21AYK

2022 LAST MINUTE TIPS

AQUILA LEGIS FRATERNITY
CRIMINAL LAW
2022 BAR OPERATIONS
21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW – REVISED PENAL CODE BOOK 1

General Principles
Territoriality
Q: What are the exceptions to the rule that Philippine penal laws are enforceable only within its territory?
A: The following may be given extra-territorial application:
1. Those who should commit an offense while on a Philippine Ship or airship;
2. Those who should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and
securities issued by the government of the Philippine Islands;
3. Those who should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations
and securities mentioned in the preceding number;
4. Those who, while being public officers or employees, commits an offense in the exercise of their functions;
5. Those who should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations defined in Title
One of Book Two (Art. 2, RPC)
Note: Cybercrime Prevention Act may also be given extraterritorial application. (Sec. 21, R.A. 10175)

Prospectivity
Q: In 2016, A was found guilty of Estafa for having defrauded X. Judgment became final and executory.
However, R.A. 10951 was subsequently enacted in 2017, and this readjusted the graduated values for which
the penalties for Estafa are based, significantly lowering the prescribed penalty for Estafa. Given these
circumstances, may A’s prison sentence be adjusted? If so, is A entitled to probation?
A: A’s prison sentence may be adjusted despite the immutability of a final judgment, which penalty is now
probationable. Because of R.A. No. 10951, not only must the sentence of the accused be modified respecting the rule
on the retroactive effectivity of favorable laws, A may even apply for probation. Applying Section 4 of P.D. No. 968, as
amended, since the judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty is modified through the
imposition of a probationable penalty, A may apply for probation based on the modified decision before such
decision becomes final. (CAMPANILLA citing Aguinaldo v. People, G.R. No. 22615, Jan. 13, 2021)

Felonies
Criminal Liabilities and Felonies
Q: When are light felonies punishable?
A: GR: Light felonies are only punishable when they are consummated.
EXC: Those committed against persons or property (Art. 7, RPC). When the light felony is committed against persons
or property then it can be punishable in its attempted or frustrated stage (Art. 7, RPC). However, only principals and
accomplices are liable (Art. 16, RPC).

Q: What are the three modes in Article 4 (1) and their corresponding penalties?
A:
Error in Personae A felony is intended, but there is a Penalty for lesser crime in its maximum
(Mistake in Identity) mistake in the identity of the victim; period (Art. 49, RPC)
injuring one person mistaken for another.

Aberratio Ictus An offender intending to do an injury to Penalty for graver offense in its maximum
(Mistake in Blow) one person actually inflicts it on another. period (Art. 48, RPC)

Praeter Intentionem No intention to commit a grave so wrong. Mitigating circumstance of not intending to
commit a grave so wrong (Art. 13, RPC)

Criminal Law | 1

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: X wilfully and intentionally threw burning oil on his enemy but instead of hitting his enemy, it landed on a
baby. The trial court convicted the accused X of the crime of child abuse. X contends that she cannot be
convicted of such crime because she did not intend to debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and
dignity of the minor. What is the criminal liability of the accused?
A: Child abuse under Sec. 10 (a), Art. VII, R.A. 7610. A person incurs criminal liability although the wrongful act done
be different from that which he intended. As defined in the law, child abuse charged against X is physical abuse of
the child, whether the same is habitual or not. X’s act of pouring the burning oil falls squarely within this definition.
(Patulot v. People, G.R. No. 235071, Jan. 7, 2019).

Q: A was riding his motorcycle when he chanced upon B, who was also on his motorcycle. A overtook B but B
flagged A down and an intense argument occurred between them. B drew his gun and fired at A. A was hit at
the back of his left arm and right wrist. Meanwhile, T, an 8 year-old boy was hit on the head by one of the
bullets fired by C. A survived but T died. Is B liable for the death of T?
A: Yes. The author of the felony shall be criminally liable for the direct, natural and logical consequence thereof,
whether intended or not. For this provision to apply, it must be shown that (a) an intentional felony has been
committed, and (b) the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct, natural and logical consequences of the
felony committed. The elements are present. B committed an intentional felony in shooting A, and the death of T
was its direct, natural and logical consequence. (Cruz v. People, G.R. No. 216642, Sept. 8, 2020, J. Caguioa).

Q: What are the requisites for an Impossible Crime?

A: The following are the requisites: (P2EI3N)
1. Act performed would be an offense against Persons or Property.
2. Act was done with Evil intent.
3. Its accomplishment is inherently Impossible, or the means employed is either Inadequate or Ineffectual.
4. Act performed does Not constitute a Violation of another provision of the RPC
Note: There is no attempted or frustrated impossible crime.

Q: What is the difference between legal impossibility and factual impossibility?

A: Legal impossibility refers to intended acts even if completed would not amount to a crime (e.g. killing a person
already dead). Factual impossibility refers to extraneous circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond his control
prevent the consummation of the intended crime (e.g. a man who puts his hand in another’s pocket with intent to
steal and finds the pocket empty). (Intod v. CA, G.R. No. 103119, Oct. 21, 1992)

Q: Distinguish the elements of Attempted Felony from the elements of Frustrated Felony?
A:
Attempted Felony (CNDO) Frustrated Felony (AFN)

1. The offender Commences the commission of the 1. Offender performs All the acts of execution.
felony directly by overt acts. 2. All the acts performed would produce the Felony
2. He does Not perform all the acts of execution as a consequence.
which should produce the felony. 3. But the felony is Not produced by reason of causes
3. The non-performance of all acts of execution was independent of the will of the perpetrator.
Due to cause or accident Other than his own
spontaneous desistance.

Q: Cite crimes which do not admit frustrated stage.

A: The following crimes do not admit frustrated stage:
1. Rape (People v. Orita, G.R. No. 88724, April 3, 1990)
2. Arson (People v. Hernandez, G.R. No. L-31770, Dec.5, 1929)
3. Bribery and Corruption of Public Officers (US v. Basa, 8 Phil. 89, Mar. 19, 1907)
4. Theft (Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007).
Criminal Law | 2

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: Discuss the distinctions between compound crimes, complex crime proper, and special complex crimes.
A:
Compound Crime Complex Crime Proper Special Complex Crime

Single act constitutes two or more An offense is a necessary means to The law fixes one penalty for two or
grave or less grave felonies commit another offense more crimes committed.

1. That only a Single act is 1. That at least 2 offenses are 1. 2 or more crimes are
performed by the offender committed committed
2. That the single acts produces: 2. That one or some of the 2. But the law 2. treats them as a
a. 2 or more grave felonies, or offenses must be Necessary to Single, Indivisible, and unique
b. 1 or more grave and 1 or commit the other offense
more less grave felonies, or 3. That both or all the offenses 3. Product of Single Criminal
2 or more less grave must be punished under the Impulse
felonies Same Statute.

Penalty for most serious crime shall Penalty for most serious crime shall That which is indicated in the RPC
be imposed in its maximum period be imposed in its maximum period
(Art. 48, RPC) (Art. 48, RPC)
Note: Light felonies produced by the same act should be treated and punished as separate offenses or may be
absorbed by the grave felony.

Q: When is there no complex crime?

A: There is no complex crime in the following cases:
1. In case of continuous crimes;
2. When one offense is committed to conceal the other;
3. When the other crime is an indispensable part or an element of the other offenses;
4. Where one of the offenses is penalized by a special law; and
5. When the provision provides for a two tiered penalty.

Q: What happens when the other offense in a complex crime is not proven?
A: When one of the two offenses is not proven, the accused may still be convicted of the other.

Circumstances affecting Criminal Liability

Q: Make a discussion on the elements to prove each of the justifying circumstances.
A:
Defense of person, right, 1. Unlawful aggression;
property, or honor (URL) 2. Reasonable necessity of means employed to prevent or repel it; and
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself

Defense of relatives 1. Unlawful aggression;

(URN) 2. Reasonable necessity of means employed to prevent or repel it; and
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on part of relative, or, in case of provocation,
the one making the defense had No part therein.

Defense of strangers 1. Unlawful aggression;

(URI) 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and
3. The person defending was not Induced by revenge, resentment or other
evil motive.

Criminal Law | 3

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Avoidance of greater evil 1. Evil sought to be avoided actually Exists.

(ENIM) 2. Evil or injury must Not have been produced by the one invoking the
justifying circumstances.
3. Injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it; and
4. There are no other practical and less harmful Means of preventing it

Obedience to Superior 1. Order must have been issued by a superior;

Order (OPM) 2. The order is for some lawful Purpose; and
3. Means used to carry it out must be lawful.

Battered Woman 1. That the battering man, with whom the Battered woman has a marital,
Syndrome (BIC) sexual or dating relationship, inflicted physical harm upon her;
2. That the Infliction of physical harm must be cumulative; and
3. The Cumulative abuse results to physical and psychological or emotional
distress to the woman.

Q: When can Battered Woman Syndrome be invoked as a defense?

A: The following must concur:
1. There must be "at least two battering episodes" between the accused and her intimate partner;
2. Such final episode produced in the battered person's mind an actual fear of an imminent harm from her
batterer; and
3. An honest belief that she needed to use force in order to save her life. (People v. Genosa, G.R. No. 135981,
January 15, 2004).

Q: Make a discussion on the elements to prove each of the exempting circumstances.

A:
Insanity or imbecility Imbecile or insane person did not act during lucid interval.

Accident (LDAW) 1. A person is performing a Lawful act;

2. Act was done with Due care;
3. He causes an injury to another by mere Accident; and
4. Without fault or intention of causing it.

Irresistible force (PIT) 1. There is compulsion is by means of Physical force;

2. Physical force must be Irresistible; and
3. Physical force must come from a Third person.

Uncontrollable fear 1. Existence of an uncontrollable fear

(ERIGE) 2. Fear must be Real and Imminent.
3. Fear of an injury is Greater than or Equal to that committed.

