2

DUAL NATURE OF CRIMES

From the standpoint of its effects, a crime has a dual character:

1. As an offense against the State because of the disturbance of the social
order; and
2. As an offense against private person injured by the crime unless it
involves the crime of treason, rebellion, espionage, contempt and others
(wherein no civil liability arises on the part of the offender because
there are no damages to be compensated or there is no private person
unjured.)

Characteristics of Penal Law

A. Generality – refers to the persons covered by penal laws.

B. Territoriality – refers to the place where the law is applicable.
C. Prospectivity – refers to the time when the law should be applied.

GENERALITY

Penal laws are binding on all persons who reside or sojourn in the Philippines
whether citizens or not.

This is based on Art. 14 of the New Civil Code, which states that: Penal Laws
and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all those who
live or sojourn in Philippine Territory.

The Philippine is a sovereign state with the obligation and the right of every
government to uphold its laws and maintain order within its domain; and
with the general jurisdiction to punish persons for offenses committed within
its territory, regardless of the nationality of the offender.

Exception: Those covered by treaties and laws of preferential application such

as ambassadors and heads of State under the principle of par in parem non
habet imperium (An equal has no power over an equal).

 Exception can be found also in the Art. 2 of the RPC, which states that
“Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application…”
2

meaning, the treaties and laws of preferential application shall be given

preference over the provisions of the RPC.

Liang vs. People

- Officials of international organizations enjoy “Functional Immunities”,
that is, only those necessary for the exercise of the functions of the
organization and the fulfilment of its purposes.

Republic Act 75, Section 4 - exemption to arrest or imprisonment of any

ambassador or public minister of any foreign state as well as his/her domestic
servant.

TERRITORIALITY

The law is applicable to all crimes committed within the limits of Philippine
territory.

The basis of the characteristic is Art. 2 of the RPC, which states that “….the
provisions of this code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine
Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone,
but also outside of its jurisdiction, against those who:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship;
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine
islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the
Philippine Island;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these
islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding
number;
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in
the exercise of their functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against the national security and the
law of the nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.

Outside of these five cases, Philippine courts cannot take jurisdiction over a
crime committed outside the country.
2

Philippine air or airship – is one that is duly registered in the Philippines and
under Philippine Laws.

If the air or airship is in the high seas where no country has jurisdiction, the
Philippines has jurisdiction.

If it is within the territory of another country, the host country will take
cognizance, but if that foreign country will not take cognizance, the
Philippines can assume jurisdiction.

Philippine warship and the official vessel of the President, wherever they are,
are extensions of the Philippines and its sovereignty.

What are crimes against National Security and Law of Nations?

- They include Treason, Espionage, Provoking War and Disloyalty in case
of War, Piracy and Mutiny.

REPUBLIC ACT 9851

- Provides that the State shall exercise jurisdiction over persons, whether
military or civilian, suspected or accused of a crime, defined and
penalized in this Act, regardless where the crime is committed.

PROSPECTIVITY

Prospectivity of penal laws means that laws have prospective application

unless they are favorable to the offender who is not a habitual criminal.

The bases of this characteristic are:

Art. 4 of the NCC which states that “Laws shall have no retroactive effect,
unless the contrary is provided”.

Art. 21 of the NCC which states that “no felony shall be punishable by any
penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission”.

Art. 22 of the NCC which states that “penal laws shall have retroactive effect
insofar as they favor the person who is not a habitual criminal”.
2

Sec. 22, Art. III of the Constitution which states that “no ex post facto law or
bill of attainder shall be enacted”.

Lex prospicit, non respicit - the law looks forward not backward.

RATIONALE: The rationale against retroactivity is that a law usually derides

rights which may have already become vested or impairs the obligations of
contract.
- The court shall take account of the actual existence of a statute prior to
its nullification as an operative fact.
- Prior to such nullification, the statute must have been in force and had
to be complied with. It will deprive the law of its quality of fairness and
justice of there be no recognition of what had transpired prior to such
adjudication.

What is a continuing or transitory crime?

