of criminal and civil without eligibility for parole because it should be
liability in case of death of the accused. death but death cannot be imposed so it was reduced
to reclusion perpetua without the benefit of parole.
First: In the said case, it was held that the death of The counsel of X received the judgment and now he is
the accused pending appeal of his conviction preparing for MR to be filed before the SC. Before the
extinguishes his criminal liability as well his civil counsel from the PAO was able to file the MR, the SC
liability based solely thereon. Therefore, the death received a letter from the Director of Prison saying
of the accused before conviction of final judgment that X is dead. He was found dead. Based on the
extinguished both his criminal and civil liability medico-legal report, he died of a heart attack. He
directly arising from and based solely on the offence suffered from heart attack while sleeping
committed, that is civil liability ex delicto in senso
strictiore. What is the effect of X’s death on his criminal and
civil liability?
Second: The claim for civil liability survives
notwithstanding the death of the accused of the said A: Still, it will extinguish both his criminal and civil
civil liability is predicated on other sources of liability. Although the SC has already rendered its
obligation such as law, contracts, quasi-contract decision, the said counsel still has the time to file a
and quasi-delicts. motion for reconsideration. Therefore, the decision
rendered by the Supreme Court has not attained its
Third: When the civil liability survives, an action finality. Therefore, his death occurred before
for recovery, therefore, may be pursued by way of conviction by final judgment, it totally extinguishes
filing a separate civil action to be enforced either both his criminal and civil liability.
against the executor or administrator or the estate
of the said accused. SERVICE OF SENTENCE

Fourth: The private offended party need not fear a Service of sentence means satisfaction of the penalty
forfeiture of his right to file his separate imposed. If it is imprisonment, it means that he has
independent civil action by prescription because served his sentence behind bars. If it is fine, it means
the Statute of Limitations on civil liability is deemed that he has paid the amount.
interrupted during the pendency of the criminal
case under Art. 1155 of the New Civil Code. AMNESTY and ABSOLUTE PARDON

Q: X raped his biological daughter, the daughter They are both acts of grace coming from the Chief
was 17 years old. So, X was charged with qualified Executive which exempt the offender from the penalty
rape. After trial on the merits, the Judge found him prescribed by law for the crime that the offender has
guilty, the RTC Judge found him guilty of Qualified committed.
Rape. He appealed. When the case was and being
reviewed by the SC, the SC received a letter coming AMNESTY
from the Director of Prisons. In the said letter it Amnesty is an act of grace from the power entrusted
was stated that X was found dead in the morning with the execution of the law which does not only

- 106 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

exempt the offender from the service of penalty for the The running of the prescriptive period shall be from
crime committed, but also obliterates the effects of the the time of the commission of the crime if it is known.
crime. It does not only suspend the execution of the If it is not known, if commences from the discovery by
sentence. It also obliterates the effects of the crime. the offended party, authorities and agents.

ABSOLUTE PARDON Q: Y is a tenant of the house owned by X. X went to

Absolute Pardon is an act of grace received from the the said house and told Y that he failed to pay the
power entrusted with the execution of the law which rental fee for 2 months already. So Y has to pay
exempts the offender from the penalty prescribed by otherwise, he needs to leave the house tomorrow
law for the crime committed. morning. Y told X that he really don’t have the
money as of the moment since he lost his job and it
AMNESTY ABSOLUTE PARDON is only his wife who is working by selling in the
Obliterates, erases all Excuses the convict public market. Because of that, X told Y that he had
the effects of the crime from service of his already given Y too much favor so Y has to pay
as if no crime has been sentence tomorrow morning. If not, then it is better to pack
committed up and leave. Otherwise, an ejectment suit will be
May be given at any May be granted only by filed against them
stage if the proceedings the Chief executive
AFTER conviction by X turned his back at Y. Y was very mad, he was
final judgment begging, he has no money and because of that, he
It is a public act of the It is a private act of the followed X and axed the back of X numerous times
Chief Executive done Chief Executive. Thus, until X died. After having killed X, Y was so afraid
through a proclamation the court will not take and so what he did is that he cut the body of X into
requiring the judicial notice of the different parts and placed it in a sack, brought it to
concurrence of the pardon the backyard and dug the ground and buried the
congress. Thus, courts body of X.
take judicial notice of
the amnesty granted to All along, Y thought no one saw it but a passerby by
the offender the name of Z heard the commotions and shouting
Generally granted to a May be given to all kinds and all along he was peeping through a small
class or community of of offenders or opening on the gate so he saw everything from the
offenders who have prisoners altercation to the threat to the axing to the killing,
committed political dismembering of the body up to the burying. He
offenses saw everything but he was afraid of Y because he
too might be killed. He immediately left the place
PRESCRIPTION OF THE CRIME and kept everything that he saw to himself. He did
not divulge it to the authorities.
It is the loss or forfeiture of the right of the State to
prosecute an offender who has committed a violation Years passed, it is now 21 years from the time of
of the law. The moment the crime has already the commission of the said crime. Z is now old and
prescribed, the State loses the right to prosecute the he was diagnosed to have cancer and he will soon
said offender for any violation of the law. It is a watch die. He wanted to die with good conscience
of the court. It is the court who shall make sure that
the case he is trying has not yet prescribed. Z called for the police authorities of their place and
he divulged to the police authorities of what he
Period of prescription of crimes saw 21 years ago. The police dug the ground of the
Penalty of crimes Prescriptive period backyard and there they saw the dismantled body
Death, Reclusion 20 years of X.
perpetua, reclusion
temporal; Can the state still prosecute Y for the crime of
Other afflictive 15 years homicide or has the crime already prescribed?
penalties;
Correctional penalties; 10 years A: The state can still prosecute Y for the crime of
homicide for having killed the landlord. The crime has
Arresto mayor; 5 years
not yet prescribed. Here, the period of prescription of
Libel and other similar 1 year
crime shall only commence from the time Z the
offenses;
witness informed the authorities.
Oral defamation and 6 months
slander by deed Even if Z saw the commission of the crime, that is not
Light felonies; 2 months the reckoning period because Z is not the offended
party or authority. Therefore, it is 21 years thereafter,
when Z informed the authorities, that is the time you’ll