Q: Is a minor presumed to have acted with discernment?

A: No. When a minor is charged with a crime, it cannot be presumed that such minor acted with discernment. (CICL
XXX v. People, G.R. No. 237334, Aug. 14, 2019, J. Caguioa)
Note: In CICL XXX, the accused-minor was exempted from criminal liability and was acquitted of the charge because
the Court of Appeals failed to rule whether the CICL XXX acted with discernment when he committed the offense.

Criminal Law | 4

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: Discuss the mitigating circumstance of “Incomplete Self-Defense”.

A: This applies when not all the requisites necessary to justify the act or to exempt from criminal liability under
articles 11 and 12 are attendant. Provided, the majority of such conditions are present. (Nadyahan v. People, G.R. No.
193134, Mar. 2, 2016)

Q: Cite the elements to prove each of the following: (a) praeter intentionem, (b) immediate vindication of a
grave offense, (c) passion or obfuscation, (d) voluntary surrender, and (e) plea of guilt.
A:
Praeter Intentionem There is Notable and Evident Disproportion between the means employed to
(NED) execute the criminal act and its consequences

Immediate Vindication of 1. That there be a Grave offense done to the one Committing a felony, his
a Grave Offense (GCVN) spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted brothers
or sisters, or Relatives by affinity within the same degree.
2. That the felony is committed in Vindication of such a grave offense. A lapse
of time is allowed between the vindication and the doing of the grave
offense.
3. The vindication need Not be done by the person upon whom the grave
offense was committed.

Passion or Obfuscation 1. The accused acted upon an Impulse

(IPAUSL) 2. The impulse must be so Powerful that it naturally produces passion or
obfuscation in him
3. That there be an Act, both Unlawful and Sufficient to produce such a
condition of mind;
4. That said act which produced the obfuscation was not far removed from
the commission of the crime by a considerable Length of time, during
which the perpetrator might recover his normal equanimity

Voluntary Surrender 1. Offender has Not been actually Arrested;

(NA-SV) 2. Offender Surrendered himself to a person in authority or to the latter’s
agent; and
3. Surrender was Voluntary.

Plea of Guilt (SOP) 1. Offender Spontaneously confessed his guilt;

2. Confession of guilt was made in Open court; and
3. Confession of guilt was made Prior to the presentation of evidence

Q: M was convicted for the murders of his aunt A and her live-in partner. Prior to A’s death, A alleged that it
was M who hit her on the head and set their house on fire. For his defense, M denied the allegation and argued
that he did not hit his aunt on the head nor did he set on fire. M contended that while he was watching their
house being engulfed by fire, the barangay tanod approached him and handcuffed him, to which he did not
resist. M further argued that the court erred in not considering in his favor the mitigating circumstance of
voluntary surrender to the barangay tanod. Is the argument of M correct?
A: No. For a surrender to be voluntary, it must be spontaneous, that there must be an intent to submit oneself to
authorities, either he acknowledges his guilt or he wishes to save them the trouble and expenses in capturing him. M
did not actually surrender. He simply did not offer any resistance when he was arrested. The fact that he did not
resist cannot be equated with voluntary surrender (People v. Mercado, G.R. No. 218702, Oct. 17, 2018, J. Caguioa)

Criminal Law | 5

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: Make a discussion on the elements to prove the following aggravating circumstances: (a) abuse of
confidence, (b) night time, uninhabited place, and by a band, (c) evident premeditation, (d) abuse of superior
strength, (e) treachery, and (f) cruelty.
A:
Abuse of confidence (TAF) 1. That the offended party Trusted the offender
2. That the offender Abused such trust by committing a crime against the
offended party
3. That the abuse of confidence Facilitated the commission of the crime.

Nighttime, uninhabited 1. When it Facilitated the commission of the crime

place, by a band (FEI) 2. When Especially sought for by the offender to ensure the commission of
the crime or for the purpose of impunity.
3. The offender took advantage thereof for the purpose of Impunity

Evident premeditation 1. Time when the offender determined to commit the crime;
(TAL) 2. An Act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his
determination;
3. A sufficient Lapse of time between the determination and execution, to
allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his act and to allow his
conscience to overcome the resolution of his will.

Superior strength or to 1. There is a Notorious Inequality of forces between victim and aggressor.
weaken defense (NIP) 2. Offender Purposely used excessive force out of proportion to the means of
defense available to the persons attacked.

Treachery (CAN) 1. Offender Consciously Adopts particular means, methods, or forms tending
directly and specially to ensure the execution of the crime.
2. The employment of such means gave the offended party No opportunity
to defend himself or retaliate.

Cruelty (DIUE) 1. Injury caused be was Deliberately Increased by causing other wrong;
2. Other wrong was Unnecessary for the Execution of the purpose of the
offender.

Q: What are the circumstances absorbed by treachery?

A: The circumstances absorbed by treachery are as follows:
1. There is an abuse of superior strength in committing murder but it is considered as absorbed in treachery.
2. The aggravating circumstance of nighttime is absorbed by treachery if it facilitated the treacherous attack.
EXC: When nighttime is not absorbed by the aggravating circumstance of treachery.
3. Craft
EXC: When craft was employed not with a view to making treachery more effective as nighttime and abuse
of superior strength would in the killing of the victim (People v. Pedro, G.R. No. L-44274, Jan. 22, 1980).
4. Aid of armed men
5. Cuadrilla (band)
6. Employing means to weaken the defense.

Q: May evident premeditation be applied in the complex crime of Robbery with Homicide?
A: Yes. While it was previously ruled that the circumstance of evident premeditation is inherent in robbery, it is not
inherent in the special complex crime of robbery with homicide. However, it may be considered in the special
complex crime of Robbery with Homicide if there is premeditation to kill besides stealing. (People v. Olazo, G.R. No.
220761, Oct. 3, 2016, J. Caguioa)

Criminal Law | 6

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: A failed to read the label of his drink and did not notice that it was alcoholic. He became intoxicated after
drinking it. Upon going home, he argued with B, his wife, and while in the state of intoxication, punched and
kicked her in the abdomen, which led his wife’s untimely death. Is the alternative circumstance of intoxication
aggravating or mitigating in the case at bar?
A: The intoxication is mitigating. Intoxication is mitigating if it is not habitual or if such intoxication is not subsequent
to the plan to commit a felony (Art. 15, RPC). In the case at bar, A’s intoxication was inadvertent. As such, A’s
commission of the offense while in the state of intoxication is to be appreciated as a mitigating circumstance.
Note: For violations of R.A. 9262, being under the influence of alcohol, any illicit drug, or any other mind-altering
substance shall not be a defense (Sec. 27, R.A. 9262).

Q: What is the difference between instigation and entrapment?

A:
Instigation Entrapment

The law enforcer conceives the commission of the The means originate from the mind of the criminal. The
crime and suggests to the accused who adopts the idea idea and the resolve to commit the crime come from
and carries it into execution. him.

Instigation absolves the accused. Entrapment does not bar prosecution and conviction.
Note: In instigation, where law enforcers act as co-principals, the accused will have to be acquitted. But entrapment
cannot bar prosecution and conviction. (People v. Amurao y Tejero, G.R. No. 229514, July 28, 2020, J. Caguioa)

Persons Liable and Degree of Participation

Q: Compare and contrast the acts committed by a principal, accomplice, and accessory.
A:
Principal Accomplice Accessory

1. Directly participated in the One who cooperated in the 1. Made a profit from or assisted
offense; or commission of the offense without the offender in profiting from
2. Induced or forced others to being covered by Art. 17. effects of the crime; or
commit the crime; or 2. Concealed or destroyed the
3. Committed acts which are body of the crime; or
indispensable to the 3. Harbored, concealed or assisted
commission of the crime. in the escape of the principal.

Q: When is an accomplice exempt from criminal liability?

A: An accomplice is exempted from criminal liability when:
1. Crime is a light felony (Art. 19[c], RPC)
2. Principal is a relative under the exemptions in Art. 20 except if the said accessory has profited or assisted
the principal in profiting from the crime. The following are the relatives included:
a. Spouse
b. Ascendant
c. Descendant
d. Legitimate/natural/adopted Brother or Sister
e. Relative by affinity within the same degree

Q: Is the acquittal of the principal a bar to the conviction of the accessory?

A: No. Conviction of an accessory is possible notwithstanding the acquittal of the principal, if the crime was in fact
committed, but the principal was not held criminally liable, because of an exempting circumstance (Art. 12, RPC),
such as insanity or minority. In exempting circumstances, there is a crime committed. Hence, there is a basis for
convicting the accessory.
Criminal Law | 7

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Conspiracy and Proposal

Q: How may conspiracy be proved?
A: Direct proof is not essential to prove conspiracy for it may be deduced from the acts of the accused before, during
and after the commission of the crime charged, from which it may be indicated that there is a common purpose to
commit the crime. (People v. Gimpaya, G.R. No. 227395; Jan. 10, 2018. J. Caguioa).

Multiple Offenders
Q: Discuss the elements and effects of recidivism, reiteracion, habitual delinquency, and quasi-recidivism.
A:
Recidivism Habituality or Habitual Delinquency Quasi-Recidivism
Reiteracion

1. The offender is on 1. The accused is on 1. The offender had been 1. The offender
trial for an offense; trial for an offense; convicted of any of the committed a
2. He was previously 2. He previously served crimes of serious or less felony after
convicted by final sentence for another serious physical injuries, having been
judgment of another offense to which the robbery, theft, estafa or convicted by
crime; law attaches an equal falsification; final
3. Both the first and the or greater penalty, or 2. After that conviction or after judgment; and
second offenses are for 2 or more crimes serving his sentence, and 2. The felony was
embraced in the same to which it attaches within 10 years from his first committed
title of the code; and lighter penalty than conviction or release, he before
again commits any of said
4. The offender is that for the new beginning to
crimes for the second time;
convicted of the new offense; and and serve such
offense. 3. He is convicted of the 3. After his conviction of, or sentence, or
new offense after service sentence for, the while serving
second offense, and within 10 the same.
years from his last conviction
or last release for said second
offense, he again committed
any of said crimes and also
convicted, the third time or
oftener.