 It means that some acts material and essential thereto and requisite in
their consummation occur in one municipality or territory, while some
occur in another.
 In such cases, the court wherein any of the crime’s essential and material
acts have been committed maintains jurisdiction to try the case.
 It being understood that the first court taking cognizance of the same
excludes the other.

RA 9262 (AAA vs. BBB, GR 212448, Jan. 11, 2018)

WON a complaint for psychological abuse under RA 9262 may even be filed
within the Philippines if the illicit relationship is conducted abroad.
- Yes. even if the alleged extra-marital affair causing the offended wife
mental and emotional anguish is committed abroad, the same does not
place a prosecution under RA 9262 absolutely beyond the reach of
Philippine court.

RA 10883 – CARNAPPING
 The intention of the law is to make carnapping an independent crime
and provide penalties different from those prescribed for qualified theft
or robbery.
2

ABERRATIO ICTUS (Mistake in the blow)

Intent to Kill
- if the third person died, intent to kill is conclusively presumed. Hence,
the crime committed against the third person is homicide or murder.
- Intent to kill the third person can be established if the accused is aware
of the possibility of hitting others in the process of killing the target
victim.
- See Campanilla Book 1, p. 68.

Complex Crime
- If the crimes committed against the target victim and third person, who
was hit by reason of aberration ictus, were produced by a single act, the
accused is liable for a complex crime.
- The accused is entitled to the benefit of Art. 48 of the RPC, which makes
two or more crimes as a single crime.

Exceptions (accused is liable for separate crimes):

1. Crime committed against the third person is merely a light felony,
such as Slight Physical Injuries.
2. Crime committed against the third person is Child Abuse.
3. If it will constitute special complex crime.
(Ex. Robbery with Homicide)
4. If the bullet that killed the target victim is different from the bullet
that killed the third person.
5. If the components of a compound crime are alleged in two different
informations. (ex. Crim case no.1 for murder of the third person,
Crim case 2 for frustrated murder for the target victim)

Child Abuse
- Is an offence punishable under special law, which cannot be made
components of a complex crime.

MISTAKE OF FACT
2

Mistake of fact which would relieve an accused of criminal liability has the
following elements:
1. The act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused
believed them to be;
2. The intention of the accused was not unlawful; and
3. There was no fault or negligence.

An act may be justified under the mistake of fact doctrine only if:
1. the accused had no time or opportunity to make further inquiry, and
2. if the circumstances pressed him to act immediately.

Note: While Mistake of Fact relieves the accused from criminal liability,
mistakes in the Identity of the Victim (error in personae) or mistake in the
legal consequences of one’s act does not exempt the accused from criminal
liability.

PRAETER INTENTIONEM

A person shall incur criminal liability for committing an intentional felony

although its wrongful consequences is graver than that intended.
- Thus, he shall incur criminal liability for homicide, although the crime is
different from unjust vexation which he intended to commit.

INTENT TO GAIN IN QUALIFIED THEFT

This Court has been consistent in holding that “intent to gain or animus
lucrandi is an internal act that is presumed from the unlawful taking by the
offender of the thing subject of asportation. Thus, actual gain is irrelevant as
the important consideration is the intent to gain.

In this case, it is clear from the established facts that it was accused-appellant
who opened the drawer in the masters’ bedroom and took away the cash and
valuables it contained. Therefore, the burden is on the defense to prove that
intent to gain was absent despite accused-appellant’s actual taking of her
employer’s valuables. It is precisely this burden that the defense failed to
discharge.
2

Presidential Decree (PD) 483 (Penalizing Betting, Game-Fixing Or Point

Shaving And Machinations In Sports Contests, as amended by PD 1602
Prescribing Stiffer Penalties On Illegal Gambling).

Game-fixing any arrangement, combination, scheme or agreement by which

the result of any game, races or sports contests shall be predicted and/or
known other than on the basis of the honest playing skill or ability of the
players or participants.

Point-shaving any such arrangement, combination, scheme or agreement by

which the skill or ability of any player or participant in a game, races or sports
contests to make points or scores shall be limited deliberately in order to
influence the result thereof in favor of one or other team, player or participant
therein.

