The document discusses the key characteristics of Philippine criminal law:
1. Generality - Philippine criminal law applies to all people who live in or travel through the Philippine territory, with exceptions for heads of state and diplomats.
2. Territoriality - Philippine criminal law applies to all crimes committed within Philippine territory, which includes land, water up to 12 miles from shore, and airspace.
3. Prospectivity - Criminal laws apply only prospectively to future acts; they cannot be applied retroactively unless more favorable to the accused.
The document also outlines exceptions where Philippine criminal law can apply extraterritorially for crimes committed on Philippine ships or involving forgery of Philippine currency. It discusses the different schools of
The document discusses the key characteristics of Philippine criminal law:
1. Generality - Philippine criminal law applies to all people who live in or travel through the Philippine territory, with exceptions for heads of state and diplomats.
2. Territoriality - Philippine criminal law applies to all crimes committed within Philippine territory, which includes land, water up to 12 miles from shore, and airspace.
3. Prospectivity - Criminal laws apply only prospectively to future acts; they cannot be applied retroactively unless more favorable to the accused.
The document also outlines exceptions where Philippine criminal law can apply extraterritorially for crimes committed on Philippine ships or involving forgery of Philippine currency. It discusses the different schools of
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
The document discusses the key characteristics of Philippine criminal law:
1. Generality - Philippine criminal law applies to all people who live in or travel through the Philippine territory, with exceptions for heads of state and diplomats.
2. Territoriality - Philippine criminal law applies to all crimes committed within Philippine territory, which includes land, water up to 12 miles from shore, and airspace.
3. Prospectivity - Criminal laws apply only prospectively to future acts; they cannot be applied retroactively unless more favorable to the accused.
The document also outlines exceptions where Philippine criminal law can apply extraterritorially for crimes committed on Philippine ships or involving forgery of Philippine currency. It discusses the different schools of
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
ARTICLE 2 SCOPE AND APPLICATION OF THE CODE 3 Important Characteristics of Criminal Law 1. Generality 2. Territoriality 3. Prospectivity 1. Generality General criminal law applies to all who lives/ sojourn within the Philippine territory. Lives committed a crime here, Phil. Criminal law applies to you Sojourn even if you are simply passing thru you are subjected to Phil. Criminal law. General Rule: Who lives / sojourn in the Phil Territory Exceptions: Heads of state, ambassadors, ministers, resident diplomatic Q: Consuls, Vice-consuls? A: not exempt from the operation of Phil. Criminal law 2. Territoriality - physical boundaries, that would include Phil. Criminal law now will apply to all crimes within the Phil. Territory. - Phil. Territory- the land, water and the air Q: What about the extent of Phil territory? (because of the Phil. boundaries nga?) A: water- formerly 3 mile limit but now 12 mile limit from low water mark. Originally 3 mile limit extended from the low water mark 12 mile limit from the low water mark- by virtue of the New Convention of the Law on the Sea, which was ratified in 1982 by member states, 50+ member states, 52/55 expand the territorial water jurisdiction of Phil. Criminal Law Exemptions to the Territoriality Characteristics of Phil. Criminal Law are found in Art. 2 of the RPC (memorize) meaning Phil. Criminal law will apply to those persons who committed it even outside the Phil. Territory so, it applies to all those who commit an offense while on board/ Philippine ship/airship it shall apply to those who counterfeit currency notes, bank notes, coins which have been issued by the government of the RP, it shall apply to those who are responsible for the introduction of those counterfeit, bank notes that has been forge; public officials and employees who commit offenses in the course/ discharge of duties/official functions as such; and to those who commit crimes against national security and the law of the nations 5 Exceptions - that Even Committed Outside the Philippine Territory Air, Land and Water Still Subject to Philippine Criminal Law Page 1 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW CRIMINAL LAW 1 Judge Ma. Cristina Cornejo Dont Sweat the Small Stuff 1. Crime committed within a Philippine ship or airship. 2. Forgery is committed by giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer or to order the appearance of a true genuine document or by erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by any means the figures, letters, words or signs contained therein. 3. If forgery was committed abroad, it must refer only to Philippine coin, currency note or obligations and securities. 4. A public officer or employee who commits a crime related to the exercise of his office. 5. Title I of Book II on crimes against national security and the law of nations covers treason, espionage, provoking war and disloyalty in case of war, piracy and mutiny but not rebellion. Note: When rebellion is committed abroad, the Philippines will not acquire jurisdiction because rebellion is a crime against public order. Board/ Phil. Ship/ Airship + it is not a question of ownership of a vessel + it is a question of registration + where it was registered + for our court to acquire jurisdiction, it must be registered in accordance of our Phil. Laws + even it was Filipino owned but not registered under our law, even if the crimes committed there, we do not have jurisdiction + registration in the Bureau of Customs + for as long as the crime committed on board of Phil ship / Airship Q: What if the crime is committed on board on a warship? A: Of course internationally accepted that would fall under the jurisdiction - still which the country to which that warship belongs, even if it is here within the Phil. Territory, if the crime is committed in that warship that is still considered an exception in the territory of the country to which that warship belongs. Q: Crime committed on board of foreign merchant vessel? A: 2 rules: a. French rule - if the crime committed on board of a foreign merchant vessel. Example: Here in our territory, under the French rule, we do not have jurisdiction except if that crime even if on board of a foreign merchant vessel affects public order/ national security b. English rule - the crime is committed on board of a foreign merchant vessel which is situated in Phil. territory, it is subject to our jurisdiction except if that crime relates to internal affairs/ internal management of the foreign merchant vessel. 3. Prospectivity the law will apply only to facts, circumstances, events, transactions after the promulgation of the law so the law must made to apply forward, it may not apply backward, it cannot be given a retroactive application, that is the rule Exception: If it is favorable to the accused, it is not enough that RA is favorable to the. The accused must not be habitual delinquent (HD) HD - Art. 62 < 2 requisites must concur: 1. RA is favorable to the accused 2. He must not be a HD Q: Who / What is HD? A: It is a special aggravating circumstance because it adds to penalty if within a period of 10 years, reckoned from the date of his last release or the last conviction (2 reckoning point) of the crimes of (any of the crimes of) serious physical injuries, less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa and falsification, is found guilty of any of the said crimes, the third time or oftener Take note the effect of repeal of the Penal Law a.) New law provides a lighter penalty than the penalty provided in the old law with respect to a crime then the new law will apply because it Page 2 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Make Peace with Imperfection is favorable to the accused but remember he must not be a HD b.)What if the new law provides a heavier penalty? At the time of the commission of the crime, then you apply because it is not totally repealed, its only that it apply to the same offense but the point th4e lighter penalty in the old law that would have to be made to apply. c.) What if the new law does not anymore penalize the act which has been penalize before the old law - the crime is obliterated - acquitted Schools of Thought 1. Classical Theory 2. Positivist Theory 3. Protective / Utilitarian 1. Classical Theory - Man is considered a creature of absolutely free will (voluntary) - Wherefore he has a choice - If he chooses to do wrong, he will suffer the consequences - If he chooses to be right, fine! - Purpose of penalty retribution 2. Positivist does not do it voluntarily but there is a strange & morbid phenomenon that compels it to do the act psychological did not really mean to commit the crime but compel him by a strange or morbid phenomenon to commit the crime not penalty, subjected to a battery of psychological test he did not to do it on his own - forced to do it 3. Protective / Utilitarian Case Facts: Violation of BP22, he was being made to pay something, the alleged creditor would not have any cash out, there is a propensity to fool somebody who is already in a dire straight -he took advantage on the accused. Held - SC: Criminal Law, the penalty provided under the criminal law is not there to protect society only from actual wrongdoers, but likewise from potential wrongdoers. Those who have propensity/ intonations to commit a crime ARTICLE 3 FELONY Art. 3 relate to Art. 4 Art 3- defines what a felony is Art. 4- how is criminal liability incurred Q. What is a felony? Art. 3, a felony is an act or omissions punishable by law. Q. Did he incur criminal liability? A. Go back to Art. 3 & 4 Q. How is that act/omission? A. Either dolo or culpa. Q. How is criminal liability incurred? A. Felony is an act/omission punishable by law it could be by means of dolo (deceit, intent ) culpa (imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight/skills) 2 Basic Kinds of felony 1. Intentional felonies 2. Culpable Felonies Q. What are the elements: Art 365 Culpable A. Intentional vs. Culpable -freedom < -freedom -intelligence < - intelligence -intent < -negligence Act - overt act, violation of law, you penalize it Omission - why it is omission of a felony? or punishable by a law? Omission - we do not do anything - inaction, Q. So why do we penalize for something we do not do? A. because there is a law that tells you to do this, if you do not to do this, so you omit the obligations to do. Page 3 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Let Go of the Idea that Gentle, Relaxed People Cant Be Super Achievers Example Treason (misprision) you are aware of the conspiracy to commit treason- you have to report it to the proper authorities. ARTICLE 4 HOW IS CRIMINAL LIABILITY INCURRED Q. How is criminal liability incurred? A. