BOOK I –

ACT OF 2006
(RA 9344)
does not work for the treatment; provides an
restoration of the opportunity for the
PENALTIES
rights to hold public reformation of a
office, or the right of penitent offender Juvenile Justice and Welfare System
suffrage, unless such which might be less Juvenile Justice and Welfare System refers to a
rights are expressly probable if he were to system dealing with children at risk and children in
restored by means of serve a prison conflict with the law, which provides child-
pardon. sentence; and prevent appropriate proceedings, including programs and
the commission of services for prevention, diversion, rehabilitation,
offenses. re-integration and aftercare to ensure their normal
growth and development (RA 9344, Sec. 4).
Exercised when the Must be exercised
person is already within the period for “Child in Conflict with the Law”
convicted. perfecting an appeal.
It refers to a child who is alleged as, accused of, or
Being a private act by Being a grant by the adjudged as, having committed an offense under
the president, it must trial court; it follows Philippine laws [RA 9344, Sec. 4(e)].
be pleaded and that the trial court also
proved by the person has the power to order Where a child is detained, the court may order
pardoned. its revocation in a the following
proper case and under
proper circumstances. 1. The release of the minor on recognizance to
his/her parents and other suitable persons;
Does not alter the fact Does not alter the fact 2. The release of the child in conflict with the law
that the accused is a that the accused is a on bail; or
recidivist as it recidivist as it 3. The transfer of the minor to a youth detention
produces only the provides only for an home/youth rehabilitation center.
extinction of the opportunity of
personal effects of the reformation to the NOTE: The court shall not order the detention of a
penalty. penitent offender. child in a jail pending trial or hearing of his/her
case except in youth detention homes established
Does not extinguish Does not extinguish by local governments (RA 9344, Sec. 35)
the civil liability of the the civil liability of the
offender. offender. Other alternative to imprisonment may be
availed by a child in conflict with the law under
Persons disqualified to avail the benefits of probation RA 9344
(BAR 2010)
The court may, after it shall have convicted and
Any person convicted for drug trafficking or JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE
pushing under the Comprehensive Dangerous
Drugs Act of 2002, regardless of the penalty
imposed by the Court, cannot avail of the privilege
granted by the Probation Law or Presidential
Decree No. 968 as amended (Sec. 24 of RA 9165 or
CDDA of 2002). Also, those convicted of violation of
Election Code, and those who appealed the
decision (but see Colinares v. People, G.R. No.
182748, December 13, 2011).

Persons qualified to avail the benefits of

probation

A first time minor offender even if the penalty

imposed is more than six (6) years. However, the
crime must be illegal possession of dangerous
drugs only.

1
sentenced a child in conflict with the law, and upon
application at any time, place the child on probation Criminal liability may be extinguished either,
in lieu of service of sentence (Sec. 42, RA 9344). partially or totally.
____________________________________________________
Partial extinction of criminal liability
CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITIES
___________________________________________________ 1. By conditional pardon;
2. By commutation of the sentence; and
MODIFICATION AND EXTINCTION
Extinguishment of criminal liability OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

2
 BOOK I – CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITIES

3. For good conduct allowances which the culprit 1. During the first two years of imprisonment, he
may earn while he is undergoing preventive shall be allowed a deduction of twenty days for
imprisonment or serving his sentence (RPC, Art. each month of good behavior during detention;
94 as amended by RA 10592). 2. During the third to the fourth year, inclusive, of
his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a
Nature of conditional pardon deduction of twenty-three days for each month
of good behavior during detention;
When delivered and accepted, it is considered a 3. During the following years until the tenth year,
contract between the sovereign power of the inclusive of his imprisonment, he shall be
executive and the convict that the former will allowed a deduction of twenty-five days for
release the latter upon compliance with the each month of good behavior during detention;
condition. 4. During the eleventh and successive years of his
imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction
Obligation incurred by a person granted with of thirty days (30) for each month of good
conditional pardon (Art. 95, RPC) behavior during detention;
5. At any time during the period of imprisonment,
He shall incur the obligation of complying strictly he shall be allowed another deduction of
with the conditions imposed therein, otherwise, his fifteen days, in addition to numbers one to four
noncompliance with any of the conditions specified hereof, for each month of study, teaching or
shall result in the revocation of the pardon and the mentoring service time rendered (RA 10592).
provisions of Art. 159 on violation of conditional
pardon shall be applied to him. NOTE: An appeal by the accused shall not deprive
him of entitlement to the above allowances for
Nature of commutation of sentence good conduct.