Missing shots on purpose falls under point-shaving as the player deliberately

limited his skill or ability to influence the result of the game in favor of the
opponent, and doing it for money is in the ambit of game-fixing since it was an
arrangement by which the outcome of the game was predicted or manipulated
other than on the basis of honest playing talent.

JURISDICTION ON KIDNAPPING OF A FATHER OF HIS CHILDREN

Article 270. Kidnapping and failure to return a minor. — The penalty

of reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon any person who, being entrusted
with the custody of a minor person, shall deliberately fail to restore the latter
to his parents or guardians.”

This crime is classified under the crimes against liberty provided in

the Revised Penal Code. This crime can be committed by a parent, who, albeit
with some visitation rights, is without custodial rights. In your case, when the
father of your children took them from your place without your consent and
actually failed to return them to you, he became liable for this crime.
2

There are, however, crimes which although all the elements thereof for its
consummation may have occurred in a single place, yet by reason of the very
nature of the offense committed, the violation of the law is deemed to be
continuing. Of the first class, the crime of estafa or malversation and
abduction may be mentioned; and as belonging to the second class are
the crimes of kidnapping and illegal detention where the deprivation of liberty
is persistent and continuing from one place to another.

Thus, applying the said jurisprudence in your query, a case for kidnapping and
failure to return a minor can be filed in Makati City. Once a complaint is filed,
the necessary deportation proceedings must similarly be filed with the
assistance of the Department of Foreign Affairs since the extradition treaty of
the United States of America and the Philippines states that all requests for
such must be submitted through the diplomatic channel.

CONCUBINAGE after CONDONATION

The crime of concubinage is committed by keeping a mistress in the conjugal

dwelling; having sexual intercourse, under scandalous circumstances, with a
woman who is not his wife; and cohabiting with a woman who is not his wife
in any other place (Article 334, Revised Penal Code).
- The consent of the wife to the illicit affairs of her spouse or her
subsequent pardon of him may preclude her from instituting a criminal
complaint for concubinage against her husband.

It is clear that once the wife consents or condones her husband from an act of
concubinage, such consent or condonation may bar her from pursuing a
criminal complaint for concubinage. Nevertheless, such consent or
condonation should not be taken against the wife for subsequent illicit affairs.
In the same vein, such consent or condonation should not be treated as a “free
pass” for the husband to continue having a concubine or entering into a
subsequent illicit relationship. 

Accordingly, we believe that your aunt may institute a criminal complaint for
concubinage against your uncle if she can clearly establish the same. Although
she may have forgiven him and reconciled with him for his prior infidelity,
such cannot be taken as consent for him to continue his illicit affairs.
2

KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION

The elements of Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention under Article 267 of
the Revised Penal Code, as amended, are:

1. the offender is a private individual;

2. he kidnaps or detains another or in any other manner deprives the
latter of his liberty;
3. the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal; and
4. in the commission of the offense, any of the following circumstances is
present:
a. the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than three days ( If the
victim of kidnapping and serious illegal detention is a minor, the
duration of his detention is immaterial.); or
b. it is committed by simulating public authority; or
c. serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or
detained or threats to kill him are made; or
d. the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female, or a public
officer.

The fact that the kid was not physically restrained of his movement is
immaterial. The prevailing jurisprudence on kidnapping and illegal detention
is that the curtailment of the victim’s liberty need not involve any physical
restraint upon the victim’s person. For kidnapping to exist, it is not necessary
that the offender kept the victim in an enclosure or treated him harshly.

Josie is still liable for kidnapping because she is a private individual who took
the minor without the consent of the parents and brought the kid to her
province. The fact that the kid was not physically restrained, fed or treated
well is inconsequential because the kid was under the control of Josie.

THEFT

The elements of theft are the following:

1. that there be taking of personal property;
2. that said property belongs to another;
2

3. that the taking be done with intent to gain;

4. that the taking be done without the consent of the owner; and
5. that the taking be accomplished without the use of violence against or
intimidation of persons or force upon things.

The ability of the offender to freely dispose of the property stolen is not a
constitutive element of the crime of theft. It is immaterial whether the
offender able or unable to freely dispose of the property stolen since the
deprivation from the owner alone has already ensued from such acts of
execution.