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. Discussion before you can incur criminal liability - you do a felony, if you do something which is not a felonious, you may be civilly liable but not criminally liable Q. So how do you incur criminal liability? A. If you perform a felony Definition of felony It is an act/omission punishable by law, if the act is incorrect merely or otherwise but it is not punishable by law and you commit it but it appears that it is morally wrong but not punishable by law, you do not incur criminal liability. Example Q. A commit suicide and she jumps from a building and nibagsak sya kay B, did A incur criminal liability? A. No, the act is not felonious. Suicide is not a felony. Even it is immoral. Opinion: He can be liable for reckless imprudence resulting to homicide Judge Cornejo : those person who commit suicide, theres something in their head (when you go up in the tallest building) di kana titingin kung may madadaganan ka pa), I do not subscribed to the opinion. The only question is if there is a criminal liability - if your act is felonious. If the act is not felonious, you will not incur criminal liability. To be able to incur criminal liability, 2 requisites must concur: 1. The act is felonious 2. The act is the proximate cause of the injury Concept of Proximate Cause The cause of the cause is the evil caused Q: How it is defined in criminal law? A: People vs Iligan It is that cause which in the natural & continuous sequence of events unbroken by any events, unbroken by any active intervening cause produces an injury without which the result would not have result. Q: When there is a proximate cause? A: From the cause to the effect nothing must happen in between ___________________________________________________ Proximate cause Effect which is the result Case of Rockwell: Offender punched the victim, the victim fell on the floor (cemented pavement), he did not die, while on the ground, dumating si horsie horsie!!! Die Q: Was the punching - that is an exertion of violence, protective of injury? Was the punching, that is a felonious act is the proximate cause of the death of the victim? A: From the cause which is the act to the effect of the death nothing must happen in between, o di ba may nangyari the horsie, horsie,. The intervening cause - horsie horsie Case of Rockwell vs Case of Chuaco In Chuaco Case, the horse is not in the scene Punched -died of cerebral hemorrhage incur criminal liability from the cause to the effect there is no intervening People vs. Iligan + may view that the concept of Proximate Cause was modified + the victim was hacked on the head and then he run until he reached the Page 4 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Be Aware of the Snowball Effect of Your Thinking highway and he fell and run over by the vehicles. + SC said: It was still a proximate cause even if the immediate cause was the running over. Judge Cornejo : it is not modified explained by the Supreme Court, that it is a mortal wound na eh! = Highway - mabilis ang takbo ng vehicles so you do not consider that as an efficient intervening cause = it was an isolated case = you do not drive less than 100 km per hour still it is the same concept Felonious Act - effect nothing happened in between Factors Affecting Intent and Correspondingly the Criminal Liability 1. Mistake of Fact 2. Error in Personae (Mistake in Identity) 3. Aberratio Ictus (mistake in the victim of the blow) 4. Proximate Cause 1. Mistake of Fact If you commit an act which is felonious, because it is punishable by law but you did it under a mistake of fact, you will not be criminally liable Requisites (the 3 must concur): 1. That act would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believe them to be- the act would have been lawful - nakapatay ka 2. The intention of the accused in performing the act must be lawful 3. No negligence/carelessness on the part of the accused U.S. vs. Anchong killed the victim, absolved because of mistake of fact voluntary yan but under different special circumstances kaya siya na absolve, fall under the concept of mistake of fact. 1. The act would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believe them to be. Example He slept, locked the door, he heard somebody knocking trying to open the door, he taught it was a murderer. But before he opened / before he killed the victim, the intention was to protect himself or defend himself, because he believes there is somebody trying to kill him, but he was not careless, not negligent, because he asked - sino yan, sino yan? bukas bukas pa din3 rd time asking, upon opening the door he killed the person and after that he found out that it was only his roommate He is acting in self-defense which is lawful No fault or carelessness / negligence, precisely he was calling / asking 3 times 2. Error in Personae (Mistake in Identity) If the act is criminal act but as was committed not under the mistake of fact, it was voluntary, it was with knowledge, he knew what he was doing, talagang penalize siya, only that there is a mistake in the identity of the victim. Criminally liable. Example A intended to kill B but A killed C instead Q: Will A be liable for killing C? A: Naturally, liable
3. Aberratio Ictus (Mistake in the vicitim of the blow) A intended to shoot B, but A fired to C- mistake in the blow (Aberatio Ictus) liable Example The husband stopped the wife from talking, punched the pregnant wifebut there is no intention to kill the wife, intention to exert of violence into her person, to stop her from talking. There is intent to cause harm but no intent to kill the wife. No intention to commit so grave / praeter intentionem - criminally liable Impossible Crimes By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property, were if not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means Q: Is it a crime? A: technically, No! Impossible crime is not a crime because the act is not a criminal act it would be an offense or it would have been an offense against person or property for if not for Page 5 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Develop Your Compassion the impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. Q: Then if it is not a crime why it is penalize? A: it is penalize because the fact of the commission of that act, how which is not for the productive of a crime, against person/ property, he has shown his criminal propensity, intention to commit a crime only that he do not accomplish the crime because it is inherently impossible. The criminal propensity, criminal tendency that is the one which is penalize, not the crime itself, because technically it is not a crime. Example Q: A intended to kill B, A went to the house of B, he saw B lying on the bed, believing that B was sleeping but in fact B died in a cardiac arrest and A stabbed B. Had the person (B) has been alive at the time of stabbing - homicide/murder A: the point is A will not be liable for murder/homicide, because he cannot kill somebody who is dead (inherent impossibility on account of the employment of inadequate ineffectual means) Example Buying a substance, you knew it is a poison but it is sugar so your intended victim did not die. For purposes of impossible crime The act would be an offense Additional According to the SC The act should not constitute another violation of any other provision in the RPC Case: Intod vs. Court of Appeals Offenders intended to kill Mr. X, so they conducted a surveillance there is evident premeditation (go out, what time?), so on the day they decide to execute their plan to kill Mr. X, they TA! TA! TA! TA! And yet the house specifically the room - the supposed victim is not there, Mr. X is somewhere else Argue in the SC: attempted murder, they tried to kill but he was not there Another Justice - impossible crime How can it be - when one of the requisite is when the act must not constitute any violation of the RPC, eh di ba TA! TA! TA! Caused damage to the property, that is a violation of the RPC. < modified version of the impossible crime < hindi pumasok yung last provision- that do not constitute another violation of any other provision of the RPC < but they considered it as an Impossible Crime, because of the inherent impossibility < kapag attempted murder dapat andun yung tao and about