- 107 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

start counting the period of prescription of crime. the moment Z divulged it to the police officers and that
Hence, the State can still file a case of Homicide against is 21 years after. Hence,the State can still prosecute X
Y. for the commission of the crime of Homicide for
having killed the said landlord.
Q: X is renting this house. One time, the landlord
came to X. “X! You have not been paying your Q: When does the running in a prescriptive period
rental fee for three consecutive months! I have of a crime stop? When is it interrupted? When is it
given you much favor already! Now, X! You have to suspended?
pay me! If you won’t, I’m sorry but I will have no
recourse but to get you out of this place! If you will A: In the case of People v Bautista, People v Maria
not get out voluntarily then I will file an ejectment Theresa Pangilinan, the Supreme Court said that
against you.” whether it is a violation of the RPC or a violation of a
SPL, the filing of the complaint, the filing of the case
X told the landlord, “I’m sorry but I cannot pay you. before the office of the public prosecutor interrupts,
I have no money. I just lost my job. My wife only suspends the running of the period of prescription of
does the laundry, and we are really very poor crime.
nowadays.”
So the moment the case is filed before the Office of the
The landlord told X, “I do not care about your Public Prosecutor, even for purposes of preliminary
reasons X. It has been three months. I also have to investigation, the running of the prescriptive period of
earn. If you cannot pay me tomorrow morning, crime is interrupted, suspended. It remains
better pack up your things and leave.” interrupted and suspended until the accused is
acquitted or convicted of the crime charged or the case
Thereafter, when the landlord was leaving is dismissed.
towards the gate, X was very mad. He took a knife,
he went towards the landlord and repeatedly Q: X and Y were having an argument. Based on
stabbed the neck and the back of the landlord a their argument, in the course thereof, X was so
number of times. He did not stop until the landlord mad at Y and so he gave Y two punches on the right
was dead. jaw. Because of that, Y fell. X left. Y went to the
doctor and the doctor said Y sustained an injury
After seeing that he killed the landlord, X that would heal within a period of 7 days. Y filed a
dismembered the different part of the body to case of slight physical injuries against X before the
conceal the killing. He placed them in the sack and barangay. Both parties were called but no one
bury it at the backyard. appeared. No amicable settlement in the barangay
level and so, thereafter, the barangay chairman
X thought all along that only he knew what he did. issued a certification that the case is ripe for filing
Burt during those times, a person by the name of Z before the court. Because of that, Y filed a case of
was looking at a small opening at the gate. Z saw slight physical injuries against X before the Office
everything from the arguments to the act of of the Public Prosecutor.
burying the the sack. But because he was afraid, he
kept silent. The case was filed within a month from the time of
the said act of punching so it was filed within the
Years passed, it is now 21 years from the time Z prescriptive period of 2 months or 60 days.
witnessed the crime. And during this time, Z is However, the said case was filed before the fiscal’s
badly ill. Anytime he could die. Before he dies, he office. The investigating public prosecutor ruled in
wants to divulge to the authorities what he saw 21 favor of the complainant. However, the document
years ago. He called for the police officers and that lost it was not filed before the Metropolitan
narrated to them what he saw 21 years ago. Trial Court. It was only after a year that the said
Because of that, the police officer went to the said information for slight physical injury was found
house which is already vacant and they dug the before the MTC. And so, upon the filing, here comes
ground. They found it based on the narration the counsel of X. He immediately filed a motion to
made by Z, the witness. Can the State still quash the said information upon the ground that
prosecute X for the crime of homicide? the slight physical injury had already prescribed.
Should the said motion to quash be granted or
A: The State can still file a case of Homicide against X. denied?
The reason is the said period of prescription of crime
has not commenced from the time of the commission A: The motion to quash should be denied. The crime
of the crime. Because although it was known, it was has not yet been prescribed. The slight physical injury,
only known to Z, a witness who is not the offended a light felony, prescribed in 2 months. The information
party, who is not a public authority, who is not an was filed in the fiscals office within 1 month. Within
agent of public authority. Therefore, the said running the prescriptive period from the time that it was filed
of the period of prescription of crime only commenced before the office of the public prosecutor, the running