In other words, the crime of theft was completed from the moment the thief
gained possession of the bath soaps and shampoos and hid them in his jacket.
It is of no moment that you caught him and stopped him from exiting your
store because by then, all the elements of the crime had already been fulfilled.

LIABILITY OF CONSPIRATORS

Once an express or implied conspiracy is proved, all of the conspirators are

liable as co-principals regardless of the extent and character of their
respective active participation in the commission of the crime or crimes
perpetrated in furtherance of the conspiracy.

Although it is axiomatic that no one is liable for acts other than his own, when
two or more persons agree or conspire to commit a crime, each is responsible
for all the acts of the others, done in furtherance of the agreement or
conspiracy.

With respect to robbery in band, the law presumes the attendance of

conspiracy so much so that ‘any member of a band who is present at the
commission of a robbery by the band, shall be punished as principal of any of
the assaults committed by the band, unless it be shown that he attempted to
prevent the same. In this instance, conspiracy need not be proved, as long as
the existence of a band is clearly established. Nevertheless, the liability of a
member of the band for the assaults committed by his group is likewise
anchored on the rule that the act of one is the act of all.

With respect to the crime of robbery, the same principle holds true.
2

Consequently, the moment that a direct conspiracy is established, every

conspirator is liable for the resulting felony unless a conspirator can show
that it prevented the commission of any other acts not originally agreed upon,
i.e., the subsequent killings in the facts in your question.

Thus, although your brother allegedly did not consent to the subsequent
killings in the commission of robbery, he nonetheless remains liable to the
resulting felony of robbery with homicide because he expressly agreed to the
commission of the crime and he did not prevent the subsequent killings.

OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS

Article 133. Offending the religious feelings. — The penalty of arresto

mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period
shall be imposed upon anyone who, in a place devoted to religious worship or
during the celebration of any religious ceremony shall perform acts
notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful.

Elements:
1. Committed by a public officer or employee or a private individual;
2. That the acts must be notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful
3. – The said offender performs acts:
a. In a place devoted to religious worship or
b. during the celebration of any religious ceremony.

In order to be considered as notoriously offensive to the religious feelings,

must be one directed against religious practice or dogma or ritual for the
purpose of ridicule; the offender, for instance, mocks, scoffs at or attempts to
damage an object of religious veneration; it must be abusive, insulting and
obnoxious.

Republic Act 11449 - Access Devices Regulation Act of 1998

Section 9. Prohibited Acts. — The following acts shall constitute access device
fraud and are hereby ordered to be unlawful:

q) skimming, copying or counterfeiting any credit card, payment card or debit

card, and obtaining any information therein with the intent of accessing the
2

account and operating the same whether or not cash is withdrawn or

monetary injury is caused by a perpetrator against the account holder or any
depositary bank.

Based on the foregoing, it is clear that the acts of skimming, copying or

counterfeiting any credit card, payment card or debit card, and obtaining any
information therein with the intent of accessing the account and operating the
same are prohibited acts under the said law which may subject the offender to
an imprisonment or fine or both, at the discretion of the court.

SALE OF SECOND-HAND MOTORCYCLE

Any sale or disposition thereafter shall be reported by the owner to the LTO
within three days upon such sale/disposition, by presenting an original copy
and furnishing a machine copy of the notarized Deed of Sale or similar
document evidencing the disposition of the motorcycle, to the LTO office
where the latest Certificate of Registration was issued.

Penalty:
Failure of the owner to register within five (5) days from acquisition of
ownership, or to immediately report its sale or disposition, shall subject the
owner to a penalty of imprisonment of arresto mayor to prision
correccional, as defined under the Revised Penal Code, or a fine of not less
than Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000.00) but not more than Fifty thousand
pesos (P50,000.00), or both.

If a motorcycle that is not yet registered with the LTO is used in connection
with an offense punishable under the Revised Penal Code or special penal
laws, the maximum penalty of the relevant offense shall be imposed on the
offenders.

Clearly, the sale or disposition of a motorcycle must be reported to the Land

Transportation Office within three days from such sale or disposition.