to commit the crime < definition of a felony < not attempted/ frustrated stage in Impossible Crime ARTICLE 5 THERE IS NO CRIME WHEN THERE IS NO LAW THAT DEFINES AND PUNISHES IT ARTICLE 6 STAGES OF EXECUTION OF FELONY Different Stages of Execution of felony 1. Consummated 2. Frustrated 3. Attempted Discussion hindi ito crime Attempted murder or is hereby found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of attempted murder as defined and penalized in Art. 248 of the RPC in relation to Art. 6 - stages of execution of a felony - attempted homicide as defined and penalized in Art. 249 of the RPC in relation to Art. 6 1. Consummated All the essential elements of the crime are consummated Page 6 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Remind Yourself that When You Die, Your In Basket Wont be Empty Example He kills somebody - die sya - consummated the moment you put that thing, you have control, consummated na but there are certain instances the consummation/frustration of the crime will depend on the disposability of the articles taken. Case: People vs. Espiritu Rifles they put it in a truck then at the checkpoint the rifles were found, they were unlawfully taken Consummated? No! SC: it is simply frustrated because they could not have easily disposed the rifle Case: People vs. Bino they got hospital linen from the placed it was stored. They loaded it in the truck. Na-check point sila SC: consummated, because the linen is easily disposable So it would depend on the disposability of the articles taken for the purposes of the consummation 2. Frustrated Offender performs all the acts of execution, which would produce it by reason of some cause independent of the will of the perpetrator - perpetrator - offender - offender - he is the one who commit a crime - all the acts of execution- naperform na nya Examples a. Frustrated Homicide - offender performs all the act of execution if the offender has inflicted a mortal wound (sufficient to cause death) (fatal would yan) nisaksak mo in the dibdib- consummated but if you have inflicted of a mortal wound and then you have change of heart ikaw na mismo ang nagdala sa hospital or because you are a doctor, you save his life- frustrated, because the prevention of the commission of the crime/ consummation of the crime is due to you b. you inflicted the mortal wound, doctors came in, administered the necessary medication and necessary healing that save his life- frustrated, the offender performs all the act of execution that would produce a homicide as a consequence kasi mortal wound na sufficient to death but nevertheless homicide is not committed coz the victim did not die, why? Due to some cause not on the will of the perpetrator but due to the will of timely medical assistance c. Rape- no frustrated d. Arson- no frustrated e. Impossible Crime- no frustrated 3. Attempted The offender merely commences, merely begins the performance of the act, the commission of the crime directly by overt acts Frustrated naperform na lahat Attempted be merely begins, merely commences, how? By directly overt acts, but does not perform all the acts of execution by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance Attempted a. Commences directly by overt acts b. If the act is preparatory he has not reached the attempted stage of felony overt means direct external / outer for the purpose of attempted felony the overt act must have a direct relation to the crime intended to be committed not necessary that there is a physical act because the physical act may be preparatory or overt act overt act may have a relation to be the crime intended to be committed Example Q: Person decides to kill somebody, he goes to the drug store, and buys rat killer intended to mix that to be fed to the intended victim. His acts in purchasing rat killer, has reached the attempted stage? A: NO! preparatory lang yan dib a, no direct relation in his mind has a direct relation, but in the state of his mind, so it is a preparatory act, malay mo maraming rats talaga, so it is different however he comes home he mixes the poison on the food, he attempted to feed it, overt act, attempted homicide, because the direct relation. Paano magiging attempted? Page 7 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Dont Interrupt Others or Finish Their Sentences Susubo pa lang nya and the cat went to him, cat ate it and the cat died attempted, take note that he did not feed because of some cause other than his spontaneous desistance No attempted Impossible Crime Homicide Arson Notes: You put flammable articles, nibuhusan mo ng gas, overt act - attempted Rape - no frustrated- only attempted and consummated Consummated rape, when? Slightest penetration of the ano into the ano is already consummated di na kelangan to go deeper, slightest penetration, for as long as there is a slightest penetration What if walang penetration? yung haging haging lng, kasi obviously may intent, for example, you undress a women, the male organ, walang penetration that is attempted it is not acts of lasciviousness why you place your thing over her thing without intent to, attempted but the moment slightest penetration - consummated Case: People vs. Attempted male organ was placed and nagkiskis dun sa thigh nung girl. No penetration SC: that is only an attempted rape. It simply constituted the strange thing of the castle of the orgasmic potency or the shelling of the variable passion. Example They inflicted injury on the victim, believing the victim has already died? Survive, is that frustrated homicide? They belief is immaterial. What matter is if all the acts of execution were performed. ARTICLE 7 WHEN LIGHT FELONIES ARE PUNISHABLE Light Felonies Are punishable when consummated except those against person or property. Generally: when consummated Except: attempted theft, attempted homicide Example Oral defamation Slander ARTICLE 8 CONSPIRACY Q: When is there a conspiracy? A: When 2 or more persons come into an agreement concerning the commission of the crime and decide to commit it. Conspiracy can be taken into 2 senses: 1. Generally as a mode of incurring criminal liability or it is taken as a crime itself only when expressly made a crime under the RPC / law 2. If conspiracy is not expressly made a crime under the law specifically the RPC and conspiracy is simple a mode of incurring criminal liability. 1. Conspiracy as a Crime It is defined in the law as a crime Example Conspiracy to commit treason, rebellion, coup detat, sedition, particular penalty for as long it is defined a crime and gives a penalty, conspiracy is a crime but if it is not made/expressly made a crime, more it is given a penalty in the RPC, it is simple a mode of incurring criminal liability. 2. Mode of incurring criminal liability Because the act of 1 is the act of all Example Even if I, even if Mr. X is the only one who materially perform the act, even he is the one who is directly stub and kill the victim, kami we were there, did not participate in the actual killing for as long as it can be establish that we conspired to kill, then, we are likewise liable as Principals. Q. Mode of incurring liability when do you incur criminal liability? A. When you perform an act or felony. Page 8 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Do Something Nice for Someone Else and Dont Tell Anyone About It So you perform an act, you are the one who killed the victim, kami hindi but we conspired to commit a crime, in any other manner, we conspire to kill the victim, we are equally liable as to his death, as Principals, but of course in conspiracy, it must be established clearly and convincingly as the crime itself although there is no direct evidence of conspiracy of course its inferred from circumstantial evidence, was there some agreement if any part is done by them that would show there is common decide to commit a crime, there is conspiracy. Even we say there is a conspiracy, because the act of 1 is the act of all, they conspire but if somebody or one of the conspirators try to prevent the commission of an act which was not one of those agreed upon, he cannot be held liable. Example: We conspire to kill A but napatay na then susunugin yung bahay but you prevent it, you may not be held liable for arson General rule: the act of 1 is the act of all Exception: if 1 of the conspirators try to prevent the commission of another act which was not agreed upon. Proposal to Commit a Felony A mode of incurring criminal liability, is likewise a crime only if it is made expressly a crime under the RPC Examples Proposal to commit treason, proposal to commit rebellion, proposal to commit sedition if it is made expressly made a crime it is not necessary that a proposal is accepted, mere proposal even if not accepted, it is made a crime in so far as the offense and liable, not specifically made a crime it must be accepted perjury Example I decide to induce him to execute a false affidavit, propose the execution, if he will not accept my proposal. He is not liable Accept both will be liable, Principal by Inducement