If not offset by any Same as recidivism but Imposes the maximum of the An additional
mitigating circumstances, not always an aggravating penalty for the new offense, and penalty shall be
increase the penalty only circumstance as the Court cannot be offset by any mitigating imposed.
to the maximum. should exercise discretion circumstance.
in favor of the accused if
the previous offenses of
the offender are against
property and not directly
against persons and
applying habituality
would result in a penalty
of death.

Criminal Law | 8

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: When is the Indeterminate Sentence Law inapplicable?

A: Its application shall be mandatory except in the following cases: (R.A. 4103, Sec. 2).
1. Those persons convicted of offenses punished with life imprisonment.
2. Those persons convicted of offenses punished with reclusion perpetua.
3. Those convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason.
4. Those convicted of misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage.
5. Those convicted of piracy.
6. Those who are habitual delinquents.
7. Those who shall have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence.
8. Those who having been granted conditional pardon by the President shall have violated the terms thereof.
9. Those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year (not to those already sentenced by
final judgment at the time of approval of the Act, except as provided in Sec. 5 thereof).
10. Those already sentenced by final judgment at the time of the approval of this Act.
11. Those, whose sentence imposes penalties which do not involve imprisonment, like destierro.

Q: In a crime of homicide, the penalty imposed is reclusion temporal, what are the rules applying the ISL with
modifying circumstance?
A:
Homicide: Reclusion Temporal Maximum Term Minimum Term

No attending circumstances Reclusion Temporal Medium Prision Mayor in any period

1 Mitigating circumstance Reclusion Temporal Minimum Prision Mayor in any period

1 Aggravating Circumstance Reclusion Temporal Maximum Prision Mayor in any period

2 ordinary mitigating circumstance = Prision Mayor Medium Prision Correcional in any period
Privileged mitigating circumstance

1 mitigating circumstance and 1 Reclusion Temporal Medium Prision Mayor in any period
aggravating circumstance

2 mitigating circumstance and 1 Reclusion Temporal Minimum Prision Mayor in any period
aggravating circumstance = NO
Privileged mitigating (Art. 64 [5], RPC)

1 mitigating circumstance and 2 Reclusion Temporal Maximum Prision Mayor in any period
aggravating circumstance

Q: Explain how the Indeterminate Sentence Law is applied in crimes punished by special laws. (2017 BAR)
A: If the offense is punished by a special law, the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate penalty, the
maximum term of which shall not exceed the maximum fixed by said law and the minimum term shall not be less
than the minimum prescribed by the same (Sec. 1, ISLAW).

Q: Should the judgment expressly provide for subsidiary imprisonment?

A: Yes. An accused cannot be made to undergo subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency to pay the fine
imposed upon him when the subsidiary imprisonment is not imposed in the judgment of conviction (Ramos v.
Gonong, G.R. No. L-42010, Aug. 31, 1976)

Criminal Law | 9

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: When is subsidiary imprisonment not applicable?

A: Subsidiary imprisonment is not applicable when:
1. When the penalty imposed is higher than prisión correccional(Art. 39, RPC)
2. For failure to pay the reparation of the damage caused, indemnification of the consequential damages, and
the costs of the proceedings
3. When the penalty imposed is a fine and a penalty not to be executed by confinement in a penal institution
and which has no fixed duration.

Execution and Service of Sentence

Q: What are the requisites of the three-fold rule?
A: The following are the requisites of the three-fold rule:
1. The maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than three (3) times the length of time
corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon him;
2. But in no case to exceed forty (40) years;
3. This rule shall apply only when the convict is to serve four (4) or more sentences successively (Art. 70, RPC).
Note: The three-fold rule applies only when the convict has to serve continuous imprisonment for several offenses.
If the convict already served sentence for one (1) offense, that imprisonment will not be considered (Alejandro v.
Director of Prisons, G.R. No. L-3215, Oct. 6, 1949).

Q: May probation be availed of if an accused appeals his judgment of conviction?

A: No. If an accused has perfected an appeal from the judgment of conviction, the grant of probation can no longer
be availed of. (Sec. 4, P.D. 968, as amended)

Q: Who are disqualified from availing themselves of the benefits of probation law?
A: Section 9 of the Probation Law, as amended by R.A. 10707, provides for the following disqualified offenders:
1. Those sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 6 years;
2. Those convicted of any crime against the national security;
3. Those who have previously been convicted by final judgment of an offense punished by imprisonment of
more than 6 months and 1 day and/or a fine of more than Php1,000.00;
4. Those who have been once on probation under the provisions of this Decree; and
5. Those who are already serving sentence at the time the substantive provisions of this Decree became
applicable pursuant to Section 33 hereof.
Note: Under Section 24, R.A. 9165, any person convicted for drug trafficking or pushing cannot avail of the privilege
granted by the Probation Law. However, possession of drug paraphernalia is not considered as drug trafficking or
pushing. Hence, a person charged with the crime of possession of dangerous drugs is eligible to apply for
probation.(Pascua v. People, G.R. No. 250578, Sept. 7, 2020)

Q: J was convicted of the Regional Trial Court of a crime and sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment
for a minimum of eight years. He appealed both his conviction and the penalty imposed upon him to the Court
of Appeals. The appellate court ultimately sustained J’s conviction but reduced his sentence to a maximum of
four years and eight months imprisonment. Could J forthwith file an application for probation? Explain.
A: Yes, he can. When a judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty is appealed or reviewed, and
such judgment is modified through the imposition of a probationable penalty, the defendant shall be allowed to
apply for probation based on the modified decision before such decision becomes final. The application for
probation based on the modified decision shall be filed in the trial court where the judgment of conviction imposing
a non-probationable penalty was rendered, or in the trial court where such case has since been re-raffled (Sec. 4,
P.D. 968, as amended by R.A. 10707). J may apply for probation as he did not appeal a judgment that would have
allowed him to apply for probation (Colinares v. People, G.R. No. 182748, Dec. 13, 2011).

Criminal Law | 10

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: Discuss the minimum age of criminal responsibility under R.A. 9344, as amended.
A:
Child’s Age ≤ 15 years of GR: Exempt from Criminal Liability
age at the time of BUT: The child shall be subjected to an intervention program.
commission of the offense

18 ≤ Child’s Age < 15 years GR: Exempt from Criminal Liability

of age at the time of EXC: Child has acted with discernment.
commission of the offense
Note: The exemption from criminal liability herein established does not include exemption from civil liability, which
shall be enforced in accordance with existing laws. (Sec. 6, R.A. 9344, as amended)

Q: Is suspended sentence applicable only if the offender is still a minor at the time sentence is promulgated?
A: No. Suspension of sentence shall still be applied even if the juvenile is already eighteen years (18) of age or more
at the time of the pronouncement of his/her guilt. (Sec. 38, R.A. 9344, as amended)
Note: An application from the child for the suspension of his or her sentence is not needed. (Id.)

Q: Who may not avail of GCTA while undergoing preventive imprisonment?

A: The allowance is not applicable to:
1. Recidivists
2. Habitual delinquents
3. Escapees
4. Persons charged with heinous crimes (Art. 29, RPC, as amended by R.A. 10592)

Q: Discuss the rules on special time allowances under Art. 98.

A: The following must be observed:
1. When prisoner, having evaded his sentence, gives himself up to authorities within 48 hours following
issuance of proclamation by Chief Executive announcing the passing away of the calamity. – of period of
sentence
2. When prisoner chooses to stay in place of confinement. – of period of sentence (Art. 98, RPC)
Note: Special time allowance for loyalty applies to any prisoner whether undergoing preventive imprisonment or
serving sentence (Art. 98, RPC, as amended by R.A. 10592).

Q: Discuss “community service” under R.A. 11362.

A: Community service shall consist of any actual physical activity which
1. Inculcates civic consciousness.
2. Intended towards the improvement of a public work or promotion of a public service.
3. Shall be rendered in the place where the crime was committed, under such terms as the court shall
determine.
It authorizes the court, in its discretion, to require community service in lieu of imprisonment for offenses
punishable by arresto menor and arresto mayor (R.A. 11362).
Note: The privilege of rendering community service in lieu of imprisonment shall be availed of only once.

Criminal Law | 11

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Extinction of Criminal and Civil Liability

Q: How is criminal liability totally extinguished?
A: Criminal liability is totally extinguished in the following instances:
1. Death of the convict as to personal penalties, as to the pecuniary liabilities, liability therefore is
extinguished only when death occurs before final judgment
Note: Criminal liability is not extinguished with the death of the offended party since the offense
committed is a crime against the state. (People v. Misola, G.R. No. L-3606, Dec. 29, 1950)
2. Service of sentence
3. Amnesty
4. Absolute pardon
5. Prescription of the crime
6. Prescription of the penalty
7. Marriage of the offended woman as provided in Art. 344.

Q: What is the effect of death of the accused to his criminal and civil liability?
A: Death of the accused totally extinguishes criminal liability; civil liability, however, is only extinguished when
death occurs before final judgment if grounded solely on the criminal action. The criminal liability is totally
extinguished by the death of the accused, as to personal penalties; and as to pecuniary penalties, liability
therefore is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final judgment.