Nonetheless, the non-registration of the sale to the concerned entity will not
render the transaction invalid.
2

GENDER-BASED ONLINE SEXUAL HARASSMENT (RA 11313 – SAFE SPACES

ACT)

Gender-based online sexual harassment refers to an online conduct targeted

at a particular person that causes or likely to cause another mental, emotional
or psychological distress, and fear of personal safety, sexual harassment acts
including unwanted sexual remarks and comments, threats, uploading or
sharing of one’s photos without consent, video and audio recordings,
cyberstalking and online identity theft.

CHILD ABUSE (RA 7610 - Special Protection of Children Against Abuse,

Exploitation and Discrimination Act)

Child abuse
- refers to the maltreatment, whether habitual or not, of the child which
includes: “Any act by deeds or words which debases, degrades or
demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being.”

Consequently, to be liable, the following elements must be established:

1. the offended party must be a minor;
2. the accused committed any act by deeds or words, which debases,
degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a
human being;
3. the act or utterance was not done impulsively or carelessly out of anger;
and
4. there must be a specific intent to debase, degrade or demean the
intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being.

In some cases, specific intent need not be proven when the acts are
intrinsically cruel and excessive.
- The petitioner strangled, severely pinched, and beat an eight-year-old
child, causing her to limp. The Court held that these abusive acts are
intrinsically cruel and excessive as they impair the child’s dignity and
worth as a human being and infringe upon her right to grow up in a safe,
wholesome, and harmonious place. It was also highlighted that these
abusive acts are extreme measures of punishment not commensurate
with the discipline of an eight-year-old child.
2

TREASON

Any Filipino citizen who levies war against the Philippines or adheres to her
enemies giving them aid or comfort within the Philippines or elsewhere, shall
be punished by reclusion perpetua to death and shall pay a fine not to exceed
100,000 pesos.
- No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two
witnesses at least to the same overt act or on confession of the accused
in open court.

Elements:
a. That the offender is a Filipino citizen or a resident alien
b. That there is a war in which the Philippines is involved
c. That the offender either levies war against the government or adheres
to the enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

Treason is a war crime. It is not an all-time offense. It cannot be committed in

peace time. While there is peace, there are no traitors. Treason may be
incubated when peace reigns. Treasonable acts may actually be perpetrated
during peace, but there are no traitors until war has started.

As treason is basically a war crime, it is punished by the state as a measure of

self-defense and self-preservation. The law of treason is an emergency
measure. It remains dormant until the emergency arises. But as soon as war
starts, it is relentlessly put into effect.

It is apt to say that not every act of disloyalty is treason. To be considered as

such, it must be at a time of war wherein the Philippines is a party.

ESTAFA THROUGH MISAPPROPRIATION

With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence, namely: By misappropriating or

converting, to the prejudice of another, money, goods, or any other personal
property received by the offender in trust or on commission, or for
administration, or under any other obligation involving the duty to make
delivery of or to return the same, even though such obligation be totally or
2

partially guaranteed by a bond; or by denying having received such money,

goods, or other property.

The elements of estafa under Article 315, par. 1 (b) are as follows:
1. that money, goods, or other personal properties are received by the
offender in trust, or on commission, or for administration, or under any
other obligation involving the duty to make delivery of, or to return, the
same;
2. that there is a misappropriation or conversion of such money or
property by the offender or a denial of the receipt thereof;
3. that the misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the prejudice of
another; and
4. that there is a demand made by the offended party on the offender. 

The failure to return upon demand the properties which one has the duty to
return is tantamount to appropriating the same for his own personal use.

The words convert and misappropriate connote the act of using or disposing
of another’s property as if it were one’s own, or of devoting it to a purpose or
use different from that agreed upon. To misappropriate for one’s own use
includes not only conversion to one’s personal advantage, but also every
attempt to dispose of the property of another without right.

In proving the element of conversion or misappropriation, a legal

presumption of misappropriation arises when the accused fails to deliver the
proceeds of the sale or to return the items to be sold and fails to give an
account of their whereabouts.

CRIMINAL LIABILITY CANNOT BE INHERITED BY HEIRS

It is fundamental that criminal responsibility is personal. It cannot be

transferred to or inherited by the heirs of the accused upon his or her death.