Q: What if several persons were charged as conspirators, have been acquitted, the last are guilty/ convicted, is there something wrong? A: No, People vs. Nothing irregular because conspiracy is a mode of incurring criminal liability. ARTICLE 9 GRAVE, LESS GRAVE, LIGHT FELONIES ARTICLE 10 SPECIAL PENAL LAWS ARTICLES 11 TO 15 Art. 11 Justifying Circumstances Art. 12 Exempting Circumstances Art. 13 Mitigating Circumstances Art. 14 Aggravating Circumstances Art. 15 Alternative Circumstances JEMAA they are referred to as modifying circumstances. Q. Why modifying? A. Because they modify either to increase or decrease the degree of criminal liability of a particular accused. J there is no criminal liability E there is no criminal liability M there is criminal liability but reduced A there is criminal liability but liability is increased or if it is in the nature of qualifying aggravating circumstance then the crime is changed. It changes the nature of the crime. Example Qualifying aggravating circumstance killing generally would amount to homicide but there is an attendance in the commission of the crime of qualifying aggravating circumstance of treachery or evident premeditation, the crime is qualified from homicide to murder. Justifying vs. Exempting 1. J there is no crime, there is no criminal liability because the act is justified (neither crime nor criminal) E there is a crime but there is no criminal Because the criminal or perpetrator of the act is exempt from criminal liability Page 9 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Let Others Have the Glory 2. J since there is no crime, there is no civil liability except Paragraph 4 state of necessity or avoidance of greater injury. (We all know even in criminal procedure civil liability flows from the commission of the crime so if there is no crime, there is no source from which the civil liability might flow or spring) E since there is a crime, there is civil liability. There is no criminal liability but there is civil liability except paragraphs 4 (accident) and 7 (insuperable cause). Meaning: with respect to paragraphs 4 and 7 there is neither criminal liability nor civil liability. JEM invoked by the accused. Aggravating invoked by the prosecution for the purpose of increasing the degree of criminal liability of the accused. The prosecution is requesting and trying to prove to the court that this circumstance should be appreciated against the accused in the commission of the crime so as to increase the criminal liability of the accused. ARTICLE 11 JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES 1. Self defense (SD) 2. Defense of Relatives (DR) 3. Defense of Strangers (DS) 4. State of Necessity or Avoidance of Greater Evil 5. Fulfillment of a Duty 6. Obedience to Superior In self-defense, defense of relatives and defense of strangers, the first two elements of these three defenses are the same: 1. Unlawful aggression from the victim 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression They differ in the 3 rd requisite: SD lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself DR - in case the provocation was given by the person attacked, that the one making the defense (the accused) had no part therein / even if the relative being defended gives the provocation, it is important that the person defending had no part in the provocation. DS the person defending the stranger was not motivated by hate, revenge, resentment or other evil motives. The unlawful aggression should have come from the private offended party. In all these defenses the indispensable requisite is unlawful aggression. Q. Why unlawful aggression is indispensable? A. Because if there is no unlawful aggression, the second requisite (which is reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression) has no basis because you are invoking SD, DR, DS so the unlawful aggression should have come from the victim. Meaning without the unlawful aggression, there is nothing to prevent or repel. Incomplete Justifying Circumstance (IJC) if not all the conditions are present Q. What is the effect of IJC? A. It is a privileged mitigating circumstance (PMC). Q. What is the effect of PMC? A. It serves to reduce the penalty by degrees. It is 1 degree lower to the mitigating. Incomplete SD, Incomplete DR, Incomplete DS, Incomplete exempting circumstance not all the conditions necessary to justify the act or exempt the accused from criminal liability are present. If in any of these defenses (SD, DS, DR) there is no unlawful aggression, even if the two other requisites are present, you cannot invoke of the PMC of IJC because as far as these defenses are concerned, the indispensable element is unlawful aggression coming from the private offended party. Examples: 1. If in SD reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression and lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself are Page 10 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Learn to Live in the Present Moment present but there is no unlawful aggression no PMC 2. If in SD unlawful aggression and reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression are present there is PMC 3. If in SD unlawful aggression and lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself are present there is PMC 4. If in SD one requisite is present, which is unlawful aggression ordinary mitigating circumstance. PAR. 1 - SELF DEFENSE Requisites: 1. Unlawful aggression from the victim 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression 3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself 1. Unlawful Aggression from the Victim Aggression should have come from the victim of the accused The unlawful aggression must have come from the victim because he is defending himself or defending his relative or defending a stranger so the aggression should have come from the victim of the accused. Q. What is unlawful aggression / What would consist of unlawful aggression? A. It is an action either an actual physical assault coming from the victim or the threat to inflict real injury on the offender and the threat to inflict real injury must be immediate and imminent. The threat to inflict real injury in not merely imagined. Immediate / Imminent about to happen. There are signs to show that the aggression is about to happen. Example Lumalapit lang sayo yung tao, no threat, you imagined that he will kill you this is not imminent. It must be at the time the unlawful aggression is still existing If you act / claim in SD, it must be at the time the unlawful aggression is still existing because of you attack somebody after the unlawful aggression has already ceased to exist, that is no longer SD, you are no longer preventing, you are no longer preventing any aggression. When the unlawful aggression ceased to exist that is simply retaliation. Example Ni-saksak ka nya, umalis na sya tapos ni- attack mo pa sya retaliation Binugbog ka, after binugbog ka, bumagsak ka, he left and did not do anything else and then you stood up and you followed him and stabbed him. Q. Is that SD? A. No. Tapos na eh! It should be on going or about to happen. You are simply repelling the aggression so the aggression must be existing at the time you reacted. 2. Reasonable Necessity of the Means Employed to Prevent or Repel the Unlawful Aggression - Case to case basis. It would depend on the existence of the aggression as well as the nature and extent of the aggression because you are trying to repel or trying to prevent the aggression so it must be reasonable and must depend on the nature and extent of the aggression. Example Nisampal ka nya, sinaksak mo sya. Is that reasonable? No. Kung sinampal ka, sampalin mo din or suntukin mo. Minura ka, sinaksak mo that is unreasonable! It must be proportionate to the aggression. So it would depend on the nature and extent or gravity of the aggression. The reasonableness would depend on the existence of aggression. If there is no aggression there is no basis for repelling. 3. Lack of Sufficient Provocation on the Part of the Person Defending Himself Q. What is provocation? Page 11 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Imagine that Everyone is Enlightened Except You A. It is something that would steal somebody to action. Q. What is lack of provocation? A. Even if the accused gave the provocation, it was not sufficient. Meaning: kung wala syang ginawang provocation that could have illicited the aggression from the private offended party (POP) or magbigay man sya ng provocation, it was not sufficient to illicit such unlawful aggression from the POP. PAR. 2 - DEFENSE OF RELATIVES Requisites: 1. Unlawful aggression from the victim 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression 3. In case the provocation was given by the person attacked, that the one making the defense (the accused) had no part therein / even if the relative being defended gives the provocation, it is important that the person defending had no part in the provocation. Q. Who are the relatives? A. Spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity in the same degrees, relatives by consanguinity within the fourth civil degree. Note: If not included in the list, you are simply acting in defense of a stranger. Spouse must be Legitimate Spouse The spouse must be a legitimate spouse. If common law spouse, that is defense of stranger. There should be legitimate relationship between you and the spouse. Note: The concept of unlawful aggression and reasonable necessity in SD is the same in DR. 3. Even if the Relative Being Defended Gives the Provocation, it is Important that the Person Defending had no Part in the Provocation Example Gerard (brother of Ayce) saw Ayce on the ground about to be hit by the group of Chat. Gerard did not know that Ayce gave the provocation but it was Ayce who started it all. Gerard thought that it was Ayce who was the victim. So what Gerard did, he assaulted the group of Chat. Gerard was acting in defense of a relative even if Ayce was the one who gave the provocation. What is important is that it Gerard was not part of the provocation. PAR. 3 - DEFENSE OF STRANGERS Requisites: 1. Unlawful aggression from the victim 2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression 3. the person defending the stranger was not motivated by hate, revenge, resentment or other evil motives. Q. Who is a stranger? A. A person who is not listed under the concept of relatives.