The death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability as well the civil
liability based solely thereon. The death of the accused prior to final judgment terminates his criminal liability
and only the civil liability directly arising from and based solely on the offense committed, i.e., civil liability ex
delicto. (People v. Sayo y Reyes, G.R. No. 227704; Apr. 10, 2019, J. Caguioa)

Q: When does the period of prescription of a crime begin to run as provided for under the RPC and when is
it interrupted?
A:
1. The period of prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is discovered by the
offended party, the authorities, or their agents.
2. It shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information.
3. It shall commence 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.
Note: The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the Philippine Archipelago.

CRIMES UNDER THE REVISED PENAL CODE – BOOK 2

Crimes against Fundamental Law of the State

Q: Discuss the difference between arbitrary detention and illegal detention.
A:
1. Arbitrary detention – is committed by a public officer, who has the authority to arrest and detain a person.
Thus, a police officer, judge or mayor can commit arbitrary detention.
2. Illegal detention – is committed by private individual. A public officer (e.g., stenographer) who has no
authority to arrest or detain a person, is a private individual for purpose of illegal detention since he
committed the act in his private capacity. (Duropan vs. People, G.R. No. 230825, June 10, 2020) But although
a public officer (e.g., police officer) has the authority to arrest and detain a person, he can be considered as
a private individual for purpose of illegal detention if the crime is committed in his private capacity. (People
v. Santiano, G.R. No. 123979, Dec. 3, 1998) (CAMPANILLA)

Criminal Law | 12

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: What are the acts punishable in connection with search warrants?

A: The following are punishable under Art. 129:
1. By procuring a search warrant without just cause.
2. By exceeding his authority or by using unnecessary severity in executing a search warrant legally procured.

Crimes against Public Order

Q: X, Y and Z were charged with the crime of rebellion with multiple murder and robbery. The prosecution
alleged that X, Y and Z took arms with GANG, a rebel group, to commit armed raids, ambushes and attacks
against the police, constabulary and armed detachments as well as innocent civilians. It is further alleged
that, as a necessary means to commit rebellion, they also committed the crime of murder, arson and robbery.
Was the charge of the prosecution correct?
A: No, the charge was incorrect. All crimes, whether punishable under special or general law, which are mere
components or ingredients, or committed in furtherance thereof, become absorbed in the crime of rebellion and
cannot be isolated and charged as separate crimes themselves. (Enrile v. Amin, G.R. No. 93335, Sep. 13, 1990)
Note: If the killing, robbing, etc., during the rebellion, were done for private purposes or profit, without any political
motivation, the crimes would be separately punished.

Q: Is the proposal to commit sedition punishable?

A: No. Article 141 punishes only conspiracy to commit sedition. Hence, the proposal to commit sedition is not
punishable. (REYES)

Q: What are the elements of the crime of Direct Assault in its second mode?
A: The following are the elements: (AFIR-PA2P-KN)
1. That the offender makes an Attack, employs Force, makes a serious Intimidation, or makes a serious
Resistance. (AFIR)
2. That the person assaulted is a Person in authority or his Agent.
3. That at the time of the assault the person in authority or his agent (a) is engaged in the Actual performance
of official duties, or that he is assaulted, by reason of the Past performance of official duties. (AP)
4. That the offender Knows that the one he is assaulting is a person in authority or his agent in the exercise of
his duties.
5. That there is No public uprising.

Q: What is the difference between direct/indirect assault and the crime of resistance/obedience?
A: The distinction between direct assault and resistance of disobedience is the amount of force employed against
agents of persons in authority. Hence, a sudden blow given to a policeman while engaged in effecting an arrest does
not constitute that employment of force which is punishable as assault. If the use of physical force against agents of
persons in authority is not serious, the offense is not direct assault, but resistance or disobedience. The laying of
hands or using physical force against agents of persons in authority when not serious in nature constitutes
resistance or disobedience under Article 151, and not direct assault under Article 148 of the RPC. (Mallari v. People,
G.R. No. 224679, Feb. 12, 2020)

Q: What are the elements of Evasion of Service of Sentence?

A: The following are the elements:
1. Convicted by final judgment and not a detention prisoner
2. Serving his sentence which consists in deprivation of liberty
3. He evades the service of his sentence by escaping during the term of his sentence (fact of return is
immaterial) (Art. 157, RPC)

Criminal Law | 13

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: What are the elements of Evasion of Service of Sentence on the Occasion of Calamities under Art. 158?
A: The following are the elements:
1. Offender is convicted by final judgment and confined in a penal institution
2. There is disorder resulting from
a. Conflagration
b. Earthquake
c. Explosion
d. Similar catastrophe and mutiny, not participated
3. Offender evades the service of his sentence by leaving the penal institution
4. Offender fails to return within 48 hours after announcement of the chief executive that calamity has passed.

Q: What is the liability of the escaping prisoner?

A:
1. If the fugitive is serving sentence by reason of final judgment, he is liable for evasion of the service of
sentence under Art. 157; and
2. If the fugitive is only a detention prisoner, he does not incur criminal liability.

Crimes against Public Interest

Q: What are the Modes of Falsification based on Art. 171?
A: The following are the modes of falsification under Art. 171:
1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric.
2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so
participate.
3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than those in fact
made by them.
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts.
5. Altering true dates.
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaning.
7. Issuing in authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original document when no such
original exists, or including in such copy a statement contrary to or different from, that of the genuine
original.
8. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry or official book

Q: What are the elements of Falsification of Public, Official, or Commercial Document by a Private Individual?
A:
1. That the offender is a private individual or a public officer or employee who did not take advantage of his
official position.
2. That he committed any of the acts of falsification enumerated in Art. 171.
3. That the falsification was committed in a public or official or commercial document.
Note: Art. 172 does not punish falsification by a public officer, employee or notary public who takes advantage of his
official position, all of whom are punished based on Art. 171.

Q: What are the elements of Falsification of Private Document?

A:
1. That the offender committed any of the acts of falsification, except those in paragraph 7, in Art. 171.
2. That the falsification was committed in any private document.
3. That the falsification caused damage to a third party or at least the falsification was committed with intent
to cause such damage.

Criminal Law | 14

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: Discuss the crime of Estafa through Falsification.

A: The following guiding principles must be observed:
1. The falsification of public, official or commercial documents may be complexed with the crime of estafa.
This is because (1) the crime of falsification has already been consummated, (2) damage or intent to cause
damage is not an element of the crime of falsification of public, official or commercial document, and (3)
the act of utilizing that falsified public, official or commercial document to defraud another is estafa.
2. On the other hand, the falsification of private documents may not be complexed with the crime of estafa.
The damage to another is caused by the commission of the crime of falsification of private document. The
intent to defraud in using the falsified private document is part and parcel of the crime, and cannot give rise
to the crime of estafa, because the damage, if it resulted, was caused by, and became the element of, the
crime of falsification of private document. Here, even if there is intent to defraud, only the crime of
falsification of a private document is committed.
Note: In estafa, damage is an essential element. In both crimes of falsification of public or official document and
falsification of commercial document, damage is not an essential element. However, in falsification of a private
document, damage is an essential element. Under the common element doctrine, the use of damage as an element
of falsification of private document precludes the re-use thereof to complete the elements of estafa, and vice versa.

Crimes Committed By Public Officers

Q: What are the punishable acts under Direct Bribery?
A: The following are the punishable acts under Direct Bribery:
1. Agreeing to perform or performing an act pertaining to the duties of the office which constitutes a crime , it
is unnecessary that the corruptor should deliver the consideration or the doing of the act. Mere promise is
sufficient. Once there is a meeting of the minds, even without the delivery of the consideration, even
without the public officer performing the act amounting to a crime, bribery is already committed on the
part of the public officer. Corruption is already committed on the part of the supposed giver.
2. Accepting a gift in consideration of the execution of an act which does not constitute a crime − If the act or
omission does not amount to a crime, the consideration must be delivered by the corruptor before a public
officer can be prosecuted for bribery. Mere agreement is not enough to constitute the crime because the act
to be done in the first place is legitimate or in the performance of the official duties of the public official.
3. Abstaining from the performance of official duties.

Q: What are the elements of Indirect Bribery?

A: The following are the elements of indirect bribery.
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He accepts gifts; and
3. Said gifts are offered to him by reason of his office.

Q: Distinguish Robbery with Intimidation from Bribery.

A: The principal distinction between the two offenses is that in bribery, the transaction is mutual and voluntary; in
the case of robbery, the transaction is neither voluntary nor mutual, but is consummated by the use of force or
intimidation. (REYES)

Q: What are the acts punishable in Malversation?

A: The following are the acts punishable in Malversation:
1. By appropriating public funds or property.
2. By taking or misappropriating the same.
3. By consenting, or through abandonment or negligence, permitting any other person to take such public
funds or property.
4. By being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or malversation of such funds or property.

Criminal Law | 15

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: What are the elements common to all acts of Malversation under Article 217?
A: The following are the elements in the commission of Malversation:
1. That the offender be a public officer.
2. That he had the custody or control of funds or property by reason of the duties of his office.
3. That those funds or property were public funds or property for which he was accountable.
4. That he appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented or, through abandonment or negligence,
permitted another person to take them.
Note: Private individuals, who, in any capacity, have charge of national, provincial or municipal funds, revenues or
property, are liable for malversation based on Article 222.

Q: What are the elements of Infidelity in the Custody of Document?

A: The elements of infidelity in the custody of public documents are the following:
1. The offender must be a public officer;
2. There must be a document abstracted, destroyed or concealed;
3. The document destroyed or abstracted must be entrusted to such public officer by reason of his office; and
4. Damage to the public interest or to a third person must be caused by the removal, destruction or
concealment of such document.