- 108 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

of the 2 months prescriptive period is suspended, looking for him. Too late, the state can no longer
interrupted. Therefore, the crime has not yet been execute the final sentence imposed on him.
prescribed the moment it was filed before the
Metropolitan Trial Court. Q: What if X was charged with the crime of
homicide and homicide is a bailable offense so X
It remains interrupted or suspended until the said posted bail of P200,000 pesos as fixed by the Court
accused is acquitted or convicted of the said crime or and X posted P200,000. He is now on temporary
the case is dismissed for no proof. liberty. He appeared during the arraignment and
pleaded not guilty. The moment trial begins, X
Q: X was charged and thereafter, X was convicted failed to appear. Until the counsel of X divulge to
of homicide. The Judgment became final and the court that he lacks knowledge of X’s
executory. Thereafter, X was brought to Bilibid. A whereabouts. The judge said that since X jumped
man from that time that he was delivered to the bail, we will proceed with the trial in absentia.
Bilibid, X saw an opportunity to escape. X left After trial, the judge convicted X with homicide
successfully the national penitentiary. Police and imposed upon him the penalty of reclusion
authorities and police guards tried to look for him. temporal. Thereafter, since he was not present
In fact, a warrant of arrest had already been during the promulgation of judgment and a
ordered by the court however he could not be warrant of arrest was issued against him. The
located. They looked everywhere, X could not be judgement convicting X of homicide, the maximum
located. penalty of 20 years of reclusion temporal became
final and executory. The Police officers looked for
Twenty five years thereafter the police authorities X, they could not locate X anywhere. 20 years
of the said place got an important tip that a person thereafter, the police got a tip that a man in the
by the name of X was onboard a Cebu Pacific flight name of X on the manifesto of Cebu Pacific flight
coming from General Santos City and will be coming from Gensan arriving in Naia Terminal 3
landing in NAIA Terminal 3 at exactly 10:30 in the exactly 10:30. The Police armed with a warrant of
morning and because of that the police officers, arrest and his picture went to the Tarmac of the
armed with the warrant of arrest issued by the terminal. They were looking on every passengers
Court, went at the tarmac of NAIA Terminal 3, they that would disembark from the said Cebu Pacific
were waiting for the arrival of said Cebu Pacific Flight. They were able to found X. They served the
Flight coming from General Santos City. The warrant of arrest and placed handcuffs on him.
moment it landed, they murmured, of course 25 Thereafter, they placed him behind bars. The
years had lapsed, they didn't know if X would have counsel of X immediately filed a petition for
the same face and so they were carrying his habeas corpus on the ground that the penalty has
picture and hoping that they would identify him already prescribed. Should the Judge grant or deny
from the persons disembarking from the said the petition for habeas corpus?
plane. They were looking carefully at every person
at disembarking until they saw one with long hair A: The judge should deny the said petition for habeas
but resembled it. They immediately cornered him corpus. The penalty has not yet prescribed and has not
and thereafter they were able to identify that yet even commenced to run. The running of the period
indeed he was X. The warrant of arrest was served of prescription of penalty shall commence only the
upon him and thereafter he was placed with the moment the convict evade the service of his sentence.
handcuffs and brought behind bars. He was And there is evasion of service of sentence if the said
brought back to the penitentiary. His counsel convict is already serving his final sentence at the
immediately filed a motion, a petition for Habeas national penitentiary and then thereafter escaped. In
Corpus, moving for X’s immediate release from this case. X had never began serving the final sentence
prison; the ground raised by the counsel is that the imposed on him. To jump bail is different from
crime was already prescribed. escaping from the national penitentiary based on a
final judgment. Even if 25 years had already lapsed, he
If you were a Judge, would you grant or deny the can still be placed behind bars. The penalty has not yet
said petition for Habeas Corpus? prescribed.

A: If you were a Judge, you have to grant the petition The running of the period of prescription of the
for Habeas Corpus and order for the immediate penalty shall be interrupted when the said offender is
release of X from the national penitentiary. arrested or captured, when the said offender
surrendered to the police authorities. When the said
REASON: The crime was already prescribed. It has offender goes to a country in which the Philippines has
been 25 years from the time X evaded the service of no extradition treaty and when the said offender
his sentence. It has been 25 years from the time X commits another crime before the expiration of the
escaped from the penal penitentiary while serving his penalty.
final sentence. The police officers are so slow in