Besides, the accused’s death prior to his final conviction by the Court renders
dismissible the criminal cases against him/her. Article 89 (1) of the RPC
provides that criminal liability is totally extinguished by the death of the
accused.
2

Moreover, it could further be argued that the crime has already prescribed
since the falsification of the Deed of Absolute Sale was allegedly committed in
1989.

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE

Contributory negligence is conduct on the part of the injured party,

contributing as a legal cause to the harm he has suffered, which falls below the
standard to which he is required to conform for his own protection.

To hold a person as having contributed to his injuries, it must be shown that

he performed an act that brought about his injuries in disregard of warning or
signs of an impending danger to health and body. To prove contributory
negligence, it is still necessary to establish a causal link, although not
proximate, between the negligence of the party and the succeeding injury. 

In a legal sense, negligence is contributory only when it contributes

proximately to the injury, and not simply a condition for its occurrence. 

Applying the above-quoted decision in your situation, negligence per

se arising from mere violation of municipal ordinance prohibiting overloading
of passengers is not sufficient to establish damages against the tricycle driver.
There must be a causal link between the negligence of the tricycle driver
which contributes proximately to the injury.

EXEMPLARY DAMAGES
- when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating
circumstances.

Under Art. 2230 of the Civil Code, exemplary damages may be granted if at
least one aggravating circumstance attended the commission of the crime. The
aggravating circumstance for this purpose need not be specifically alleged in
the information, and can be either a qualifying or attendant circumstance.

The aggravating circumstances not alleged in the Information may still be

proven for purposes of exemplary damages.
2

DY vs. PEOPLE
GR 189081

Civil liability ex delicto cannot be awarded if there is no act or omission

punished by law which can serve as the source of obligation. Any civil liability
arising from the loan takes the nature of a civil liability ex contractu. It does
not pertain to the civil action deemed instituted with the criminal case.

PRO REO PRINCIPLE vs. PRINCIPLE OF LENITY

Pro Reo Principle – The fundamental principle in applying and in interpreting

criminal laws is to resolve all doubts in favor of the accused.

In dubio pro reo – when in doubt, rule for the accused.

Principle of Lenity – The rule applies when the court is faced with two
possible interpretations of a penal statute, one that is prejudicial to the
accused and another is favorable to him. The rule calls for the adoption of an
interpretation which is more lenient to the accused.

FELONIES

Concept: Acts or Omissions punishable by law are felonies (delitos). Felonies

are committed not only by means of deceit (dolo) but alos by means of fault
(cupla). There is deceipt when the act performed with deliberate intent and
there is fault when the wrongful ac results from imprudence, negligence, lack
of foresight, or lack of skill.

General Elements of Crimes:

1. the act or omission (actus reus) and
2. the mental element which is commonly referred to as criminal intent
(mens rea).

DOLO
2

For one to be criminally liable for a felony by dolo, there must be a

concurrence of both an evil act and an evil intent.

1. Mens rea. It the mental element of a crime. In crimes by dolo, mens rea
will refer to the requirements of freedom, intelligence and intent while
doing the act or omitting to do the act.
2. Criminal Intent. It means a state of mind which willingly consents to the
act that is done, or free will choice, or volitions in the doing of the act. It
means that the act is voluntary, and that it proceeds from a mind free to
act.

CULPA

In crimes by Culpa, the mental element of the crime refers to the requirements
of freedom, intelligence, lack of foresight or skill, and the Voluntariness of the
act.

- Setting on fire the infected wounds of a girl to cure her which resulted
to burn injuries. The actions of the accused had not been to cause an evil
but rather intended as a remedy.
- Treatment to a boy to drive out bad spirits. The liability arises from
their reckless imprudence because they ought to know that their actions
would not bring about the cure. They are, therefore, guilty of reckless
imprudence resulting in homicide and not of murder.

QUASI OFFENSES under ARTICLE 365 of the RPC

- are distinct and separate crimes and not a mere modality in the
commission of a crime.

What is penalized under Art. 365 is the mental attitude or condition behind
the acts of dangerous recklessness and lack of care or foresight although such
mental attitude might have produced several effects or consequences.