It is a change of the decision of the court made by Person granting time allowance (Art. 99, RPC,
the Chief Executive by reducing the degree of the as amended by RA 10592)
penalty inflicted upon the convict, or by decreasing Whenever lawfully justified, the Director of the
the length of the imprisonment or the amount of Bureau of Corrections, the Chief of the Bureau of
the fine. Jail Management and Penology and/or the Warden
of a provincial, district, municipal or city jail shall
Effect of commutation of sentence (Art. 96, RPC) grant allowances for good conduct. Such
allowances once granted shall not be revoked (Art.
The commutation of the original sentence for 99 as amended by RA 10592).
another of a different length and nature shall have
the legal effect of substituting the latter in the place Special time allowance for loyalty of prisoner
of the former. (Art. 98, RPC, as amended by RA 10592)

Cases where commutation is provided for by It is a deduction of one fifth (1/5) of the period of
the Code sentence of a prisoner who, having evaded the
service of his sentence during the calamity or
1. When the convict sentenced to death is over 70 catastrophe mentioned in Art. 158, gives himself up
years of age (Art. 83); and to the authorities within 48 hours following the
2. When eight justices of the Supreme Court fail issuance of the proclamation by the President
to reach a decision for the affirmance of the announcing the passing away of the calamity or
death penalty (Reyes, 2008). catastrophe. A deduction of two-fifths of the period
of his sentence shall be granted in case said prisoner
Nature of good conduct allowances (Art. 97, chose to stay in the place of his confinement
RPC, as amended by RA 10592) notwithstanding the existence of a calamity or
catastrophe enumerated in Article 158 of this Code
Allowances for good conduct are deductions from (Art. 98 as amended by RA 10592).
the term of sentence for good behavior. The good
conduct of any offender qualified for credit for Parole
preventive imprisonment pursuant to Article 29 of
the Code, or of any convicted prisoner in any penal Parole consists in the suspension of the sentence of
institution, rehabilitation or detention center or a convict after serving the minimum term of the
any other local jail shall entitle him to the following indeterminate penalty, without granting a pardon,
deductions from the period of his sentence: prescribing the terms upon which the sentence shall
be suspended (Reyes, 2008).
Parole system cannot exist without the Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 81337, August 16,
indeterminate sentence law. 1991).
Conditional pardon vis-à-vis Parole Causes of extinction from criminal liability v.
the causes of justification or exemption
CONDITIONAL The causes of the extinction arise after the
PAROLE
PARDON commission of the offense while the causes of
It may be given at any It may be given after justification or exemption arise from
time after final the prisoner has served circumstances existing either before the
judgment by the Chief the minimum penalty commission of the crime or at the moment of its
Executive. by the Board of commission (Reyes, 2008).
Pardons and Parole
under the provisions of PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES AND
the Indeterminate VIOLATIONS OF SPECIAL LAWS
Sentence Law. (ACT 3326)