Crimes Against Persons

Q: Who are the persons covered under the crime of Parricide?
A: The deceased must be either the:
1. Legitimate/Illegitimate father;
2. Legitimate/Illegitimate mother;
3. Legitimate/Illegitimate child;
4. Other legitimate ascendant;
5. Other legitimate descendant; or
6. Legitimate spouse.

Q: When is death under exceptional circumstances applicable?

A: The concurrence of the following elements:
1. That a legally married person or a parent surprises his spouse or his daughter, the latter under 18 years of
age and living with him, in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person.
2. That he or she kills any or both of them or inflicts upon any or both of them any serious physical injury in
the act or immediately thereafter.
3. That he has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that he or she has not
consented to the infidelity of the other spouse. (Art. 247, RPC)
Note: While the offender is exempted from criminal liability under Article 247, he is not exempted from civil liability.

Q: What is meant by “shall kill any of them or both of them… immediately”?

A: "Shall kill any of them or both of them . . . immediately” does not mean that the accused should commit the
killing instantly thereafter. The killing should have been actually motivated by the same blind impulse, and must not
have been influenced by external factors. The killing must be the direct by-product of the accused's rage. (People v.
Abarca, G.R. No. 74433, September 14, 1987).

Q: What are the qualifying circumstances that should be attendant for the crime of murder to exist?
A:
1. Treachery
2. Taking advantage of superior strength
3. With the aid of armed men
4. Employing means to weaken the defense
Criminal Law | 16

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

5. Employing means or persons to insure or afford impunity

6. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise
7. By means of (a) Inundation; (b) Fire; (c) Poison; (d) Explosion; (e) Shipwreck; (f) Stranding of a vessel; (g)
Derailment or assault upon a railroad; (h) Fall of an airship; (i) By means of motor vehicles; (j) or use of any
other means involving great waste and ruin
8. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in (7) or of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano,
destructive cyclone, epidemic, or other public calamity
9. Evident premeditation
10. Cruelty, deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim or outraging or scoffing at his
person or corpse.
Note: In the absence of the qualifying circumstances above, the killing of a person is merely punishable under the
crime of Homicide.

Q: A party was organized by ABC Bar Takers Association, of which X was a member. As X, his common-law wife
and friends were about to leave, Y pushed X’s common-law wife, which resulted in a heated argument
between X and Y. It appeared that Y was merely looking for the girl who left him, and had mistaken X’s
common-law wife to be that girl. One of X’s friends pacified both X and Y. After X had left, Y followed him, and
upon reaching the sidewalk, Y immediately shot the victim. The prosecution charged Y with the crime of
Murder. Is the prosecution correct?
A: No, the qualifying circumstance of treachery is not attendant. Chance encounters, impulse killing or crimes
committed at the spur of the moment or that were preceded by heated altercations are generally not attended by
treachery for lack of opportunity of the accused to deliberately employ a treacherous mode of attack. Hence, X is
liable for homicide and not murder. (People v. Menil y Bongkit, G.R. No. 233205, June 26, 2019, J. Caguioa)

Q: If the person who inflicted less serious physical injury upon the victim in a riot between two groups of men
is identifiable, is the crime of tumultuous affray committed?
A: No. Failure to identify the offender who inflicted less serious physical injury upon the victim is an important
element of physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray. If the accused is positively identified as a person, who
inflicts the injuries on the victim, the former is not entitled to the lesser penalty prescribed for physical injuries
inflicted in a tumultuous affray. There is no confusion, which is the essence of tumultuous affray. Hence, the accused
is liable for the graver crime of less serious physical injuries (Lacson vs. People, G.R. No. 243805, Sept. 16, 2020)

Q: Distinguish Serious Physical Injuries from Less Serious Physical Injuries.

A:
Serious Physical Injuries Less Serious Physical Injuries

The injured person becomes ill or incapacitated for The offended party incapacitated for labor for more
labor for more than 30 days but not more than 90 days than 10 days but not more than 30 days, or needs
medical attendance for the same period

Medical attendance is not important in serious physical There must be proof of the period of the required
injuries (Art. 263, RPC) medical attendance (Art. 265, RPC).

Q: What are the elements of Rape by Sexual Intercourse?

A: The following are the elements: (MC- FRF-12)
1. That the offender is a Man;
2. That the offender had Carnal knowledge of the woman; and

Criminal Law | 17

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

3. Such act is accomplished under any of the following circumstances:

a. Through Force, threat, or intimidation;
b. When the offended party is deprived of Reason or is otherwise unconscious;
c. By means of Fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; or
d. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the
above circumstances mentioned be present (REYES).

Q: What are the elements of Rape by Sexual Assault?

A: The following are the elements: (A-PI-FRF-12)
1. That the offender commits an act of sexual Assault;
2. The act of sexual assault is committed by any of the following means
a. By inserting his Penis into another person’s mouth or anal orifice; or
b. By inserting any Instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person.
3. The act of sexual assault is accomplished under any of the following circumstances:
a. By using Force or intimidation; or
b. When the woman is deprived of Reason or otherwise unconscious; or
c. By means of Fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; or
d. When the woman is under twelve (12) years of age or demented (REYES).
Note: R.A. 11648 amended the provision of rape with respect to the threshold of the age of the offended party to
qualify as a crime of Rape by Sexual Intercourts or Rape by Sexual Assault, from under twelve (12) years of age to
under sixteen (16) years of age (Sec. 1, R.A. 11648). However, such amending law is not covered by the bar.

Q: Is the victim’s failure to resist the rapist’s sexual advances material to acquit the latter?
A: No. The law does not impose upon the victim the burden of proving resistance. Resistance is not an element of
rape and lack thereof does not lead to an acquittal of the accused. (People v. Dechoso, G.R. No. 248530, Mar. 3, 2021)

Q: What constitutes force, threat or intimidation in rape cases?

A: The test remains to be whether the threat or intimidation produces a reasonable fear in the mind of the victim
that if she resists or does not yield to the desires of her attacker, the threat would be carried out.
Note: In rapes committed by a close kin, it is not necessary that actual force or intimidation be employed; moral
influence or ascendancy takes the place of violence or intimidation. (People v. Villaros y Caranto, G.R. No. 228779;
Oct. 8, 2018, J. Caguioa).

Q: What are the rules on absorption with respect to the crime of rape?
A: The following must be observed:
1. Rape and Acts of Lasciviousness – The latter is absorbed by the former.
2. Rape by Sexual Intercourse and Rape by Sexual Assault – These constitute separate crimes. (People v.
Dereco, G.R. No. 243625, Dec. 2, 2020).

Q: When the woman consents to sexual intercourse with a man, but thereafter withdraws the same, what are
the rules in imposing the crime of rape?
A: The following must be observed:
1. If woman consents, but then withdraws her consent before penetration, and the act is accomplished by
force, it is rape. (People v. Butiong, G.R. No. 168932, Oct. 19, 2011)
2. If the woman tacitly consents to have sexual intercourse with the accused, but then withdraws her consent
in the course of sexual intercourse because she felt pain, and the act is not rape. (People vs. Tionloc, G.R.
No. 212193, Feb. 15, 2017) (CAMPANILLA)

Criminal Law | 18

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: X, a 23-year old victim, lived with her siblings. She suffered epilepsy and mild mental retardation having a
mental age of 8 years old. Her highest educational attainment is Grade 6. One day, X’s uncle took off her
clothes, and inserted his penis inside her vagina. X’s uncle was convicted of statutory rape. Was this correct?
A: Yes. Although X was already 23 years old at the time of the rape incidents, since it was established that AAA is a
mental retardate, and her mental age is equivalent to that of an eight-year-old child, the accused-appellant should
be held liable for Statutory Rape under Article 266-A, paragraph 1(d) of the RPC. (People v. XXX, G.R. No. 242684, Feb.
17, 2021, J. Caguioa)

Q: X, the accused, raped a woman. After penetrating the woman, he was not satisfied with the sexual position,
so he pulls out his sexual organ, changes the sexual position, and penetrates the woman again. Not satisfied
with the second position, X removed his organ and penetrated the woman for the third time. How many
counts of rape is X liable for?
A: Only one count of rape despite the three successful penetrations because there is no indication that the accused
decided to commit those separate and distinct acts of sexual assault other than his lustful desire to change positions
inside the room where the crime was committed. (People v. Aaron, G.R. No. 136300-02, Sep. 24, 2002)

Q: X, the accused, pointed a gun at Y, commanding her to lie down and to take off her clothes. Thereafter, X
inserted his penis into Y’s vagina despite the latter’s plea not to rape her. Satisfied, X stopped. After about 5
minutes, X once again inserted his penis into Y’s vagina. Thereafter, he stopped. On the third time, X inserted
again into Y’s vagina. After fulfilling his desire, X stopped and finally ordered Y to dress up. The accused was
convicted of three counts of rape. Was the conviction correct?
A: Yes, X should be convicted of three counts of rape. X succeeded three times in inserting his penis into the private
part of Y. The three (3) penetrations occurred one after the other at an interval of five (5) minutes wherein X would
rest after satiating his lust upon his victim and, after he has regained his strength, he would again rape Y. Hence,
when X decided to commit those separate and distinct acts, he was not motivated by a single impulse, but by several
criminal intent. (People v. Manolito Lucena y Velasquez, G.R. No. 190632, Feb. 26, 2014).