- 109 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

These are the instances wherein the running of the Prescription of crimes Prescription of
period of prescription of penalty shall be interrupted penalty
or suspended. The last mode for total extinguishing prescriptive period does interrupts the
criminal liability is a subsequent valid marriage not interrupt prescription.
between the offender and the offended party. This is prescription.
only applicable in one public crime, and that is rape,
and in private crimes such as forcible abduction and PARTIAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
we have also acts of lasciviousness, abduction,
seduction, and acts of lasciviousness. Art. 94. Partial Extinction of criminal liability. —
Criminal liability is extinguished partially;
In all these crimes, the subsequent valid marriage 1. By conditional pardon;
between the private complainant or the victim and the 2. By commutation of the sentence; and
accused or the offender will extinguish the offender’s 3. For good conduct allowances which the
criminal liability. Under Article 334 Book 2 of the RPC, culprit may earn while he is serving his sentence.
this subsequent valid marriage, will not only
extinguish the offender’s criminal liability, it will even MODES FOR PARTIALLY EXTINGUISHING
remit the penalty already imposed by the court. Let us CRIMINAL LIABILITY
say the offender, let us say the accused who raped the The following are the modes for extinguishing
victim has already been convicted and is serving criminal liability;
sentence, but they fell in love, he and the victim fell in 1. Conditional Pardon;
love and they decided to get married. He was already 2. Commutation of sentence;
serving the sentence by final judgement. The said 3. Good conduct of allowance;
subsequent valid marriage based on Article 334 of the 4. Special Time Allowance for Loyalty;
RPC Book 2, will remit even the penalty already 5. Parole under the Indeterminate Sentence
imposed on the said convict so it is more than Law;
extinguishing the offender’s criminal liability it can 6. Implied repeal or amendment of penal law
even remit the penalty already imposed by the court. lowering the penalty;
The subsequent valid marriage between the offender
and the offended party which only applies in the public CONDITIONAL PARDON
crime of rape and the private crime of seduction,
abduction and acts of lasciviousness. Conditional Pardon is an act of grace received from a
power entrusted with the authority to execute the law,
SUSPENSION OF PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD OF but the pardon herein is subject to strict conditions.
PENALTY
The following are the grounds when the prescriptive Because of these strict conditions, there must be
period of penalty is suspended; acceptance on the part of the offender. The moment he
1. When offender surrenders; accepts, it becomes incumbent upon him to comply
2. When offender went to a country which has no with the strict terms and conditions of the pardon.
extradition treaty with the Philippines;
3. When convict commits a crime before the Failure to comply with any of the strict conditions, the
expiration of period of prescription; State can file a criminal case under Art 159- evasion of
4. When the offender is captured; service of sentence. In addition, the Chief Executive
can order the immediate incarceration of the offender
Prescription of crimes Prescription of under the Administrative Code.
penalty
Loss or forfeiture of the Loss or forfeiture of the COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE
right of the State to right of the State to
prosecute enforce final judgment; In commutation of sentence, a new sentence imposed
Starts counting upon the Starts counting upon the shall be in lieu of the original sentence.
discovery of the escape or evasion of EXAMPLE: Death penalty commuted to Reclusion
commission of the service of sentence. perpetua.
crime.
Mere absence from the Absence from the GOOD CONDUCT TIME ALLOWANCE LAW
Philippines interrupts Philippines interrupts (RA 10592)
the running of the the period only when
prescription; the convict goes to a Good conduct allowance is awarded to the offender if
foreign country without he has been behaving properly in prison. The Director
an extradition treaty of Prisons shall compute the good conduct allowance
with the Philippines; in favor of the offender so that he will be immediately
Commission of another Commission of another released.
crime before the crime before the
expiration of the expiration of the period
- 110 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Article 97. Allowance for good conduct. - The because in the ultimate analysis, it is beneficial to the
good conduct of any prisoner in any penal detained and convicted prisoners. Hence, it calls for
institution shall entitle him to the following the application of Art. 22 – retroactive application of
deductions from the period of his sentence: the said law.
1. During the first two years of his
imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of Q: What if X killed Y, and it was done
five days for each month of good behavior; treacherously. So, X was charged with murder
2. During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of qualified by treachery. After trial on the merits, X
his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction was found guilty of the crime of murder, and X was
of eight days for each month of good behavior; imposed of penalty of reclusion perpetua. After
3. During the following years until the tenth conviction of X, he was brought to the bilibid. He
year, inclusive, of his imprisonment, he shall be was brought to the Bilibid sometime in January of
allowed a deduction of ten days for each month of 1994. X appealed his conviction, but the Supreme
good behavior; and Court affirmed his conviction in 1996.
4. During the eleventh and successive years of
his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction With the enactment of RA 10952, the Good
of fifteen days for each month of good behaviour. Conduct Time Allowance Act, in 2015 X filed a
petition for habeas corpus arguing that his
Period imprisonment Deduction continued detention is already illegal under RA
First two years; 20 days for each month 10952. According to him, he has already served a
of good behavior during total of more than of 38 years in jail. Because of
detention; that, according to X, the Good Conduct Time
Third to fifth year, 23 days for each month Allowance should be applied to him. Hence, he
inclusive, of his of good behavior during must be immediately released.
imprisonment; detention;
Sixth until the tenth 25 days for each month Does the good conduct time allowance law or RA
year, inclusive, of his of good behavior during 10592 apply to persons deprived of liberty
imprisonment; detention convicted of heinous crimes?
Eleventh and successive 30 days for each month
years of his of good behavior during A: SC said NO. According to the SC, the last paragraph
Imprisonment; detention of Sec 1 of the Good Conduct Time Allowance Law
At any time during the another deduction of 15 provides that recidivists, habitual delinquents,
period of imprisonment; days, in addition to escapees and persons charged with heinous crimes
numbers one to four are excluded from the coverage of the Good Conduct
hereof for each month of Time Allowance Law.
service time rendered
for; Further, the SC said, based on the 2019 Revised
1. Study; Implementing Rules and Regulations (RIRR) of RA
2. Teaching; or 10592, the following persons are not entitled to any
3. Mentoring; good conduct time allowance during the service of
their sentence: recidivists, habitual delinquents,
First question as RA 10952 is concerned: escapees and persons deprived of liberty convicted of
Q: Can RA 10592, an Act which amended Art. 97, (also heinous crimes.
Arts. 29, 94, 98, and 99 of the RPC), be given
retroactive application as provided for under Art. 22 Therefore, SC said, that both the Good Conduct Time
of the RPC? Allowance Law (RA 10592) and its 2019 RIRR
abundantly provide clearly that persons charged with
Article 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. - and convicted of heinous crimes are not entitled to the
Penal Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as benefit of good conduct time allowance.
they favor the persons guilty of a felony, who is not
a habitual criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 In this case, the crime committed by X is murder.
of Article 62 of this Code, although at the time of the Murder is a heinous crime because its penalty is
publication of such laws a final sentence has been reclusion perpetua to death. Therefore, persons
pronounced and the convict is serving the same. convicted of murder are disqualified to be given the
benefit of RA 10592, the Good Conduct Time
Allowance Law. Art. 97 is good conduct time allowance
The Supreme Court held in the affirmative. According
amended by RA 10592.
to the SC in the case of Inmates of New Bilibid Prison vs.
Leila De Lima, although RA 10952 does not define a
SPECIAL TIME ALLOWANCE FOR LOYALTY
crime, does not define an offense, it does not provide
and prescribe a penalty, it addresses the rehabilitation
from the component of our correctional system. ART. 98. Special time allowance for loyalty. – A
Therefore, it can be given retroactive application deduction of one fifth of the period of his sentence