For violation of the For violation of the Nature of prescription of a crime/penalty

conditional pardon, the parole, the convict
convict may be cannot be prosecuted The State or the People lose the right to prosecute
rearrested or under Art. 159. He can the crime or to demand service of the penalty
reincarcerated by the be rearrested and imposed (Santos v. Superintendent, G.R. No. 34334,
Chief Executive or may reincarcerated to serve November 28, 1930).
be prosecuted under the unserved portion of
Art. 159 of the Code. his original penalty. Prescription of crimes (Art. 90, RPC) (BAR
1994, 1997, 2004, 2010)
NOTE: The mere
commission, not Those punishable by:
conviction by the court,
of any crime is 1. Death, reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal in
sufficient to warrant twenty (20) years;
the parolee’s arrest and 2. Other afflictive penalties (prision mayor) in
reincarceration fifteen (15) years;
(Guevarra, in Reyes, 3. Correctional penalty (prision correccional) in
2008). ten (10) years;
4. Arresto mayor in five (5) years;
Total extinguishment of criminal liability (Art. 5. Light offenses in two (2) months.
89, RPC) (BAR 1990, 1992, 2000, 2004, 2009)
When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one,
Art. 89 provides for the following: the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the
application of prescription (Art. 90, RPC).
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal
penalties; and as to pecuniary penalties, Rule where the last day of the prescriptive
liability therefor is extinguished only when the period falls on a Sunday or a legal holiday
death of the offender occurs before final
judgment; (BAR 2013) In Yapdiangco v. Buencamino, the Court said that in
2. By service of sentence; such a case, the information may no longer be filed
3. By prescription of the crime; the next day as the crime has already prescribed
4. By prescription of the penalty; (G.R. No. L-28841, June 24, 1983).
5. By marriage of the offended woman in cases of
seduction, abduction, rape and acts of Prescription of the crimes of oral defamation
lasciviousness, as provided in Art. 344 of the and slander (BAR 1994, 1997, 2004, 2010)
RPC.
6. By absolute pardon; and Distinction should be made between simple and
7. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the grave slander. Grave slander prescribes in six (6)
penalty and all its effects. Extinction of months while simple slander in two (2) months.
criminal liability does not necessarily mean
that civil liability is also extinguished Prescription of the crimes punishable by
(Petralba v. destierro

93
Classified as a correctional penalty under Art. 25, ordinances
and according to Art. 90, ten (10) years should be
the prescription period (Dalao v. Geronimo, G.R. No.
L-5969, April 29, 1953).

Prescription of the crimes punishable by fines

Fines are also classified as afflictive, correctional,

or light penalty under Art. 26. That is, in 15 years,
10 years, and 2 months, respectively.

The subsidiary penalty for non-payment of the fine

should not be considered in determining the period
of prescription of such crimes (People v. Basalo,
101 Phil. 57). In addition, in light felonies when a
fine of P200 is also provided, such fine should not
be considered correctional.

Basis for prescription when fine is an

alternative penalty higher than the other
penalty which is by imprisonment

Prescription herein is based on fine (People v.

Basalo, supra).

NOTE: The ruling in Basalo applies even if the

penalty is arresto mayor and fine.

Prescriptive period of offenses punished under

special laws and municipal ordinances

Act No. 3763, amending No. 3326, provides:

1. Offenses punished only by a fine or by

imprisonment for not more than one month —
after one year;
2. Offenses punished by imprisonment for more
than one month, but less than two years — after
4 years;
3. Offenses punished by imprisonment for two
years or more but less than six years — after 8
years;
4. Offenses punished by imprisonment for six
years or more — after 12 years;
5. Offenses under Internal Revenue Law — after
5 years;
6. Violation of municipal ordinances — after 2
months;
7. Violations of the regulations or conditions of
certificate of convenience by the Public Service
Commission — after 2 months (Reyes, 2008).

NOTE: Act 3326 is not applicable where the special

law provides for its own prescriptive period
(People
v. Ramos, 83 SCRA 1).