Reckless Imprudence is the crime being punished by Art. 365 and the injuries
resulted from the act of reckless imprudence are essential only for purposes
of determining the appropriate penalty which may be imposed on the accused.
2

LACK OF INTELLIGENCE AND LACK OF FREEDOM AS EXEMPTING

CIRCUMSTANCES

Exempting Circumstances for Lack of Intelligence

1. Insane and imbecile persons
2. Children 15 y/o and under (RA 9344)
3. Children over 15 y/o and under 18 y/o who acted without discernment
(RA 9344)
4. Persons who acted through Mistake of Fact

Exempting Circumstances for Lack of Freedom

1. Compulsion of an irresistible force (Art. 12, par. 5)
2. Impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury (Art. 12,
par. 6)

CHILD ABUSE

Child Abuse under Sec. 10, par. a of RA 7610 is mala in se

- The SC said that with the loss of self-control of the father, the accused
lack that specific intent to debase, degrade or demean that intrinsic
worth and dignity of a child as a human being that was so essential in
the crime of child abuse.

Aberratio ictus resulting in Child Abuse

- If the accused has willful intention of committing a felonious act on
another person but the injury falls on the victim who is a minor, as
when he swang his arms to throw burning oil on his adversary but
instead the burning oil hit a baby instead, he would be criminally liable
for child abuse under Sec.10(a) of RA 7610.

Consented Sex is not an admissible defense in the case of violation of Section

5(b) of RA 7610 for lascivious conduct.
- A child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse
cannot validly give consent to sexual intercourse with another person.

Statutory Rape
- Is committed to a girl below 12 y/o or is demented even if she
consented to the sexual intercourse.
2

- It is always a crime of statutory rape under the RPC and the offendor
should no longer be held liable under RA 7610.

Statutory Acts of Lasciviousness

- When the offended party is less than 12 y/o or is demented, even if such
party consents to the lascivious conduct the crime is always statutory
acts of lasciviousness under Art. 346 of the RPC BUT THE PENALTY is
provided for under Section 5(b) of RA 7610. There is no conflict
between the RPC and RA 7610.

In case the victim who is 12 y/o or less than 18 y/o and is deemed to be a
child “exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse” because she AGREED
to indulge in sexual intercourse “for money, profit or any other consideration
or due to coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group”
- The crime is not rape under the RPC. Instead, the offender will be
penalized under Section 5(b) of RA 7610.

However, if the same victim gave her consent to the sexual intercourse, and
NO MONEY, PROFIT, CONSIDERATION, COERCION, or INFLUENCE is involved,
then there is no crime committed.
- BUT if the victim does not give her consent to sexual intercourse, in the
sense that the sexual intercourse was committed through force, threat
or intimidation, the crime is Rape under the RPC.

Principal Offender in RA 7610

- Those who engaged in or promote, facilitate or induce child prostitution
under Sec.5(a) shall be liable as PRINCIPAL BY FORCE OR
INDUCEMENT
- Whereas those who derive profit or advantage shall be liable as
PRINCIPAL BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION.

PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

First, for an accused to be criminally liable for the UNINTENDED

consequences of a criminal act, the following requisites must be present
1. That an intentional felony has been committed, and
2. That the wrong done be the direct, natural, and logical consequences of
the felony committed by the offender.
2

Second, the rule is that if a man creates in another person’s mind an

immediate sense of danger, which causes such person to try to escape, and, in
so doing, the latter injures himself, the man who creates such a state of mind
is responsible for the resulting injuries.

Third, for an accused to be held responsible to the resulting injury, the felony
must the proximate cause of the resulting injury. Proximate Cause is that
cause, which in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by any efficient
intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which, the result would
not have occurred.

o Remember, to hold the accused responsible for the resulting

death of the victim:
1. It should be medically established that tetanus developed from
the injuries inflicted by the accused, and
2. The possibility of an efficient intervening cause from the time
injuries had been inflicted until death ensued is remote.

WHEN FELONY NOT DEMED PROXIMATE CAUSE OF THE INJURY

The felony committed is not the proximate cause of the resulting injury when:
a. There is an ACTIVE FORCE that intervened between the felony
committed and the resulting injury, and the active force is a distinct act
or fact absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the accused; or
b. The resulting injury is due to the intentional act of the victim.