- 111 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

shall be granted to any prisoner who, having evaded mere detention prisoners or ongoing preventive
his preventive imprisonment or the service of his imprisonment.
sentence under the circumstances mentioned in
Article 158 of this Code, gives himself up to the CIVIL LIABILITY
authorities within 48 hours following the issuance
of a proclamation announcing the passing away of Article 100. Civil liability of a person guilty of
the calamity or catastrophe referred to in said felony. - Every person criminally liable for a felony
article. A deduction of two-fifths of the period of his is also civilly liable.
sentence shall be granted in case said prisoner
chose to stay in the place of his confinement For every criminal action filed in court, the civil action
notwithstanding the existence of a calamity or goes with it. So the private complainant, the victim the
catastrophe enumerated in Article 158 of this Code. heirs of the victim need not file a separate and
independent civil action in order to recover civil
This Article shall apply to any prisoner whether liability.
undergoing preventive imprisonment or serving
sentence. Q: X killed Y so the heirs of Y filed a case of murder
against X. They have sleepless nights, tension,
Article 98 provides for special allowance for loyalty. spent much for the burial and hospitalization.
This must be read in connection with Art. 158. They wanted to file a separate civil action to
recover all of these. Should they do so?
Q: There is an earthquake. Because of the said
earthquake, there was this siren. It was a strong A: No. In the very same criminal action for the crime of
earthquake. Everything was falling. There was a murder, the said civil action goes with it. That’s why in
siren at the national penitentiary. There was a case X is convicted aside from the penalty of
siren at the bilibid. Based on their training, if you imprisonment imposed by the court, the court will
hear this siren, it means that you are allowed to also impose upon X the payment of civil liability and
leave because prisoners are accountability of the other damages.
state. The moment there is a calamity, the state can
no longer protect these prisoners so they are GENERAL RULE: For every criminal action, the civil
allowed to leave. So because of the magnitude 7 action goes with it.
earthquake, there was a siren. All of the prisoners
left, including X. EXCEPTION: The filing of a criminal action does not
carry with it, civil action in the ff:
Two years thereafter, the president issued on 1. When the offended party waives the right to
national television, on radio, an order to all institute a civil action; or
prisoners who left to return within 48 hours. X 2. The offended party reserves the right to
returned within 48 hours. What is the effect of his institute the civil action which reservation must
return on his criminal liability? be made before the presentation of evidence for
the prosecution; or
A: Under Article 98, as amended by RA 10592, there 3. When the offended party instituted the civil
shall be 1/5 deduction, 1/5 credit on the term of his action ahead of the criminal action
sentence.
Q: What if the said accused is acquitted from the
Q: What if X did not leave? He tried to safeguard criminal action? Does it mean that the private
himself by hiding under a strong table and he complainant can no longer recover the civil
survived the earthquake, what is the effect on his liability?
criminal liability?
A: It depends on the kind of acquittal. In the case of
A: There will be 2/5 deduction on the term of his Lumantas vs Calapiz, and the case of Daluraya vs.
sentence. Oliva, the SC said that:
1. If the accused is acquitted based on reasonable
Special Allowance for Loyalty. X was so loyal. He doubt, there can still be recovery of civil
already left yet he returned. Because of that the state indemnity because it can be proven by mere
favors you, you will be given 1/5 deduction. But X in preponderance of evidence.
the 2nd problem is more loyal. Despite the fact that his 2. If the said criminal action is acquitted because
life is at stake, he did not leave. He just stayed there. So the offender is not the author of the crime, the
he will be gifted with 2/5 deduction based on the term said acquittal totally bars recovery of civil
of his sentence. indemnity

Based on the amendment provided by RA 10592, this LUMANTAS v CALAPIZ

special allowance for loyalty shall also apply not only G.R. No. 163753 January 15, 2014
to prisoners convicted by final judgment, but also to
- 112 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

CRIME CHARGED: Reckless imprudence resulting Our law recognizes two kinds of acquittal, with
to serious physical injuries different effects on the civil liability of the accused:

FACTS: Spouses Hilario Calapiz, Jr. and Herlita First is an acquittal on the ground that the accused
Calapiz brought their 8-year-old son, Hanz Calapiz is not the author of the act or omission complained
(Hanz), to the Misamis Occidental Provincial of. This instance closes the door to civil liability, for
Hospital, Oroquieta City, for an emergency a person who has been found to be not the
appendectomy. perpetrator of any act or omission cannot and can
never be held liable for such act or omission. There
Hanz was attended to by the petitioner, who being no delict, civil liability ex delicto is out of the
suggested to the parents that Hanz also undergo question, and the civil action, if any, which may be
circumcision at no added cost to spare him the pain. instituted must be based on grounds other than the
With the parents’ consent, the petitioner performed delict complained of. This is the situation
the coronal type of circumcision on Hanz after his contemplated in Rule 111 of the Rules of Court.
appendectomy. On the following day, Hanz
complained of pain in his penis, which exhibited The second instance is an acquittal based on
blisters. His testicles were swollen. The parents reasonable doubt on the guilt of the accused. In this
noticed that the child urinated abnormally after the case, even if the guilt of the accused has not been
petitioner forcibly removed the catheter, but the satisfactorily established, he is not exempt from
petitioner dismissed the abnormality as normal. civil liability which may be proved by
preponderance of evidence only.
On February 8, 1995, Hanz was confined in a
hospital because of the abscess formation between The Rules of Court requires that in case of an
the base and the shaft of his penis. Petitioner acquittal, the judgment shall state "whether the
referred him to Dr. Henry Go, an urologist, who evidence of the prosecution absolutely failed to
diagnosed the boy to have a damaged urethra. Thus, prove the guilt of the accused or merely failed to
Hanz underwent cystostomy, and thereafter was prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. In either
operated on three times to repair his damaged case, the judgment shall determine if the act or
urethra. omission from which the civil liability might arise
did not exist."
When his damaged urethra could not be fully
repaired and reconstructed, Hanz’s parents Conformably with the foregoing, therefore, the
brought a criminal charge against the petitioner for acquittal of an accused does not prevent a judgment
reckless imprudence resulting to serious physical from still being rendered against him on the civil
injuries. aspect of the criminal case unless the court finds
and declares that the fact from which the civil
RTC: Acquitted for the crime charged due to liability might arise did not exist. Although it found
insufficiency of evidence but liable for moral the Prosecution’s evidence insufficient to sustain a
damages because there was a preponderance of judgment of conviction against the petitioner for
evidence showing that Hanz had received the the crime charged, the RTC did not err in
injurious trauma from his circumcision by the determining and adjudging his civil liability for the
petitioner. same act complained of based on mere
preponderance of evidence. In this connection, the
CA: Affirmed RTC Court reminds that the acquittal for insufficiency of
the evidence did not require that the complainant’s
ISSUE: Whether or not the CA erred in affirming the recovery of civil liability should be through the
petitioner’s civil liability despite his acquittal of the institution of a separate civil action for that
crime of reckless imprudence resulting in serious purpose.
physical injuries.
The petitioner’s contention that he could not be
RULING: NO. It is axiomatic that every person held civilly liable because there was no proof of his
criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. negligence deserves scant consideration. The
Nevertheless, the acquittal of an accused of the failure of the Prosecution to prove his criminal
crime charged does not necessarily extinguish negligence with moral certainty did not forbid a
his civil liability. finding against him that there was preponderant
evidence of his negligence to hold him civilly liable.
In Manantan v. Court of Appeals, the Court With the RTC and the CA both finding that Hanz had
elucidates on the two kinds of acquittal recognized sustained the injurious trauma from the hands of
by our law as well as on the different effects of the petitioner on the occasion of or incidental to the
acquittal on the civil liability of the accused, viz: circumcision, and that the trauma could have been
avoided, the Court must concur with their uniform
findings. In that regard, the Court need not analyze