Running of the prescriptive periods for

violations penalized by special laws and

94
Prescription shall begin to run from the any kind of investigative proceeding instituted
day of the commission of the violation of against the guilty person, which may ultimately
the law, and if the same be not known at lead to his prosecution should be sufficient to toll
the time, from the discovery thereof and prescription (Panaguiton, Jr. v. DOJ, G.R. No.
the institution of judicial proceedings for 167571, November 25, 2008).
its investigation and punishment (Act No.
3326, Sec. 2).
Prescription does not divest court of
jurisdiction; it is a ground for acquittal of
the accused. Thus, the court must
exercise jurisdiction, and not inhibit itself
(Santos v. Superintendent, 55 Phil. 345).

Interruption of the running of the

prescriptive period for crimes or
violations punishable by the RPC,
special law & ordinance

The running of the prescriptive period

shall be interrupted:

1. Crime punishable by the RPC –

interrupted upon the filing of the
case before the fiscal’s office.
2. Crime punishable by special law –
interrupted upon the filing of the
case before the fiscal’s office even for
purposes of preliminary
investigation.
3. Violation of municipal ordinance –
interrupted upon the filing of the
case before the appropriate court

Determining prescription of offenses

(Art. 91, RPC)

The period of prescription commences to

run from the day the crime is committed

1. The period of prescription

commences to run from the day on
which the crime is discovered by the
offended party, the authorities or
their agents.
2. It is interrupted by the filing of the
complaint or information.
3. It commences to run again when
such proceedings terminate without
the accused being convicted or
acquitted or are unjustifiably stopped
for any reason not imputable to him.
4. The term of prescription shall not
run when the offender is absent from
the Philippines.

NOTE: The term "proceedings" should

now be understood to be either executive
or judicial in character: executive when it
involves the investigation phase; and,
judicial when it refers to the trial and
judgment stage. With this clarification,
95
 BOOK I – CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITIES

Situations which do not follow Art. 91 A’s wife were discovered by X, the gardener.
(Computation of prescription of offenses) Since X had a standing warrant of arrest, he
hid
1. Continuing crimes – prescriptive period will
start to run only at the termination of the
intended result.
2. In crimes against false testimony – prescriptive
period is reckoned from the day a final
judgment is rendered and not at the time when
the false testimony was made.
3. Election offense –
a. If discovery of the offense is incidental to
judicial proceedings, prescription begins
when such proceeding terminates; or
b. From the date of commission of the
offense.

---
Q: One fateful night in January 1990, while 5-
year old Albert was urinating at the back of
their house, he heard a strange noise coming
from the kitchen of their neighbor and
playmate, Ara. When he peeped inside, he saw
Mina, Ara’s stepmother, very angry and
strangling the 5- year old Ara to death. Albert
saw Mina carry the dead body of Ara, place it
inside the trunk of the car and drive away. The
dead body of Ara was never found. Mina spread
the news in the neighborhood that Ara went to
live with her grandparents in Ormoc City. For
fear of his life, Albert did not tell anyone, even
his parents and relatives, about what he
witnessed. Twenty and a half (20 & ½) years
after the incident, and right after his graduation
in Criminology, Albert reported the crime to
NBI authorities. The crime of homicide
prescribes in 20 years. Can the State still
prosecute Mina for the death of Ara despite the
lapse of 20 and 1/2 years? (BAR 2000)

A: YES, the State can still prosecute Mina for the

death of Ara despite the lapse of 20 and ½ years.
Under Article 91, RPC, the period of prescription
commences to run from the day on which the crime
is discovered by the offended party, the authorities
or their agents. In the case at bar, the commission
of the crime was known only to Albert, who was
not the offended party nor an authority or an agent
of an authority. It was discovered by the NBI
authorities only when Albert revealed to them the
commission of the crime. Hence, the period of
prescription of 20 years for homicide commenced
to run only from the time Albert revealed the same
to the NBI authorities.
---
---
Q: A killed his wife and buried her in the
backyard. He immediately went into hiding in
the mountains. Three years later, the bones of