Note: The concept of unlawful aggression and reasonable necessity in SD is the same in DS. 3. The Person Defending the Stranger was not Motivated by Hate, Revenge, Resentment or other Evil Motives Most of these are circumstantial. It is a matter of proof. Example Ariel saw Jessica (a stranger) being mauled by Ayce. Ayce is Ariels mortal enemy. Ariel assaulted Ayce. Ariel claimed that he is defending Jessica who was assaulted by Ayce. Nobody knew that Ayce is the mortal enemy of Ariel so it is a matter of proof. What is important is that the person defending was not motivated by hate, revenge, resentment or other evil motives. PAR 4 - STATE OF NECESSITY OR AVOIDANCE OF GREATER INJURY / EVIL Requisites: 1. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists; Page 12 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Let Others be Right Most of the Time 2. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it; 3. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it. G.R.: There is no but there is civil liability EXC: Paragraph 4. Meaning there is no crime, there is no civil liability. Example Faye was driving her Jaguar car in the zigzag road, head on collision with a bus. If she swerves her car to the left, she would hit a pedestrian. If she swerves her car to the right, she would fall and would die. This is avoidance of greater injury, and naturally, greater injury would be her life. So she swerved her car to the left. This is self-preservation. Faye is relieved of criminal liability because she acted in avoidance of greater injury. Hence, she has to bear the civil liability for any damages that she caused to the victim. OBEDIENCE TO AN ORDER ISSUED BY A SUPERIOR Rules: 1. It must be obedience to a lawful order of a superior. It is not a blind obedience. It must be proved that it is a lawful order of superior. 2. If the accused complied with an unlawful order under a mistake of fact, he has no liability. He will not be criminally responsible. 3. If he acted in compliance with an order which is clearly and patently 7unlawful, he cannot invoke the defense of acting in obedience to a lawful order. Q. What if he acted in obedience to an unlawful order but he acted in obedience because of an irresistible force or under a compulsion of an uncontrollable fear? A. He is not justified but he will be exempt under Art. 12. ARTICLE 12 EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES The following are exempt from criminal liability: 1. An imbecile or insane person unless the latter has acted during a lucid interval. 2. A person under nine years of age. 3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen unless he has acted with discernment, in which case such minor shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Article 80 of this Code. 4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes an injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it. 5. Any person who acts under the compulsion of irresistible force. 6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury. 7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented by some lawful or insuperable cause. 1. An Imbecile or Insane Person Unless the Latter has Acted During a Lucid Interval Imbecility the person has the mentality of a child 2 to 7 years old. It is not the chronological age. Lucid aware of what he is doing Insanity the act must have been performed by the accused in a state of total deprivation of intelligence. Insanity would include schizophrenia and epilepsy. Example Gerard does not know what he is doing at the time he committed the crime because even if he has been declared insane but at the time he committed the act, he was acting during lucid interval that is not exempting. Because if he did it under lucid interval (sane or aware of what he was doing) from his insanity (declared or diagnosed insane) not exempt. Note: Burden of proof is on the accused to prove that he is exempt / insane Page 13 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Become More Patient 2. A person under nine years of age. 3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen unless he has acted with discernment, in which case such minor shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of Article 80 of this Code. Minority under the RPC, if he is under 9 he is exempt. But by virtue of R.A. 9344 or The Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 (Kiko Pangilinan Law) under 9 or over 9 but under 15, exempt from criminal liability. 15 or under at the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability but the child shall be subjected to an intervention program. Q. What about above 15 but below 18 (16 to 17 years old)? A. Exempt but the child shall be subjected to an intervention program in accordance with a particular act unless he acted with discernment (he knows what is right and wrong), in which case, he shall be subjected to the appropriate proceeding in accordance with law. The exemption from criminal liability under R.A. 9344 shall not include exemption from civil liability which shall be enforced in accordance with law. Before R.A. 9344 Juveniles in Conflict with the Law (A.M. by SC) it is still consistent. It provides that a minor under 9 at the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability. Over 9 under 15 at the time of the commission of the offense, he shall be committed to the care of his father or mother or the nearest relative or family friend. If however, the prosecution proved that he acted with discernment, he shall be subjected to appropriate proceedings in accordance with law. Prevailing Rule R.A. 9344 because it was promulgated 2006. 4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes an injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it *Relate this with criminal negligence. Q. Why will I be penalized for something I did not intend to do? Because we said that felony is an act or omission punishable by law committed not only by means of deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa) Concept of Accident as an Exempting Circumstance Accident as an Exempting Circumstance there is no criminal liability but in Accident (plain) there is criminal liability under Article 365 of the RPC. Note: To be exempt from criminal liability, the offender must be performing a lawful act with due care causing injury to another or damage to the property of another. Q. If Charles has a license to drive, he drives his vehicle and in the course of his driving, he hit another vehicle or run over somebody, liable under Art. 365. But why he would liable? (He never wanted that to happen.) A. Because it is in the way that he performed his lawful act. He has a license and he is driving he is performing a lawful act, but if he caused injury because he performed the lawful act recklessly without due care, then he is criminally liable. It is only when you perform a lawful act with due care can you make use of accident as an exempting circumstance. Example Licensed driver ka and you are driving in the highway, ang bagal bagal mo na nga 20 km/hour, you are reckless? No. Saskia is driving inside the compound of San Sebastian at 70-100 km/hour. She is licensed to drive but she is driving in an area where there are kids playing that is reckless.