- 113 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

and weigh again the evidence considered in the identify him as the driver of the vehicle that hit the
proceedings a quo. The Court, by virtue of its not victim and that there was no clear and competent
being a trier of facts, should now accord the highest evidence of how the incident transpired.
respect to the factual findings of the trial court as
affirmed. MeTC granted Daluraya's demurrer and dismissed
the case for insufficient evidence. RTC dismissed
Q: The mother decided to go to a 2nd doctor for a the appeal and affirmed the MeTC's ruling. CA
second opinion, and the 2nd doctor who examined granted the petition and reversed the RTC Decision.
the boy said that, “the boy suffered a damaged In so ruling, the CA held that the MeTC's Order
urethra, which can never be repaired.” The mother showed that Daluraya's acquittal was based on the
was very mad at the doctor who performed the fact that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt
circumcision operation. And so she filed against beyond a reasonable doubt. As such, Daluraya was
the doctor a case for reckless imprudence not exonerated from civil liability.
resulting in serious physical injuries. After trial on
the merits, the RTC Judge acquitted the said Issue: Whether or not the CA was correct in finding
doctor. The prosecution of the State failed to prove Daluraya civilly liable for Marina Oliva's death
the negligence of the doctor beyond reasonable despite his acquittal in the criminal case for
doubt. The prosecution failed to prove that the Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide on
said doctor, in conducting the said circumcision theground of insufficiency of evidence.
operation has negligence. Why was the State failed
in proving said negligence? Ruling: The CA erred in construing the findings of
the MeTC, as affirmed by the RTC, that Daluraya's
A: Because the fiscal, the prosecution did not present acquittal was anchored on reasonable doubt, which
an expert doctor to show that this doctor was would necessarily call for a remand of the case to
negligent in the conduct of the circumcision. Only an the court a quo for the reception of Daluraya's
expert doctor can state that he was negligent in the evidence on the civil aspect. Records disclose that
conduct of the circumcision operation. But the State Daluraya's acquittal was based on the fact that "the
did not present an expert doctor in order to show that act or omission from which the civil liability may
this doctor conducted the circumcision operation was arise did not exist" because of the prosecution's
negligent. And so, the negligence was not proven failure to sufficiently establish that he was the
beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, it is an acquittal. author of the crime ascribed against him.
However, although the doctor who performed the Consequently, his civil liability should be deemed as
operation was acquitted, the Judge imposed upon him non-existent by the nature of such acquittal.
civil liability, moral damages. So the doctor went to the
Supreme Court questioning, “I am acquitted. How In the case of Daluraya vs. Oliva, the accused was
come there is civil liability? The moment I am charged with reckless imprudence resulting in
acquitted, there must be no civil liability.” homicide. So the victim was killed, allegedly because
he hit and bump the said victim. So, reckless
Supreme Court said, “You are wrong. The Court is imprudence resulting in homicide. However, during
correct.” The acquittal of the doctor based on the hearing of that case, when the prosecution
reasonable doubt, because the State failed to prove his presented its witnesses, none of the witnesses
negligence beyond reasonable doubt. Since the presented by the State was able to pinpoint to the
acquittal of the doctor was based on reasonable doubt, accused as the driver of the van, the driver of the
there can still be recovery of civil indemnity, because vehicle that hit and killed the victim. Hindi nila nakita
it can be proven by mere preponderance of evidence. kung sino yung nagda-drive.
And based on the RTC Judge’s decision, it is obvious to
him that the boy had suffered. Therefore, the grant of Because of that, the defense counsel filed a Demurrer
civil liability, damages is proper. to Evidence, for failure of the prosecution to prove the
guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The
DALURAYA v. OLIVA demurrer to evidence was granted by the trial court.
GR 210148, 08 December 2014
The CA affirmed the grant of the demurrer to evidence.
Facts: Daluraya was charged with Reckless However, the CA said although the demurrer to
Imprudence Resulting in Homicide in connection evidence is granted, because the prosecution failed to
with the death of Marina Oliva. Oliva was crossing prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable
the street when a Nissan ran her over. She doubt, he shall be imposed with civil liability.
eventually died, prompting her daughter to file a
criminal case against Daluraya, the purported The accused went to the Supreme Court, the demurrer
driver of the vehicle. After the prosecution rested to evidence was granted akin to an acquittal yet it was
its case, Daluraya filed an Urgent Motion to Dismiss the CA who imposed upon him civil liability. The SC
(demurrer), asserting, among other things, that any said the CA is wrong. The reason for the acquittal is
of the prosecution witnesses did not positively that the accused is not the author of the said act
- 114 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