IMPOSSIBLE CRIME

1. That the act performed would be an offense against persons or

property;
2. That the act was done with evil intent;
3. That is accomplishment is inherently impossible, or that the means
employed is either inadequate or ineffectual; and
4. That the act performed should not constitute a violation of another
provision of the RPC.

Legal Impossibility
2

- Occurs where the intended acts, even if completed, would not amount to
a crime. Legal impossibility would apply to those circumstances where:
1. The motive, desire, and expectation is to perform an act in violation
of the law;
2. There is intention to perform the physical act;
3. There is performance of the intended physical act; and
4. The consequences resulting from the intended act does not amount
to a crime.

- The impossibility of killing a person already dead falls in this category.

Factual Impossibility
- Occurs when extraneous circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond
his control prevent the consummation of the intended crime.
- Ex. Man puts his hand in the coat pocket of another with the intention to
steal the latter’s wallet and finds the pocket empty.

OVERT ACT

- Is some physical activity or deed, indication the intention to commit a

particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if
carried to its complete termination following its natural course, without
being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the voluntary desistance of
the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete
offense.

- Overt acts must have an immediate and necessary relation to the

offense.

ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE

- If the wound/s sustained by the victim were not fatal or mortal, then the
crime committed is only attempted murder or attempted homicide.
2

- the attending physician and the medical certificate must be presented to

determine the nature of the injury sustained by the victim, without
which only Attempted.

Etino vs. People

- an accused who only filed a single shot at close range, but did not hit any
vital part of the victim’s body, the victim’s wounds, based on the Medical
Certificate, were located at not a vital part of the body, and immediately
fled the scene right after the shooting
- should be liable for Serious Physical Injuries only.
- According to the SC, these acts certainly do not suggest that accused had
intended to kill the victim, for if he did, he could have fired multiple
shots to ensure the latter’s death.

ATTEMPTED RAPE

- For the accused to be convicted of the crime of attempted rape, he must

have already commenced the act of inserting his sexual organ in the
vagina of the victim (slight penetration is enough)
o but due to some cause or accident, excluding his own spontaneous
desistance, he wasn’t able to even slightly penetrate the victim –
only acts of lasciviousness.

CONSUMMATED THEFT

- It is immaterial to the product of the felony that the offender once

having committed all the acts of execution for theft, is able or unable to
freely dispose of the property stolen since the deprivation from the
owner alone has already ensued from such acts of execution.

CONSPIRACY

Wheel Conspiracy
- The Wheel conspiracy occurs when there is single person or group (the
HUB) dealing individually with two or more other persons or groups
2

(the SPOKES). The Spoke typically interacts with the Hub rather than
with another Spoke. In the event that the spoke shares a common
purpose to succeed, there is a single conspiracy. However, in the
instance when each spoke is unconcerned with the success of the other
spokes, there are multiple conspiracies.

Chain Conspiracy
- Chain conspiracy exists when there is successive communication and
cooperation in much the same way as with legitimate business
operations between manufacturer and wholesaler, then wholesaler and
retailer, and the retailer and consumer. This involves individuals linked
together in a vertical chain to achieve a criminal objective.

Conspiracy is not presumed. It must be established with proof beyond

reasonable doubt either by direct or indirect evidence or circumstantial
evidence.
- Except: Conspiracy is legally presumed in hazing!
 “The presence of any person during the hazing is prima
facie evidence of participation as principal, unless he
prevented the commission of the punishable acts.

MERE PRESENCE IN THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME AS BASIS OF JOINT

CRIMINAL LIABILITY

1. In hazing (up)
2. Article 296 of the RPC provides that any member of a band who is
present at the commission of robbery by the band shall be punished as
principal of any of the assaults committed by the band, unless if be
shown that he attempted to prevent the same.

UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION
- There must be actual physical force or actual use of a weapon. It is
present only when the one attacked faces real and immediate threat to
his life. It must be continuous, otherwise, it does not constitute
aggression warranting self-defense.
2