Page 14 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Create Patience Practice Periods 5. Any person who acts under the compulsion of irresistible force. 6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury. Irresistible force & uncontrollable fear they are connected because both have the same concept. Rationale Q. Why is the offender exempt from criminal liability if he commits a crime while acting under the impulse of an irresistible force (IF) or compulsion of an uncontrollable fear (UF)? A. IF means actual physical force exerted on the person of the offender. UF means you are being threatened but the force to be exerted on the person of the accused or the threat or intimidation that is employed on the accused that could have prompted him to commit the crime simply reduced him to a mere instrument. He has no choice but to do it. IF for it to be exempting, always remember did this physical force reduced him to simply being a tool or instrument? He has no choice but do it. Example: Bugbog sarado na sya Pasasabugin mo ba ito o hindi? Pak! Pak! Pak! Pasasabugin mo ba yung building o hindi? Pak! Pak! Pak! O sige, pasasabugin ko na C Note: Common denominator of UF / IF reduced to being a mere instrument Note: It does not mean that he has no more intelligence but it should be he has no more will power or choice. UF Example: You kill this particular person otherwise I will kill your wife or child. He has no choice because it would mean the death of his wife or child. IF / UF always remember for these to be exempting, he was reduced or the force to be exerted in his person or the intimidation employed was simply reduced him to being an instrument. He has no choice but do it. 7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented by some lawful or insuperable cause. Insuperable Cause it is a cause that cannot be overcomed. Example Joan gave birth in the forest so she was so weak and she has to leave her baby to seek for help. She was not able to come back because she was seriously ill, the baby died. She was subsequently, sued for infanticide. Joan said she was exempt. Is Joan correct? Yes. Because she was seriously ill at the time (cause that cannot be overcomed) making her go back to her child. Liability in Exempting Circumstance If there is an exempting circumstance, there is a crime and therefore there is civil liability because there is a source from which you get the civil liability except paragraph 4 (accident) and paragraph 7 (insuperable cause). This means that if the exempting circumstance is paragraph 4 or paragraph 7, there is no criminal liability and no civil liability. ABSOLUTORY CAUSES Absolutory means the offender is relieved. Entrapment vs. Instigation Entrapment the person is engaged in an unlawful activity or the offender is actually doing the crime only that he cannot be arrested so ways and means are resorted to by the police officers to catch him in the act or in flagrante delicto. A common form of entrapment is a buy bust operation. Instigation it is in the nature of inducement. The offender or the one who committed the crime did not even think of committing the crime only that he was instigated to commit the crime and then when he committed the crime, Page 15 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Be the First One to Act Loving or Reach Out the police officers arrested him. The police officer simply induced him to commit the crime, the offender never even thought of committing the crime from the very beginning. Q. What could be the absolutory cause as between instigation and entrapment? A. Instigation because the offender is simply induced or lead to commit the crime. It is not entrapment because entrapment is valid the police officers are simply catching the offender in the act. The offender had been doing the act before. ARTICLE 13 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES The following are Mitigating Circumstances: 1. Incomplete justifying or exempting circumstances. 2. Minority / senility (Wala na kasi exempt na) 3. Praeter intentionem 4. Sufficient provocation or threat 5. Immediate vindication of a grave offense 6. Passion or obfuscation 7. Voluntary surrender 8. Voluntary plea of guilt 9. Deaf and dumb, blind or other physical defect. 10. Illness 11. Analogous circumstances Q. What is the effect of mitigating circumstance (MC)? A. It is either to reduce the penalty by period or by degrees. Kinds of Mitigating Circumstances 1. Ordinary MC it serves to reduce the period of the penalty. In cases of divisible, it serves to reduce the penalty in its minimum. Note: We talk of the periods of the penalty if it is divisible because a period is one of the three equal portions of divisible penalty. But it may have an effect with respect to indivisible not single indivisible, if the penalty consists of 2 indivisible penalties. We do not talk of periods in cases of indivisible penalty. Example Death penalty is indivisible. There is no death minimum, death maximum! 2. Privileged MC it serves to reduce the penalty by degrees. Reduces the penalty by 1 or 2 degrees. Example 1 penalty is 1 degree R Temporal Prision Mayor Kinds of Privilege MC: A. Incomplete Justifying B. Incomplete Exempting A & B meaning not all the conditions are present. Majority of the conditions are present. G.R. For purposes of Incomplete Justifying and Incomplete Exempting as a Privileged Mitigating Circumstances, the majority of the requisites should be present. Note: if there are 2 or more mitigating and there is no aggravating, it is already a privileged MC, which means it will reduce the penalty by 1 degree. Note: In SD / DS / DR unlawful aggression should always be present. Even if the majority of the requisites are present for as long as the unlawful aggression is not present no incomplete justifying. 6. Passion or Obfuscation Passion or obfuscation is an ordinary MC. Obfuscation is confusion. If you commit an offense under passion or obfuscation, it can be mitigating. Jurisprudence: for passion or obfuscation to be mitigating, it must have arisen from lawful sentiments. Example: A man witnessed a woman taking a bath. He was so aroused that after the woman took a bath, when the woman came out, he raped the woman. The man admitted but he contended that he acted under passion. Held: The Supreme Court said that the man did not act under passion. He acted under lust. Lust was never a lawful sentiment. Q. What if a girl acted because of jealousy? Page 16 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Lower Your Tolerance to Stress A. Generally, jealousy is an unlawful sentiment but it will be mitigating if it has a legitimate basis. 7. Voluntary Surrender and Confession of Guilt Voluntary Surrender Requisites: 1. The surrender must be voluntary 2. The surrender must be unconditional 3. It must be a surrender of oneself. Discussion: There is no problem that in voluntary surrender, the offender acknowledges having committed the crime. The liability is mitigated because by voluntary surrendering, the offender unconditionally placed himself subject to the custody of the authorities. The offender saved the government from the time and expense in looking for him. The offender is given a concession his liability is mitigated. Surrender must be Voluntary Q. When is voluntary surrender mitigating? A. It must be made immediately after the commission of the crime. Example Paparating na ang mga pulis, the you said, I surrender. This is not mitigating because what prompted you to surrender yourself is not because you really wanted save the government from the time and expense in looking for you but because palapit na sila. Surrender of Oneself Note: You do not surrender the instrument of the crime but yourself Example You killed somebody then pumunta ka sa police station and you said Ito sinu-surrender ko na yung bolo, may dugo dugo pa, pinatay ko si Mr. X. This is not mitigating because you simply surrendered the instrument of the crime and not yourself. 8. Voluntary plea of guilt Confession of Guilt (at the arraignment or during the pre-trial) / Admission of Guilt Discussion: If you offer to plea guilty to a lesser offense and your offer to plea guilty to a lesser offense is accepted by the public prosecutor and by the private offended party, it is valid and you will be allowed to plea guilty to a lesser offense. Q. Murder under the original information at the time of the pre-trial, you offered to plea guilty to a lesser offense of homicide. Since you pleaded guilty and since you made a confession of guilt in open court, will it be considered as mitigating in your favor? A. No more. For it to be mitigating, it must be a plea of guilt or confession of guilt only to the offense as originally charged in the information and that plea should be a plea of guilt to a lesser offense. 9. Deaf and dumb, blind or other physical defect. Physical defects you committed it when you are blind or deaf. 11. Analogous mitigating circumstances Analogous means similar Example Extreme poverty if you commit theft under extreme poverty, it is analogous to state of necessity. This is self-preservation, you have to live and eat. If you voluntarily surrendered the stolen property, the Supreme Court said that it would be analogous to voluntary surrender in a prosecution for theft or robbery. Note: There are only analogous mitigating circumstances but there are no analogous aggravating circumstances. Example The judge considered rape as analogous to ignominy or physical injuries as analogous to cruelty. Page 17 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Ask Yourself the Question, Will This Matter a Year from Now? SC said: by express provision of Article 13, there are only analogous mitigating circumstances but no analogous aggravating circumstances. (People vs. Regala, December 2000) ARTICLE 14 AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES Kinds of Aggravating Circumstances 1. Generic 2. Specific 3. Inherent 4. Qualifying 5. Special 1. Generic Applies to all kinds crimes Examples Recidivism, habituality 2. Specific They apply only to particular cases Examples Evident premeditation, treachery and cruelty, they are aggravating circumstances but specifically applied to crimes against persons 3. Inherent They are necessarily present in the crime but they are not used in the definition of the crime. They are part of the crime. Examples Abuse of authority / public office is inherent in bribery. Fraud is an aggravating circumstance inherent in estafa. Deceit is inherent in simple seduction. Unlawful entry in trespass to dwelling 4. Qualifying It changes the nature of the crime Examples Abuse of superior strength, cruelty When killing is attended by qualifying aggravating circumstances, that killing will be qualified from homicide to murder. Simple theft can be qualified to qualified theft. Example of Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances treachery, evident premeditation, abuse of superior strength, cruelty. 