Q: What are the effects of pardon or subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended party?
A: Art. 266-C, RPC provides that the subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended party shall
extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed. In case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty:
Provided, That the crime shall not be extinguished or the penalty shall not be abated if the marriage be void ab
initio. (R.A. 8353)

Crimes against Personal Liberty and Security

Q: What are the elements of kidnapping and serious illegal detention?
A: The elements of kidnapping and serious illegal detention are: (PKI-MoST-MFP)
1. That the offender is a Private individual;
2. That he Kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner deprives the latter of his liberty;
3. That the act of detention or kidnapping must be Illegal; and That in the commission of the offense, any of
the following circumstances is present:
a. That the kidnapping or detention lasts for More than three (3) days;
b. That it is committed Simulating public authority;
c. That any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained or Threats
to kill him are made; or
d. That the person kidnapped or detained is a Minor, Female, or a Public officer.

Q: What are the crimes that may be committed when a person dies while being detained?
A:
1. Kidnapping with Homicide – If the victim dies or is killed as a consequence of detention.
2. Separate Crimes of Murder and Arbitrary Detention – If the victim dies or is killed in the course of
arbitrary detention. The two crimes are not produced by a single act. Arbitrary detention is not used as a
necessary means to commit murder. (People vs. Dongail, G.R. No. 217972, Feb. 17, 2020)

Criminal Law | 19

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: What are the crimes that may be committed when a woman is transported from one place to another?
A:
1. Forcible abduction − If a woman is transported from one place to another by virtue of restraining her of her
liberty and that act is coupled with lewd designs.
2. Kidnapping with serious illegal detention − If a woman is transported just to restrain her liberty. There is
no lewd design or intent.
3. Grave coercion − If a woman is carried away just to break her will, to compel her to agree to demand or
request by the offender. (REYES)

Q: X allowed the victim and the latter’s common-law husband to live in X’s house free of rent. In return, the
couple helped maintain the house and contributed to utility bills. One day, X intercepted the victim, who had
just arrived home with a sack of rice, at the garage area and pointed a knife at her back. Thereafter, X dragged
her to his room and raped her. When the police authorities arrived, X refused to release her. She was detained
for a period of time.
A: Yes. Although the initial forcible abduction of victim may have been absorbed by the crime of rape, the continued
detention of the victim after the rape cannot be deemed absorbed in it. Likewise, since the detention continued after
the rape had been completed, it cannot be deemed a necessary means for the crime of rape. Hence, the accused is
convicted of rape and slight illegal detention. (People v. Concepcion, G.R. No. 214886, Apr. 4, 2018)

Crimes Against Property

Q: Discuss the rules when death results on occasion of the crime of robbery.
A: The following jurisprudential guidelines must be observed:
1. If robbery is the main purpose and objective of the accused, the killing being merely incidental to the crime
of robbery, the complex crime of robbery with homicide is committed. The intent to rob must precede the
taking of human life but the killing may occur before, during or after the robbery.
2. If killing the victim is the main purpose and objective (such as when the accused is motivated to kill the
victim), and the accused killed him, and took his property as an afterthought, the crimes committed are
penalized separately, that is: homicide or murder, and theft or robbery. (CAMPANILLA citing People v.
Atanacio, No. L-11844, Nov. 29, 1960; People vs. Natindim, G.R. No. 201867, Nov. 4, 2020)

Q: Cite instances where homicide is said to have been committed by reason or on occasion of robbery.
A: Homicide is said to have been committed by reason or on occasion of robbery if, for instance, it was committed:
1. To facilitate the robbery or the escape of the culprit;
2. To preserve the possession by the culprit of the loot;
3. To prevent discovery of the commission of the robbery; or
4. To eliminate witnesses in the commission of the crime (People vs. Balute, G.R. No. 212932, Jan. 21, 2015)

Q: X, Y and Z, who carried weapons, declared a holdup in a jeepney. One of the passengers yelled for help. Two
policemen immediately responded. Upon seeing the police, X took his gun. One of the policemen struggled to
secure the possession of the gun, which subsequently fired. The shot hit X. He died as a result of the shooting.
May W, X, Y and Z be held liable for the crime of robbery with homicide?
A: Yes. In the special complex crime of robbery with homicide, it is immaterial that the victim of homicide is other
than the victim of robbery, as long as homicide occurs by reason of the robbery or on the occasion thereof. Hence,
the victim of the robbery did not need to be the victim of the homicide. There is special complex crime of robbery
with homicide even if the person killed is one of the robbers. (CAMPANILLA citing People vs. Casabuena, G.R. No.
246580, June 23, 2020; People vs. Daguman, G.R. No. 219116, Aug. 26, 2020)
Note: The same principle applies where the victim of the homicide is a bystander or a responding policeman.

Criminal Law | 20

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: Discuss the rules on absorption when rape is committed as an incident to robbery with homicide.
A: In robbery with homicide, all other felonies such as rape, intentional mutilation, usurpation of authority, or direct
assault with attempted homicide are integrated into this special complex crime. This special complex crime is
committed as long as death results by reason or on occasion or robbery without reference or distinction as to the
circumstances, causes or modes or persons intervening in the commission of the crime, and the number death.

Q: Discuss the nature of the special complex crime of robbery with rape.
A: The crime of robbery with rape is a crime against property which is a single indivisible offense. The rape
accompanies the robbery. In a case where rape and not homicide is committed, there is only a crime of robbery with
rape if both the robbery and the rape are consummated. (REYES)
Note: Although the victim was raped twice on the occasion of Robbery, the additional rape is not considered as an
aggravating circumstance in the crime of robbery and rape. There is no law providing for the additional rape/s or
homicide/s for that matter to be considered as aggravating circumstance. The enumeration of aggravating
circumstances under Art. 14 of the RPC is exclusive, unlike in Art. 13, which enumerates the mitigating circumstances
where analogous circumstances may be considered (People v. Regala, G.R. No. 130508, Apr. 5, 2000)

Q: Discuss the nature of the special complex crime of robbery with physical injuries.
A: To be considered as such, the physical injuries must always be serious. If the physical injuries are only less serious
or slight, they are absorbed in the robbery. The crime becomes merely robbery. But if the less serious or slight
physical injuries were committed after the robbery was already consummated, there would be a separate charge for
the less serious physical injuries. (REYES)

Q: What are the elements of robbery by the use of force upon things under Article 299 (a) and Article 299 (b)?
A:
Robbery under Article 299 (a) Robbery under Article 299 (b)

1. The offender shall Enter: 1. The offender is Inside a dwelling house,

a. An Inhabited place; public building, or edifice devoted to
b. Public building; or religious worship, regardless of the
c. Edifice devoted to religious worship. circumstances under which he entered it;
2. That the entrance was Effected by any of the ff: 2. The offender takes personal property
a. Through an Opening unintended to enter or exit belonging to another, with intent to Gain,
b. By Breaking any wall, roof, or floor, or breaking under any of the circumstances:
any door or window; 3. By Breaking doors, wardrobes, chest, or
c. By using False keys, picklocks, or similar tools; or any other kind of locked or sealed
d. By using any fictitious Name or pretending the furniture or receptacle; or
exercise of public authority. 4. By Taking such furniture or objects away
3. Once Inside the building, the offender took personal to be broken or forced open outside the
property belonging to another with Intent to gain. place of the robbery.

Q: What are the elements of aiding and abetting a band of brigands?

A: The elements of aiding and abetting a band of brigands are: (BKO-AIR)
1. That there is a Band of brigands;
2. That the offender Knows the band to be brigands;
3. That the Offender does any of the following acts:
a. He is in any manner Aids, abets, or protects such band of brigands;
b. He gives Information of the movements of the police or other peace officers of the Government; or
c. He acquires or Receives the property taken by such brigands (REYES).

Criminal Law | 21

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: Distinguish theft from robbery.

A:
Theft Robbery

The offender does not use violence or intimidation or There is violence or intimidation or force upon things.
does not enter a house or building through any of the
means specified in Art. 299 or Art. 302 in taking
personal property of another with intent to gain.

It suffices that consent of the owner is lacking. That the taking is against the will of the owner.

Q: When is the act of “grabbing” considered as theft and when is it considered as robbery?
A: The act of “grabbing” does not automatically mean that force attended the taking. For the requisite of violence to
obtain in cases of simple robbery, the victim must have sustained less serious physical injuries or slight physical
injuries in the occasion of the robbery. (Del Rosario v. People, G.R. No. 235739, July 22, 2019, J. Caguioa). However, if,
on occasion of the act of “grabbing” the bag of the complainant who carried a gun, the accused attempted to stab
him, and thereafter punched and kicked him, the crime of robbery is consummated even if the complainant was
able to retrieve the bag. (Poquiz v. People , G.R. No. 238715, Jan. 11, 2021)

Q: When is theft consummated?

A: Unlawful taking is deemed complete from the moment the offender gains possession of the thing, even if he has
no opportunity to dispose of the same. (Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007)
Note: There is no crime of frustrated theft. Unlawful taking is the element which produces the felony in its
consummated theft. (Canceran v. People, G.R. No. 2016442, July 1, 2015)

Q: X was carrying a huge sum of money bundled together in a rubber band placed on his lap. X forgot that it
was on his lap. Hence, upon alighting from the car, the bundled money fell on the road near the vehicle. A, a
minor, was riding a bicycle when he noticed the bundled money. He shared the same with his other cousin,
another minor, B, and C, of legal age. It was established that C convinced the two minors to just divide it
among themselves. The lower courts found C to be liable for the crime of theft. C appealed the conviction
contending that he is not the actual finder of the bundled funds. Is C’s contention tenable?
A: No. A "finder" under Article 308, par. 2 (1) is not only limited to the actual finder of the lost property since the gist
of the offense is the furtive taking and misappropriation of the property found. Though not the actual finder, there is
no dispute that the accused knew for a fact that his two co-accused minor did not own the subject money. He knew
that his co-accused minor merely found the money along the road while the latter was delivering bread. Instead of
returning the money, the accused convinced his co-accused minors not to return the money and to divide it among
themselves. At that moment, the accused placed himself precisely in the situation as if he was the actual finder. The
accused was a "finder in law," if not in fact; and his act in appropriating the money was of precisely of the same
character as if it had been originally found by him. Having obtained possession of the complainant’s lost money, the
accused had the opportunity and the obligation to return the lost property to its rightful owner or the local
authorities, but he unjustifiably refrained from doing so. (Pante v. People, G.R. No. 218969, Jan. 18, 2021)

Q: When is theft qualified?