alleged in the Information. No one saw him to be the Under Article 101, if the offender is insane, imbecile,
driver of the said van that hit and killed the victim. or a minor 15 years or under, he is exempted from
Therefore, he is not the author of the crime. Since he is criminal liability but not from civil liability.
not the author of the crime, since he did not commit
the act alleged in the Information, there is no reason Q: Who shall shoulder the civil liability?
for him to be imposed with civil liability.
A: The person having direct control and custody of the
ARTICLE 101 said insane, imbecile, or minor shall be the one
primarily liable for the civil liability, except when he
ARTICLE 101. Rules regarding civil liability in acted without fault or negligence, then it is the
certain cases. — The exemption from criminal property of the said insane, imbecile, or minor that
liability established in subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 shall answer for the civil liability.
of article 12 and in subdivision 4 of article 11 of this
Code does not include exemption from civil liability, Under Article 12 (Exempting Circumstances), if the
which shall be enforced subject to the following offender committed a crime because he acted under
rules: the compulsion of an irresistible force, because he
acted under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of
First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of equal or greater injury, he shall be exempted from
Article 12, the civil liability for acts committed by an criminal liability but not from civil liability.
imbecile or insane person, and by a person under
nine years of age, or by one over nine but under Q: Who shall shoulder the civil liability?
fifteen years of age, who has acted without
discernment, shall devolve upon those having such A: The third person shall be the one primarily civilly
person under their legal authority or control, unless liable, but in case of insolvency, then the accused
it appears that there was no fault or negligence on himself shall be the one to answer the said civil
their part. liability.

Should there be no person having such insane, For crimes committed by their children, the parents
imbecile or minor under his authority, legal are subsidiarily civilly liable.
guardianship or control, or if such person be
insolvent, said insane, imbecile, or minor shall For crimes committed by their students and pupils,
respond with their own property, excepting the school and the teacher are subsidiarily civilly
property exempt from execution, in accordance liable.
with the civil law.
For crime committed by their employee, the employee
Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of is subsidiarily civilly liable.
Article 11, the persons for whose benefit the harm
has been prevented shall be civilly liable in Q: X checked-in in a hotel. X has 2 million pesos in
proportion to the benefit which they may have his attache case. Before checking-in in the hotel, he
Received. met someone who bought his land and there was
the payment given to him. Since it was a sunday he
The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, could not deposit it so he brought along the
the proportionate amount for which each one shall attache case with 2 million pesos.
be liable.
A: The person having direct control and custody of the
When the respective shares cannot be equitably said insane, imbecile, and minor shall be the one
determined, even approximately, or when the primarily liable for the said civil liability except when
liability also attaches to the Government, or to the he acted without fault or negligence. Then, it is the
majority of the inhabitants of the town, and, in all property of the insane, imbecile, or minor that shall
events, whenever the damages have been caused answer of the civil liability.
with the consent of the authorities or their agents,
indemnification shall be made in the manner Under Art. 12 Exempting Circumstances, if the
prescribed by special laws or regulations. offender committed a crime because he acted in
compulsion of an irresistible force, because he acted
Third. In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and under the impulse of uncontrollable fear of equal or
6 of Article 12, the persons using violence or greater injury, he shall be exempted from criminal
causing the fears shall be primarily liable and liability but not from civil liability.
secondarily, or, if there be no such persons, those
doing the act shall be liable, saving always to the Q: Who shall answer for the civil liability?
latter that part of their property exempt from
execution. Atty: The person who employed the force on him. The
third person shall be the one primarily, civilly liable

- 115 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

but in case of his insolvency, then the accused himself with simple robbery under Art. 294 because the
shall be the one to answer the said civil liability. act of taking was done with intimidation. After
trial on the merits he was convicted imposed with
By crimes committed by their children, the parents are a penalty of imprisonment and civil liability.
subsidiarily civilly liable. However, the 2M pesos inside the attache case
were already gone, he has already passed it to
For crimes committed by their students an pupils, the another person therefore, he could no longer pay.
schools, the teachers are subsidiarily civilly liable. Is the proprietor of the establishment is
subsidiary civilly liable?
For crimes committed by their employees, the
employers are subsidiarily civilly liable. A: No. If the crime committed is robbery with violence
against or intimidation of persons under Article 294,
Q: X checked in a hotel. X at the time has 2M pesos the said proprietor of the establishment is not
in his attache case reason before checking in the subsidiary civilly liable, except when the crime is
hotel, he met someone who bought his land and committed by its very own employees.
there was the payment given to him and since it
was a Sunday, he could not deposit it. He brought In this case, the person who committed simple
along the attache case with 2M pesos. He checked robbery or robbery with intimidation is a total
in this hotel, the proprietor of the said stranger, not an employee. Therefore, the said inn
establishment told X that “we have rules and keeper, and proprietor of the establishment is not
regulations for valuables” and so X read the said subsidiary civilly liable.
rules and regulations for the care and vigilance of
valuables. X deposited his attache case that Q: X is a driver of ABC Corporation. X was asked to
contains 2M pesos at the front desk to the do an errand for the president of the said
proprietor of the said establishment. So he corporation. He has to go to a branch to get some
complied. With the said hotel’s rules and very important documents. He has to hurry
regulations as to the care and vigilance of because of a meeting being attended by the
valuables. president of the company. At the time he was going
to the place to get the said documents, his wife
While X was fast asleep that night in a room inside called. The wife said that she has to be brought to
the hotel, a robbery took place and among the the hospital— the baby is going out. X went into
things taken were his attache case which contains panic. He has to get the document first and bring it
2M. When the robber was arrested and charged to the president before going home. He was in a
with the crime of robbery. He was thereafter hurry. He is driving recklessly, driving as fast as he
convicted by final judgment and imposed with a could. As a result, he hit and bumped another
penalty including civil liability which includes the vehicle and because of that, the said other vehicle
restitution of 2M pesos. But he was insolvent, he was in total damaged. Good enough that the owner
has no money, he already passed the 2M to another of the vehicle has not yet boarded so the owner
person. Who shall answer for the said civil wasn’t hurt.
liability? Who shall pay the amount to X?
X, the employee of ABC Corporation, is now being
A: It is the proprietor of the said establishment. Since prosecuted for reckless imprudence causing
the crime was committed and among the things taken damage to property. After the trial on merits, he
was the attache of the case which contains 2M. Since X was found guilty by the Metropolitan Trial Court
complied with the rules and regulations of the hotel as judge for reckless imprudence causing damage to
to the care and vigilance of valuables. Then, in case of property. Penalty imposing on him— fine, public
its loss, the said proprietor, innkeeper, tavern-keeper censure, and also civil liability. He has to pay the
and proprietor of the said establishment shall be value of the damage to the car. But the moment the
subsidiarily civilly liable in case of insolvency of the judgment became final and executory, and the writ
offender who is the one primarily civilly liable. of execution was issued, the court sheriff returned
the writ of execution unsatisfied. X, the employee,
Q: What if the said robbery took place, so X is insolvent to pay the value of the damage to the
complied with the rules and regulations of the car. What is the remedy of the owner of the said
hotel thereafter, he went upstairs and slept on his damaged car? Is it necessary for him to file a
room. That night a robbery took place, however, in separate and independent civil action in order to
order to take the all the said valuables, the said recover the value of the said car?
robber pointed a gun at the said proprietor of the
said establishment. A: The Supreme Court said no. In the very same
criminal action for reckless imprudence causing
The proprietor of establishment could not do damage to property, since the said convict employee
anything but give all his valuables. Later, the said was found to be insolvent and cannot pay the value of
man was arrested and the said man was charged the said damaged car, the remedy of the owner of the