5. Special They arise under special conditions in order to increase the penalty but they cannot be offset by any mitigating circumstances. Example Quasi-recidivism (Article 160 RPC), if after having been convicted of final judgment or before serving sentence or while serving sentence, the offender commits another (new) crime and therefore he will be imposed a penalty with a maximum of the imposable penalty for the new crime. If a crime is committed by a syndicate syndicated estafa, syndicated illegal recruitment, membership in an organized syndicated crime group. The following are aggravating circumstances: 1. Taking advantage of official position 2. In contempt of or insult to public authorities 3. Age, sex, rank, dwelling 4. Abuse of confidence / obvious ungratefulness 5. Committed in the palace of the chief executive, etc. 6. Nighttime, uninhabited place, band 7. On the occasion and by means of calamity or misfortune 8. Committed with the aid of armed men 9. Recidivism 10. Habituality 11. Price, promise or reward 12. Inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel etc. 13. Evident premeditation 14. Craft, fraud or disguise 15. Abuse of superior strength 16. Treachery 17. Ignominy 18. Unlawful Entry 19. Breaking of wall, roof, floor, door or window 20. Aid of minor, use of motor vehicle 21. Causing other wrong not necessary for its commission 1. Taking advantage of official position Page 18 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Surrender to the Fact that Life Isnt Fair 2. In contempt of or insult to public authorities This is a generic aggravating circumstance. Public Authorities do not include the agents of persons in authority. 3. Age, sex, rank, dwelling Dwelling Q. When is dwelling aggravating? A. If the crime is committed in the dwelling of the offended party who has not given provocation. Q. The mother was walking along the street where a house is situated where her daughter is working as a household helper. The mother heard the daughter crying (the daughter was verbally and physically abused). The mother entered the dwelling of the employer of the daughter and assaulted the employer. Is dwelling aggravating? A. No. Because the offended party here, who is the employer gave the provocation. Note that the mother is still liable only that her liability will not be aggravated. Q. If the offender enters the dwelling of another person who has not given provocation. Inside the dwelling he dragged the victim. Outside the dwelling, he assaulted the victim. Can dwelling be appreciated against him? A. Yes. For as long as the violence or assault started inside the dwelling. Against the offended party who has not given the provocation. Q. What if from the outside, there is no entry into the dwelling, but from the outside nibaril nya yung private offended party who was there inside. No provocation on the part of the private offended party. Is dwelling aggravating? A. Yes. The violence was committed there although from the outside and the victim gave no provocation. Note: Burden of proof prosecution 4. Abuse of confidence / obvious ungratefulness 5. Committed in the palace of the chief executive, etc. Situations: 1. Committed in the palace 2. Committed in the palace in the presence of the president 3. Committed anywhere in the presence of the president Q. What if the crime was committed in the Arlgeui Residence which is situated in the Malacanan grounds? A. It is not aggravating (unless in the presence of the president) because the term palace contemplates Malacaan Palace only. Note: The Arlegui Residence was built during the time of President Corazon Aquino because Pres. Aquino does not want to live in Malacaan Palace so a house was built for her inside the Malacaan grounds. 6. Nighttime, uninhabited place, band Discussion: For these three aggravating circumstances to be appreciated against the accused, the crime was committed in order to facilitate the crime. Nighttime It is not enough that the crime was simply committed at night time. Example You killed somebody now (nighttime) but there is no showing that you purposely waited for night time to facilitate the commission of the crime. It just simply happens that the crime was committed at nighttime. Nighttime in this case is not aggravating. Nighttime will only be aggravating to increase the criminal liability of the accused if it can be Page 19 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Allow Yourself to be Bored shown that it was purposely sought for to facilitate the commission of the crime. Q. Why? A. Because pag night time mas mahirap ang identification lalo na kung maitim sya The Crime is Committed in an Uninhabited Place Example You want to kill him in a far place, in a warehouse or bodega, wala syang means of escape or he cannot ask help from anybody. In this case, uninhabited place was purposely sought for the commission of the crime. The burden of proof - is in the prosecution that it is an uninhabited place. Na hinanap yan or dinala sya don for the victim not to be able to seek help from anybody. By a Band This is not a rock band This is a criminal band. Q. When is a crime considered to have been committed by a band? A. If there are more than 3 armed male factors who committed the crime. Note: 4 male factors - 3 of them armed and 1 not armed no band Note: There is another aggravating circumstance that speaks of armed men (No. 8 of Article 14). If the crime is committed with the aid of armed men that is a different aggravating circumstance but if you notice whether committed by a band or with the aid of armed men, the men in those circumstances are armed. Q. What would make a band as an aggravating circumstance? A. 1. The (whole) band or all of them must be armed. 2. At least 4 or more than 3 armed malefactors must have participated in the commission of the crime. 3. They must be principals by direct participation in the commission of the crime. Q. If 4 sila but only 3 directly participated in the commission of the crime 1 participated by virtue of inducement. Can you appreciate band as an aggravating circumstance? A. No. because at least 4 armed malefactors must have directly participated in the commission of the crime. All of them must be principals by direct participation. Q. How is it different from the aggravating circumstance of the crime being committed with the aid of armed men? A. 1. With the aid of armed men the armed men need not necessarily take part on the commission of the crime. This aggravating circumstance is appreciated only against the very person who committed the crime. So ang nag-direct participate ay yung taong nag-rely sa kanila. If the crime is committed by a band it will be appreciated against all of them because they are all principals by direct participation. 2. With the aid of armed men this aggravating circumstance will only be taken against the very person who committed the crime and the armed men who aided him will be considered as accomplices not conspirators because it was not mentioned what kind of aid. As long as they are there, they are accomplices. If the crime is committed by a band All must have participated directly in the commission of the crime so that will be appreciated against all of them. 7. On the occasion and by means of calamity or misfortune Q. What is the purpose of committing the crime? A. You are taking advantage of the misfortune. Example In the course of relief operations, nagnanakaw ka pa. Super criminal ka! 8. Committed with the aid of armed men 9. Recidivism Page 20 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Once a Week, Write a Heartfelt Letter Forms of Repetition 1. Recidivism 2. Habituality or Reiteracion 3. Habitual Delinquency (Art. 62) 4. Quasi-recidivism (Art. 160) 1. Recidivism if the offender after having been previously convicted by final judgment is now on trial for a new offense embraced in the same title of the code. Q. If he has been previously convicted of theft by final judgment and after which he killed somebody. Is he a recidivist? A. No. Because theft is a crime against property and the killing or homicide is a crime against persons. Both crimes must be embraced in the same title of the code. Q. What if the person after having been previously convicted of homicide, kills another person. Is he a recidivist? A. Not necessarily because he has not been previously convicted by final judgment. Note that at the time of his trial for the new crime which is embraced in the same title, he must have been previously convicted by final judgment to make him a recidivist. Q. When is judgment by conviction final? A. After the expiration of the 15-day period reckoned from notice of promulgation of judgment without any appeal taken from the judgment. 10. Habituality 2. Habituality or Reiteracion the offender has been previously punished for an offense to which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty than the penalty for the new crime or he has been previously punished for 2 or more crimes to which the law attaches a lighter penalty. Punished for an Offense to which the Law Attaches an Equal or Greater Penalty Q. Serious physical injuries it turns out that before he committed serious physical injuries, records show that he has been previously punished or he has served sentence for homicide. Is there habituality? A. Yes. Because what he committed is equal or greater than homicide. Note: pag baliktad hindi pwede. Example He commits homicide now and he has been previously punished of physical injuries. Note: homicide to homicide pwede kasi equal. Note: In habituality, we are talking about the penalty, if it is greater or equal than the new crime. Two or More Offenses to which the Law Attaches a Lighter Penalty Q. He has been previously punished for 2 counts of slight physical injuries. He now stands trial for maltreatment. Is there habituality? Is he punished for 2 or more crimes to which the law attaches a lighter penalty? A. Yes. Lighter than the new crime. He has been previously punished for less physical injuries (light offense) to which the law attaches a lighter penalty. He is now on trial, he commits slight physical injuries. Is there habituality? A. None. Light yan eh! Note: Lagyan nyo lagi ng than. Equal or greater than what? Than the new penalty for the new offense. Lighter than the penalty for the new offense. 