A:
1. If the theft is committed by a domestic servant.
2. If the theft is committed with grave abuse of confidence.
3. If the property stolen is a (a) motor vehicle, (b) mail matter, or (c) large cattle.
4. If the property stolen consists of coconuts taken from the premises of a plantation.
5. If the property stolen is fish taken from a fishpond or fishery.
6. If property is taken on the occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or any other calamity,
vehicular accident or civil disturbance.
Criminal Law | 22

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: What are the jurisprudential pronouncements that must be observed as regards qualified theft through
grave abuse of confidence and estafa through conversion or appropriation committed by employees?
A: The possession of the employee such as bank teller, collector, cash custodian or branch manager is only physical.
Hence, misappropriation of property is qualified theft. Abuse of confidence is present since the property is
accessible to the employee. However, if the employee is an officer of the company with discretion on how to use
property or fund of the company to further its interest, his possession is juridical; hence, misappropriation thereof is
estafa. Thus –
1. A bank president who held the money in trust or administration for the bank in his fiduciary capacity with
discretion on how to administer such fund (People vs. Go, G.R. No. 191015, Aug. 6, 2014)
2. A corporate treasurer who received the money for safe-keeping and administration (U.S. vs. Sevilla, G.R. No.
18056, Mar. 16, 1922)
3. A corporate officer with discretion option on how to use bending machine without the participation of the
corporation (D’Aigle vs. People, G.R. No. 174181, June 27, 2012). However, in Remo vs. Devanadera, G.R. No.
192925, December 9, 2016, the Supreme Court ruled that the directors of a corporation have no juridical
possession over the corporate funds. (CAMPANILLA)
Note: The element that personal property is received in trust, on commission, for administration or with the duty to
deliver of or return the same presupposes that the offender acquires both physical possession and juridical
possession of the thing received. (Manjares vs. People, G.R. No. 207249. May 14, 2021, J. Caguioa)

Q: What are the elements of Estafa with Abuse of Confidence?

A:
1. That personal property is received in trust, on commission, for administration, or under any other
circumstance involving the duty to make delivery of or to return the same.
2. Conversion or diversion of such property by the person who has so received it.
3. That such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the Prejudice of another
4. That there is a demand made by the offended party to the offender

Q: When may novation be used as a defense in Estafa with Abuse of Confidence?

A: Receiving the property under an obligation involving the duty to deliver, or to return” is an element of estafa
through misappropriation. Novation may convert a contract where the accused has the duty to return property into
a new contract where the accused has no such duty. Hence, estafa through misappropriation is not committed.
(CAMPANILLA citing Sorongon v. People, G.R. No. 230669, June 16, 2021, J. Caguioa)
Note: This is not the general rule. The general rule with respect to novation is that it does not affect criminal liability
for estafa simply because novation is not a mode of extinguishing criminal liability. Novation is merely a valid
defense when one of the elements of the crime is the existence of a contractual relationship between the offender
and the victim. Since juridical possession of the property passes by way, which may trigger the application of estafa
through misappropriation, novation may be a defense for such a crime.

Q: What are the elements of Estafa by means of Deceit?

A:
1. That there must be a false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means.
2. That such false pretense, fraudulent act or fraudulent means must be made or executed prior to or
simultaneously with the commission of the fraud.
3. That the offended party must have relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act, or means, that he was
induced to part with his money or property because of the false pretense, fraudulent act, or means.
4. That as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage.

Criminal Law | 23

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Q: Is the return by the accused of the money received through estafa by means of deceit a tenable defense for
the acquittal of the accused?
A: No. The return by the accused of money belonging to the private complainant will not reverse a consummated act
of Estafa. Arriola's initial attempts to reimburse Del Rosario through checks, coupled with the actual return of the
latter's money after the RTC issued its judgment of conviction, may all be considered as unequivocal gestures to
compromise and which can be measured against Arriola as his implied admission of guilt. (Arriola v. People, G.R. No.
199975, Feb. 24, 2020)

Q: Distinguish Estafa under Article 315 (2[d]) from the Bouncing Check Law.
A:
Bouncing Check (B.P. 22) Estafa by postdating a check or issuing a check in
payment of an obligation (Art. 315 par. 2 (d))

Deceit and damage are not essential elements Deceit and damage are required

Mere issuance of a check that is dishonored gives rise No such presumption

to the presumption of knowledge of the drawer that he
issued the same without sufficient funds.

Drawer of a dishonored check may be convicted even if Such circumstance negate criminal liability
he had issued the same for a pre-existing obligation

Crime against public interest. Crime against property

Mala prohibita Mala in se

Note: What sets apart the crime of estafa from the other offense of this nature (i.e., B.P. No. 22) is the element of
deceit. To constitute estafa, the issuance of the check must have been the inducement for the surrender by the party
deceived of his money or property. (Abalos vs. People, G.R. No. 221836, Aug. 14, 2019)

Q: What are the elements of syndicated estafa under P.D. 1689?

A:
1. They must be at least five in number.
2. They must have formed or managed a rural bank, cooperative, farmer's association or any other
corporation or association that solicits funds from the general public.
3. They formed or managed such association with the intention of carrying out an unlawful or illegal act,
transaction, enterprise or scheme i.e., using the very association that they formed or managed as the
means to defraud its own stockholders, members and depositors.
Note: Swindling may fall within P.D. No. 1689 if it is committed through an association. On the other hand, estafa is
committed regardless of the number of the accused when:
1. The entity soliciting funds from the general public is the victim and not the means through which the estafa
is committed, or
2. The offenders are not owners or employees who used the association to perpetrate the crime.

Q: What are the requisites of “other deceits”?

A: The following are the elements:
1. False pretense, fraudulent act or pretense other than those enumerated in Articles 315, 316, and 317;
2. Such false pretense, fraudulent act must be made prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the
fraud; and
3. The offended party suffers damage or prejudice. Thatuch false statement or fraudulent representation
constitutes the very cause or the only motive for the private complainant to part with her property.

Criminal Law | 24

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Note: Article 318 includes any kind of conceivable deceit other than those enumerated in Articles 315 to 317 of the
RPC. It is intended as the catchall provision for that purpose.

Q: What are the rules on incurring criminal liability when a person dies as a result of the crime of arson?
A:
1. If the main objective is to kill the victim in a building, and fire is resorted to as the means to accomplish
such goal, the crime committed is murder only. Murder qualified by means of fire absorbs arson since the
latter is an inherent means to commit the former. Single act of burning the building to kill two persons
constitutes compound crime of double murders.
2. If the main objective is to burn the building, but death results by reason or on the occasion of arson, the
crime is arson with qualifying circumstance of resulting death. The resulting homicide is absorbed since it
will be considered as a modificatory circumstance.
3. If the objective is to kill, and in fact the offender has already done so, and arson is resorted to as a means to
cover up the killing, the offender may be convicted of two separate crimes of either homicide or murder,
and arson.

Q: Who are exempted from criminal liability for Theft, Swindling and Malicious Mischief under Art. 332?
A: The persons exempted from criminal liability under Article 332 of the RPC are:
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants, or relatives by affinity in the same line;
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the property which belonged to the deceased spouse before the same
passed into the possession of another; and
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers- in-law and sisters-in-law, if living together (Intestate Estate of
Carungcong v. People, G.R. No. 181409, Feb. 11, 2010).

Crimes against Chastity

Q: What are the elements of the crime of Adultery?
A: The following are the elements:
1. That the woman is married.
2. That she had sexual intercourse with a man not her husband.
3. With regard to the man, he must know her to be married.

Q: What are the elements of the crime of Concubinage?

A: The following are the elements:
1. The man must be married.
2. He committed any of the following acts:
a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling.
b. Having sexual intercourse under scandalous circumstances with a woman not his wife.
c. Cohabiting with her in any other place.
3. With regard to the woman, she must know him to be married.

Crimes against the civil status of persons

Q: What are the elements for the crime of bigamy?
A:
1. That the offender has been legally married.
2. That the marriage has not been legally dissolved or, in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse
could not yet be presumed dead according to the Civil Code.
3. That he contracts a second or subsequent marriage.
4. That the second or subsequent marriage has all the essential requisites for validity.

Criminal Law | 25

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Crimes Against Honor

Q: How is the crime of libel committed?
A: The elements of the crime of libel are as follows:
1. There must be an imputation of a crime, or a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission,
condition, status or circumstance;
2. The imputation must be made publicly;
3. It must be malicious;
4. The imputation must be directed at a natural personal or a juridical person, or one who is dead; and
5. The imputation must tend to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of the person defamed.

Quasi-Offenses
Q: What are the elements of reckless imprudence?
A: The following are the elements:
1. Offender does or fails to do an act;
2. The doing of or the failure to do that act is voluntary;
3. It be without malice;
4. Material damage results; and
5. There is an inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing or failing to perform such
act taken into consideration:
a. Employment or occupation
b. Degree of intelligence
c. Physical condition
d. Other circumstances regarding persons, time and place

Q: What are the elements of simple imprudence?

A: The following are the elements:
1. There is lack of precaution on the part of the offender; and
2. Damage impending to be caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly manifested.