95
 CRIMINAL LAW
the bones in an old clay jar and kept quiet about The filing of the charge 6 years thereafter is
it. After two years, Z, the caretaker, found the well within the prescriptive period.
bones and reported the matter to the police. ---
After 15 years of hiding, A left the country but
returned 3 years later to take care of his ailing
sibling. Six years thereafter, he was charged Prescription of penalties (Art. 92, RPC) (BAR
with parricide, but he raised the defense of 1993, 1994, 1997, 2004, 2010)
prescription.
a. Under the Revised Penal Code, when does 1. Death and reclusion perpetua in twenty (20)
the period of prescription of a crime years;
commence to run? 2. Other afflictive penalties (reclusion temporal to
b. When is it interrupted? prision mayor) in fifteen (15) years;
c. Is A’s defense tenable? Explain. (BAR 2010) 3. Correctional penalty (prision correccional) in
ten (10) years;
A: 4. Arresto mayor in five (5) years; and
5. Light penalties in one (1) year.
a. Under Art. 91 of the RPC, the period of
prescription commences to run upon discovery Rules in prescription of penalties (Sec. 93)
of the crime by the offended party, the
authorities, or their agent. 1. The period of prescription of penalties
b. It is interrupted upon filing of the complaint or commences to run from the date when the
information in court. culprit evaded the service of his sentence. (BAR
c. No, parricide prescribes in 20 years. The period 2015)
of prescription started only when Z reported 2. It is interrupted if the convict—
the matter to the police, which is equivalent to
10 years of hiding from the time of reporting to a. Gives himself up,
Z. The period of three years shall not be b. Be captured,
counted since he is absent from the Philippines. c. Goes to a foreign country with which we have
no extradition treaty (BAR 2015), or

d. Commits another crime before the expiration Q: Petitioner Adelaida Tanega failed to appear on the day
of the period of prescription. of the execution of her sentence. On the same day,
PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTIES
NOTE: The acceptance of a conditional pardon also ART. 92, RPC
interrupts the prescriptive period, likening such respondent judge issued a warrant for her arrest. She
acceptance to the case of one who flees from this was never arrested. More than a year later, petitioner
jurisdiction (People v. Puntillas, G.R. No. 45269). through counsel moved to quash the warrant of arrest,
on the ground that the penalty had prescribed. Petitioner
Period of prescription of penalties commence claimed that she was convicted for a light offense and
to run again since light offenses prescribe in one year, her penalty
had already prescribed. Is the motion meritorious?
When the convict escapes again, after having been
captured and returned to prison (Reyes, 2008) A: NO, the penalty has not prescribed as she did not evade
her service of sentence. For purpose of prescription of
Elements of prescription of penalties penalties, Art. 93 of the Revised Penal Code, which provides
that the prescription of penalties “shall commence to run
1. That the penalty is imposed by final sentence; from the date when the culprit should evade the service of
2. That the convict evaded the service of the his sentence,” must be understood in the light of Art. 157, as
sentence by escaping during the term of his the concept of evasion of sentence is readily provided for in
sentence; this Article (Tanega v. Masakayan, G.R. No. 141718, January
3. That the convict who escaped from prison has 21, 2005).
not given himself up, or been captured, or gone ---
to a foreign country with which we have no
extradition treaty, or committed another Prescription of crimes vis-à-vis Prescription of penalties
crime; and
4. That the penalty has prescribed because of the
lapse of time from the date of the evasion of
the service of the sentence by the convict
(Reyes, 2008).