- 116 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

car is to file a motion for the issuance of a subsidiary The court will determine the value of the thing taken
writ of execution against the employer ABC including its special sentimental value and award it
Corporation. against the accused in favor of the offended party

The Supreme Court said that this motion is not ex INDEMNIFICATION OF CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES
parte motion, it is a litigated motion. Therefore, a copy
of the motion must be given to *inaudible* the said Indemnification includes moral damages, civil
ABC Corporation and he must be given a day in court indemnity, exemplary damages.
Moral damages in case of rape or murder need not be
Although the subsidiary civil liability of the said proved. It suffices that the crime has been committed.
corporation, of the said employer is absolute in nature, The law presumes that the victim suffered moral
he must be given his day in court because the following indemnity because of the crime committed.
must be proven before his subsidiary civil liability may
become absolute. Exemplary damages can only be granted if there are
1. There must be an employer-employee aggravating circumstances in the commission of the
relationship between X as well as the said crime.
corporation
2. The corporation is engaged in some kind of What if the offenders are conspirators? Let us say
industry that we have three offenders and all three of them
3. Said act of reckless imprudence causing are made civilly liable for the commission of the
damage to property was committed by X while crime because of their conviction. How shall the
in performance of his duty as an employee of civil liability be determined?
ABC corporation
4. X was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt ARTICLE 109
5. The writ of execution must returned unsatisfied
because of X’s insolvency Art 109. Share of each person civilly liable - If
there are two or more persons civilly liable for a
If all of these are proven, then that is the time that the felony, the courts shall determine the amount for
said employer becomes subsidiarily civilly liable which each must respond.
absolutely. You as the employer shall be the one to pay
for a value of the said damaged car. How shall the civil liability be determined?
Under Art 109, if there are two or more persons civilly
There is no need to file a separate and independent liable, the court shall determine the amount for all of
civil action in order to recover for the value of the said these co-conspirators.
car.
If there were two accused convicted, insofar as the
INCLUSIONS TO CIVIL LIABILITY civil liability is concerned, it is the court which shall
determine the civil liability of the two accused.
Article 104. What is included in civil liability –
The civil liability established in Articles 100, 101, ARTICLE 110
102 and 103 of this Code includes:
1. Restitution Art 110. Several and subsidiary liability of
2. Reparation of the damage caused principals, accomplices and accessories of a felony -
3. Indemnification of consequential damages Preference in payment – Notwithstanding the
provisions of the next preceding article, the,
RESTITUTION principals, accomplices and accessories each within
their respective class, shall be liable severally (in
RETURN of the very thing taken and the thing taken or solidum) among themselves for their quotas and
the thing subject of that crime can be returned to the subsidiaries for those of the other liable.
owner even if it is already in possession of an innocent
purchaser in good faith The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first
against the property of the principal, next against
As long as the innocent purchaser in good faith did not that of the accomplices and lastly against that of the
buy it in a public sale because in case of public sale, accessories.
restitution becomes impossible.
Whenever the liability in solidum or the
If restitution is impossible, then we have reparation of subsidiarity liability has been enforced, the person
damage caused by whom payment has been made shall have a right
of action against the others for the amount of their
REPARATION OF DAMAGE CAUSED respective shares.

- 117 -
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW

Q: What if in the commission of the crime, A is the

principal, B is the accomplice and C is the
accessory, how shall the civil liability be imposed
on them and how shall this paid to the offended
party?

A: The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first

against the property of the principal, second against
that of the accomplices and third against that of the
accessories.

However, the moment the principal or the accomplice

or the accessory has already paid to the private
complainant this principal or accomplice or accessory
who paid already, has a right of action against the
others because insofar as they are considered, their
liability will be several in solidum.

Art 89, RPC provides for the modes of totally

extinguishing criminal liability while Art 94, RPC
provides for the modes for partially extinguishing
criminal liability. But nowhere in the RPC can you find
an article enumerating for the mode for extinguishing
the civil liability.

EXTINGUISHMENT OF CIVIL LIABILITY

Art 112. Extinction of civil liability - Civil

liability established in Articles 100, 101, 102 and
103 of this Code shall be extinguished in the same
manner as other obligations, in accordance with the
provisions of the Civil Law

Under Art 112, extinction of civil liability shall be in

accordance with the New Civil Code. That’s why
there’s nothing in the RPC which provides the modes
for extinguishing civil liability. Under the Civil Code,
civil liability shall be extinguished by payment, loss of
thing due, remission of debt, merger of rights,
compensation, novation. What applies would be NCC.

- 118 -