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

Anti-Fencing Law
Q: How is Fencing committed?
A: Act of any person who, with intent to gain for himself or for another, shall buy, receive, possess, keep, acquire,
conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in any article, item, object or anything of
value which he knows, or should be known to him, to have been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery
or theft. (Sec. 2, P.D. 1612)
Note: Fencing is malum prohibitum. (Estrella vs. People, G.R. No. 212942, June 17, 2020)

Q: Is there a presumption of Fencing?

A: Yes. Mere possession of any good, article, item, object, or anything of value which has been the subject of robbery
or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of fencing. (Sec. 5, P.D. 1612)

Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act

Q: What are the corrupt practices penalized
A:
1. Persuading, inducing, or influencing another officer to commit violation (Sec. 3[a]) – 2 acts
punished:
a. Persuading, inducing or influencing another public officer to perform an act constituting a
violation of rules and regulations duly promulgated by competent authority or an offense in
connection with the official duties of the latter
b. Allowing himself to be persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such violation or offense.
Criminal Law | 26

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

2. Requesting gifts in connection with contract or transaction (Sec. 3[b]) – Directly or indirectly
requesting or receiving any gift, present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself or for any other
person, in connection with any contract or transaction between the Government and any other party,
wherein the public officer in his official capacity has to intervene under the law.
3. Requesting gifts in consideration for help given (Sec. 3[c]) – Directly or indirectly requesting or
receiving any gift, present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for himself or for another, from any
person for whom the public officer, in any manner or capacity, has secured or obtained, or will secure or
obtain, any Government permit or license, in consideration for the help given or to be given, without
prejudice to Section thirteen of this Act.
4. Accepting employment in enterprise with pending business with him (Sec. 3[d]) – Accepting or
having any member of his family accept employment in a private enterprise which has pending official
business with him during the pendency thereof or within one year after its termination.
5. Causing any undue injury to any party (Sec. 3[e]) – Causing any undue injury to any party including
the Government, or giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the
discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith
or gross inexcusable negligence.
6. Neglecting to act (Sec. 3[f]) – Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or request, without sufficient
justification, to act within a reasonable time on any matter pending before him.
7. Entering into grossly disadvantageous contracts (Sec. 3[g]) – Entering, on behalf of the Government,
into any contract or transaction manifestly and grossly disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the
public officer profited or will profit thereby.
8. Having unlawful business interests (Sec. 3[h]) – Directly or indirectly having financial or pecuniary
interest in any business, contract or transaction in connection with which he intervenes or takes part in
his official capacity, or he is prohibited by the Constitution or by any law from having any interest.
9. Having material interest in transactions requiring his approval (Sec. 3[i]) – Directly or indirectly
becoming interested, for personal gain, or having a material interest in any transaction or act requiring
the approval of a board, panel or group of which he is a member, and which exercises discretion in such
approval, even if he votes against the same or does not participate in the action of the board,
committee, panel or group. (Interest for personal gain shall be presumed against those public officers
responsible for the approval of manifestly unlawful, inequitable, or irregular transactions or acts by the
board, panel or group to which they belong.)
10. Granting license to unqualified persons (Sec. 3[j]) – Knowingly approving or granting any license,
permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any person not qualified for or not legally entitled to such license,
permit, privilege or advantage, or of a mere representative or dummy of one who is not so qualified or
entitled.
11. Divulging confidential information (Sec. 3[k]) – There are two acts punished, namely:
a. Divulging valuable information of a confidential character, acquired by his office or by him on
account of his official position to unauthorized persons, or
b. Releasing such information in advance of its authorized release date.

Q: What are the three modes by which the offense for violation of Section 3 (e) may be committed?
A: The three modes are:
1. Through evident bad faith;
2. Through manifest partiality;
3. Through gross inexcusable negligence.
Note: Gross inexcusable negligence is separate and distinct from the modality of evident bad faith. Hence, where
the information charges the accused with two counts of violation of Section 3 (e) through evident bad faith, the
case must be dismissed where the accused was not in bad faith, but was grossly negligent. (Buencamino v.
People, G.R. No. 216745-46, Nov. 10, 2020, J. Caguioa)

Criminal Law | 27

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act

Q: When is “Violence against women and their children” committed under R.A. 9262?
A: "Violence against women and their children" refers to any act or a series of acts committed by any person
against a woman who is his wife, former wife, or against a woman with whom the person has or had a sexual or
dating relationship, or with whom he has a common child, or against her child whether legitimate or illegitimate,
within or without the family abode, which result in or is likely to result in physical, sexual, psychological harm or
suffering, or economic abuse including threats of such acts, battery, assault, coercion, harassment or arbitrary
deprivation of liberty.

Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act

Q: What are the elements of illegal sale of dangerous drugs (DD) and/or controlled precursors (CP) and
essential chemicals (EC)?
A: The following are the elements:
1. The identity of the buyer and the seller; the object and the consideration of the sale.
2. The delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor.

Q: What are the elements of illegal possession of dangerous drugs (DD)?

A: The following are the elements:
1. The accused is in possession of an item or object, which is identified to be prohibited or regulated drug;
2. Such possession is that authorized by law; and
3. The accused freely and consciously possessed the drug (People v. Trinidad, G.R. No. 199898, Sep. 3,
2014).
Note: Constructive possession exists when the drug is under the dominion and control of the accused or when
he has the right to exercise dominion and control over the place where it is found. Exclusive possession or
control is not necessary. The accused cannot avoid conviction if his right to exercise control and dominion over
the place where the contraband is located is shared with another.

Q: What are the rules of absorption under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act?
A:
Possession Use

GR: Possession of dangerous drugs is generally GR: Use of dangerous is absorbed under possession
absorbed in the sale of dangerous drugs. EXC: Where the presence of dangerous drugs for
EXC: If the offender possesses another quantity of possession is only in the form of residue, he should
drugs or pack of drugs other than the dangerous be charged with use (People v. Martinez, G.R. No.
drugs sold. 191366, Dec. 13, 2010)

Q: Upon a tip to the desk officer regarding drug-related activities, the police station was instructed to
conduct a buy-bust operation. The police told the bystanders that he wanted to buy shabu. N, one of the
bystanders, obliged, going in and coming out of his house carrying 2 plastic sachets. After which, N was
arrested. On the other hand, N’s version was that a group of 7-8 men, later identified as police officers,
barged into a house, dragged, and frisked them, but produced nothing. Was N properly convicted of
violation of illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs?
A: No for both charges. To convict a person charged with the crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs under
Section 5, Article 2 of R.A. 9165, the prosecution is required to prove the following elements: (1) the identity of the
buyer and the seller, the object, and the consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment
therefor. On the other hand, illegal possession of dangerous drugs under Section 11, Article 2 of R.A. 9165 has the
following elements: (1) the accused is in possession of an item or object, which is identified to be a prohibited or
regulated drug; (2) such possession is not authorized by law; and (3) the accused freely and consciously

Criminal Law | 28

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

possessed the drug. In the present case, there was no showing that there was proper identification of the object.
Absent this requisite, there can be no conviction for the illegal sale. Additionally, under jurisprudence, it has
been repeatedly held that he accused need not present a single piece of evidence in his defense if the State has
not discharged its onus. The accused can simply rely on his right to be presumed innocent (People v. Narvas y
Balosoc, G.R. No. 241254; July 8, 2019, J. Caguioa)

Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012

Q: What is the multiple publication rule?
A: A single defamatory statement, if published several times, gives rise to as many offenses as there are publications.
Every publication of the same libel constitutes a distinct offense. This is the “multiple publication rule” followed in
our jurisdiction.

Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation, and Discrimination Act

Q: What is the necessary ingredient for a person to be convicted under child abuse specifically under Section
10(a) of R.A. 7610?
A: A specific intent to debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth of a child as a human being is required for
conviction under Section 10 (a) of R.A. 7610 in relation to Section 3 (b) (2). Consequently, the prosecution must not
only prove that the acts of child abuse under Section 3 (b) (2) were committed, but also that the same were
intended to debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of the minor victim as a human being.
(Briñas y Del Fierro v. People, G.R. No. 254005; June 23, 2021, J. Caguioa)

Q: What are the guidelines provided in designating or charging the proper offense in case of lascivious
conduct committed under sec. 5 (b) of R.A. 7610?
A: If the victim is exactly twelve (12) years of age, or more than twelve (12) but below eighteen (18) years of age, or is
eighteen (18) years old or older but is unable to fully take care of herself/himself or protect herself/ himself from
abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition, the
crime should be designated as “Lascivious Conduct under Section 5(b) of R.A. 7610,” and the imposable penalty is
reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion perpetua (XXX v. People, G.R. No. 242101; Sept. 16, 2019, J.
Caguioa)

Criminal Law | 29

21AYK 21AYK
21AYK 21AYK

Drafting a Criminal Complaint

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT
NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
Branch 45, City of Manila

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

Plaintiff,

-versus-

JUAN DELA CRUZ

Accused,

Criminal Case No. 1234567

For: Simple Seduction

x—--------------------------------x

COMPLAINT

The undersigned, JOANNA DELA CRUZ, accuses JUAN DELA CRUZ for the crime of Simple
seduction, committed as follows to wit:

That on or about the 17th day of April, 2022, in the City of Manila, Philippines, a place within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did then and there willfully, unlawfully, and
feloniously, and by means of deceit, had sexual intercourse with the undersigned, JOANNA DELA CRUZ, 16 years
of age, unmarried and of good reputation, inside undersigned’s room when her parents were still at work. Prior
consent from the undersigned was secured through deceit when accused promised to marry her.

CONTRARY TO LAW.

City of Manila, Philippines, April 18, 2022

(sgd.) JOANNA DELA CRUZ

Complainant

VERIFICATION

A preliminary investigation has been conducted in this case under my direction, having been
examined by the witnesses under oath.

(sgd.) ANGEL REYES

MTC JUDGE

Criminal Law | 30

21AYK 21AYK