---

96
 BOOK I – CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITIES
offense against the State. In criminal cases, the
PRESCRIPTION OF PRESCRIPTION OF intervention of the aggrieved parties is limited to
CRIMES PENALTIES being witnesses for prosecution.
Loss or forfeiture of Loss of forfeiture of
the State to prosecute. the State to enforce XPN: Pardon by an offended party in the crimes of
judgment. adultery and concubinage will be a bar to criminal
prosecution, provided, they pardoned both
Starts counting upon Starts counting upon offenders. Provided further, it must be made before
discovery of the the escape or evasion the institution of criminal prosecution. Pardon here
commission of the of service of sentence. may be implied (Art. 344).
crime.
In the crimes of seduction, abduction, rape or acts
Mere absence from the Absence from the of lasciviousness, there shall be no criminal
Philippines interrupts Philippines interrupts prosecution if the offender has been pardoned by
the running of the the period only when the offended party or her parents, grandparents or
prescription. he goes to a foreign guardian. Provided, the pardon in such cases must
country without be express.
extradition treaty with
us. NOTE: Pardon by the wife in favor of the husband
Commission of another Commission of another found guilty of raping her extinguishes the penalty.
crime before the crime before
expiration of the expiration of the Rule on extinguishment of criminal liability by
period does not period interrupts the the marriage of the offended woman to her
interrupt prescription. prescription. offender in seduction, abduction, rape and acts
of lasciviousness
PARDON BY THE OFFENDED PARTY
The extinguishment of criminal liability by the
GR: Pardon by the offended party does marriage of the offended woman to her offender in
not result to extinguishment of seduction, abduction, rape and acts of
criminal action. A crime committed is an lasciviousness is not an absolute rule. The marriage

97
must be contracted in good faith. Hence, a marriage impeachment.
contracted only to avoid criminal liability is devoid
of legal effects (People v. Santiago, 51 Phil. 68).

Likewise, in cases of multiple rapes, the

subsequent valid marriage of the offender and the
offended party will not extinguish criminal liability
(Sandoval, 2010).

Compromise does NOT extinguish criminal

liability

A crime is a public offense which must be

prosecuted and punished by the Government on its
own motion even though complete reparation
should have been made of the damage suffered by
the offended party (People v. Benitez, 59 O.G. 1407).

NOTE: There may be a compromise upon the civil

liability arising from an offense; but such
compromise shall not extinguish the public action
for the imposition of the legal penalty (NCC, Art.
2034).

PARDON BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

Pardon

It is an act of grace proceeding from the power

entrusted with the execution of the laws which
exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed
from the punishment the law inflicts for the crime
he has committed.

A pardon, whether absolute or conditional, is in the

nature of a deed, for the validity of which is an
indispensable requisite. Once accepted by the
grantee, the pardon already delivered may not be
revoked by the granting authority (Reyes, 2008).

Effects of pardon by the President

1. GR: A pardon shall not restore the right to hold

public office or the right of suffrage.

XPN: When either or both rights are expressly

restored by the terms of the pardon.

2. It shall not exempt the culprit from the payment

of the civil indemnity. The pardon cannot make
an exception to this rule.

Limitations upon the exercise of the pardoning

power

1. The power can be exercised only after

conviction; and
2. Such power does not extend to cases of
 Extinguishment of the effect of the accessory It is granted only after Pardon should be given
penalties attached to it by pardon of the conviction and may be before the institution of
principal penalty extended to any of the criminal prosecution
GR: Pardon of the principal penalty does not offenders. and must be extended
extinguish the effect of the accessory penalties to both offenders (RPC,
attached to it. When the principal penalty is Art. 344).
remitted by pardon, only the effect of that principal
penalty is extinguished. The rights are not restored AMNESTY
unless expressly restored by the terms of the
pardon. Amnesty

XPN: When an absolute pardon is granted after the It is an act of sovereign power granting oblivion or
term of imprisonment has expired, it removes all a general pardon for a past offense, and is rarely, if
that is left of the consequences of conviction ever exercised in favor of a single individual, and is
(Cristobal v. Labrador, G.R. No. L-47941, December 7, usually exerted in behalf of persons, who are
1940). subject to trial, but have not yet been convicted
(Brown v. Walker, 161 U.S. 602).
Pardon by the Chief Executive vis-à-vis Pardon
by the offended party (BAR 1994) Pardon vis-à-vis Amnesty (BAR 2006)

PARDON BY THE PARDON BY THE In pardon, the convict is excused from serving the
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFENDED PARTY sentence but the effects of conviction remain
unless expressly remitted by the pardon; hence, for
It extinguishes the It does not extinguish pardon to be valid, there must be a sentence
criminal liability of the criminal liability of the already final and executory at the time the same is
offender. offender. granted. Moreover, the grant is in favor of
individual convicted offenders, not to a class of
It cannot exempt the Offended party can convicted
offender from the waive the civil liability
payment of the civil which the offender
indemnity. must pay.

offenders; and the crimes subject of the grant may ---

be common crimes or political crimes. The grant is ________________________________________________
a private act of the Chief Executive which does not
require the concurrence of any other public officer.
CIVIL LIABILITY
In amnesty, the criminal complexion of the act ________________________________________________
constituting the crime is erased, as though such act
was innocent when committed; hence the effects of PERSONS CIVILLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES
the conviction are obliterated. Amnesty is granted
in favor of a class of convicted offenders, not to GR: Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly
individual convicted offenders; and the crimes liable (RPC, Art. 100).
involved are generally political offenses not
common crimes. Amnesty is a public act that XPNs:
requires concurrence of the Philippine Senate.
(BAR 2015) 1. If there is no damage caused by the commission of the
--- crime, the offender is not civilly liable.
Q: A, while serving sentence for homicide 2. There is no private person injured by the crime
escaped but was re-arrested, and was .
sentenced for evasion of service of sentence. Basis of civil liability
Later on, he was granted absolute pardon for
homicide. He now claims that the pardon A crime has dual character: (1) as an offense against the
includes the evasion of service since the latter state because of the disturbance of social order; and (2) as
crime occurred because of Homicide. Is A’s an offense against the private person injured by the crime.
contention correct? In the ultimate analysis, what gives rise to the civil liability
is really the obligation of everyone to repair or to make
A: NO. Pardon by the Chief Executive must specify whole the damage caused to another by reason of his act or
the crime and does not include those not specified omission, whether done intentionally or negligently and
in the pardon. whether or not punishable by law (Occena v. Icamina, G.R.
No. 82146, January 22, 1990).
Q: Since a person criminally liable is also civilly
liable, does his acquittal in the criminal case
mean extinction of his civil liability?

A: NO, civil liability may exist, although the accused

is not held criminally liable, in the following cases:

1. Acquittal on reasonable doubt (NCC, Art. 29).

NOTE: There is no need for a separate civil

action. The reason is the accused has been
accorded due process. To require a separate
civil action would mean needless clogging of
court dockets and unnecessary duplication of
litigation with all its attendant loss of time,
effort, and money on the part of all concerned
(Padilla v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-39999,
May 31, 1984).
2. Acquittal from a cause of non-imputability.

XPN: The exemption from criminal liability in

favor of an imbecile or an insane person, and a
person under fifteen years of age, or one who
over fifteen but under eighteen years of age,
who has acted without discernment, and those
acting under compulsion of an irresistible
force or under the impulse of an uncontrollable
fear of an equal or greater injury does not
include exemption from civil liability (RPC, Art.
101).

3. Acquittal in the criminal action for negligence

does not preclude the offended party from
filing a civil action to recover damages, based
on the new theory that the act is a quasi-delict.
4. When there is only civil responsibility.
5. In cases of independent civil actions (NCC,
Articles 31, 32, 33, and 34).

CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS EXEMPT FROM

CRIMINAL LIABILITY

GR: Exemption from criminal liability does not

include exemption from civil liability.

XPNs:

1. No civil liability in paragraph 4 of Article 12

(injury caused by mere accident).
2. No civil liability in paragraph 7 of Article 12
(failure to perform an act required by law
when prevented by some lawful or insuperable
cause).

Persons civilly liable for the acts of an insane or

minor
If the persons having legal authority or control
over the insane or minor are at fault or negligent,
then they are the persons civilly liable for the acts
of the latter.