3. Habitual Delinquency (Art. 62) if within a period of 10 years reckoned from the date of his last release or last conviction of the crimes of: a. Serious physical injuries b. Less serious physical injuries c. Robbery d. Theft e. Estafa f. Falsification he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. Note: Any of the said Crimes Page 21 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Imagine Yourself at Your Own Funeral Example He has been convicted of robbery, convicted for 10 years. He has been found guilty of serious physical injuries. He is a habitual delinquent. The 3 rd time or Oftener 3 rd , 4 th , 5 th , 6 th Q. Why is this aggravating? A. (In a way this is a special aggravating circumstance). Because under Art. 62, if it is committed for the third time or any of the six crimes this is penalty for the new crime plus plus. The penalty will be increased or added. 4. Quasi-recidivism (Art. 160) after having been previously convicted by final judgment or before serving sentence or while serving sentence, he commits a new crime. Example Hindi pa sya nakaka-serve or he has not finished serving his sentence by final judgment, nag commit na naman sya ng new crime, there is quasi-recidivism. Note: Please remember pareho lang sila ng apelido ng recidivism but they are totally different. Recidivism vs. Quasi-recidivism Recidivism the second crime must have been embraced in the same title of the code as the previous crime of which he was convicted by final judgment. Quasi-recidivism there is no such requirement 11. Price, promise or reward 12. Inundation, fire, poison, explosion, stranding of a vessel etc. 13. Evident Premeditation Requisites: 1. Time when the offender has decided to commit the crime. 2. Act manifestly indicating that he has clung to his determination to commit the crime. 3. Sufficient lapse of time from the time he decided to commit the crime up to the time he actually executed his clung to commit the crime. Example He decided to kill somebody after his decision to kill somebody he makes preparation he conducted a survey where does his intended victim reside? What time does he go back to the house? Then he buys the instrument for killing these are acts manifestly indicating his clung or determination to commit the crime. Evident Premeditation meaning that there is sufficient lapse of time. Note that evident premeditation is not presumed. Premeditation there is cool reflection. Example Isip?! Isip?! Itutuloy ko ba? If you kill somebody, you will be liable but your penalty will be increased. You could have desisted from doing it but the fact that you deliberated on it and you have sufficient time to reflect on it Evident premeditation is very obvious. May criminal perversity ka because you sought / thought to do it you planned to do it Q. If the offender says I plan and I have decided to kill the first person I meet on the street. He gets an instrument of the crime. He goes out of his house and sees somebody who is walking and kills that somebody. Can evident premeditation be appreciated? A. Yes. The 3 elements are present. Q. What if he says I plan to kill Mr. X. I made the necessary preparations. I have decided to kill Mr. X. I purchased the necessary instrument jungle bolo to kill Mr. X. I conducted the necessary moves with which to execute my plan to kill Mr. X. On the day when I am supposed to kill Mr. X, I saw somebody and I killed that somebody. Page 22 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Repeat to Yourself, Life Isnt an Emergency It turned out that somebody is not Mr. X but Mr. Y. Will I be liable for the death of Mr. Y? A. Yes. But evident premeditation will not be appreciated against me if I killed another person because my plan was to kill X. I killed Mr. Y so with respect to the killing there is no evident premeditation. 14. Craft, fraud or disguise Craft cunning presentation Fraud misrepresentation Disguise Intended to make identification more difficult. Example You put a mask to commit a crime Q. What is the purpose for resorting to this? Why is it aggravating? A. It would show a greater criminal perversity on the part of the offender. When an offender resorted to craft or fraud or disguise to deceive the victim and he was able to accomplish the plan criminal perversity. 15. Abuse of superior strength It means greater strength. It is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor. It does not refer to numerical superiority. Example 3 offenders and 1 victim it does not necessarily mean that there is abuse of superior strength 1 on 1 your victim is parang hindi kumain ng 10 araw, victim mo lelembot lembot. Ikaw incedible hulk you abuse your superior strength. There is abuse of superior strength. The offender took advantage of his greater strength. 16. Treachery Treachery applies only to crimes against persons. Note: There is a deviation. A case decided by SC (People vs. Escote, 2003). In this case treachery was considered in a case of robbery with homicide (eh di ba ang robbery with homicide is a special complex crime?) What is the main crime in this case? Di ba robbery? Robbery with homicide is a crime against property and yet in this case treachery was considered only to increase the penalty for homicide. How can they increase? Eh special complex crime nga yan eh. 1 penalty lang binibigay dyan eh. This case is a deviation. For Purposes of Determining Whether there is Treachery Remember 2 things these must Concur: 1. Mode of attack must have been consciously adopted by the accused. 2. To make sure that at the time of the attack, the victim is defenseless. Mode of Attack The mode of attack must have been consciously adopted by the accused meaning that the mode of attack must have been deliberately chosen by the accused. It is not an impulsive attack. It is not simply an impulsive reaction of the accused to any provocation on the part of the victim. Q. It must have been consciously adopted by the accused or deliberately chosen by the accused, for what purpose? A. To ensure the accomplishment of his purpose (without risking self), arising from any defense that the victim might put up and to make sure that at the time of the attack, the victim was defenseless. For as long as it was shown that the victim was defenseless at the time of the attack treachery is there. Q. What if X and Y quarreled. After their fight, X attacked Y from behind. Is there treachery? (People vs. Samson) A. No. The SC said that the fact that they quarreled, it must have put the victim Y on guard that something is going to be done after the fight. Note: Even if the victim was attacked in front but the attack was sudden and that at the time of the attack, the victim had no weapon (defenseless) treachery 17. Ignominy Ignominy vs. Cruelty Page 23 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Experiment with Your Back Burner Ignominy you committed the crime but in the commission of the crime you still do something to add to the moral suffering of the victim. Note: Generally, ignominy is not applied to crimes against chastity. Cruelty You commit a crime and you still do something else in addition to the crime that would add to the physical suffering of the victim. Example Case of grave coercion an old woman was asked to show her underwear. That act adds to the moral suffering of the old woman. People vs. Yao (March 2000) when you committed rape in dog style position. This is ignominy. But note that rape is a crime against person. Note: In cruelty, at the time you do other acts, the victim must have been alive kasi nga it adds to the physical suffering of the victim. The manner is to augment the victims physical sufferings. New SC Decision: The number of wounds sustained by the victim is not determinative of existence of cruelty in the commission of the crime. It must be proved that those wounds were inflicted in a manner that would add to the physical suffering of the victim. People vs. Salvador (1987) victim sustained 56 stabbed wounds. The offender was convicted of murder. Is there cruelty? Held: No cruelty. It must be shown by the prosecution that those wounds were inflicted to augment the victims physical sufferings. Homicide not murder. Example If the wounds were inflicted successively and the victim is still alive, usually, if it is successive, hindi mo na nararamdaman. It must be proved that such wounds were inflicted to augment the physical sufferings of the victim. There must be circumstantial evidence to show that tsak! Aray! Tsak! Aray! Tsak! Ang sakit! 18. Unlawful Entry 19. Breaking of wall, roof, floor, door or window 20. Aid of minor, use of motor vehicle Use of Motor Vehicle Differentiate if the offense was committed with the use of a motor vehicle it is aggravating but if the offense was committed inside a motor vehicle not aggravating. Crime was Committed Under 15 Years of Age Mahirap na kasi di ba lahat ng 15 exempt? It is hard to prosecute kasi sino nagsabi sa kanila na gawin nila? 21. Causing other wrong not necessary for its commission ARTICLE 15 ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES Alternative (either or) meaning that it may either be mitigating or aggravating or even empting. 1. Relationship 2. Intoxication 3. Degree of Instruction or Education of the Offender Q. Why 1, 2, 3 are alternative circumstances? A. Meaning that relationship could either be aggravating or mitigating, intoxication could either be aggravating or mitigating, degree of instruction could either be aggravating or mitigating. It would depend on the circumstances that would be established. 1. Relationship Generally, mitigating in crimes against property although relationship may be exempting in theft, estafa or swindling, malicious mischief, if the crime is committed mutually by the relatives. Page 24 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Spend a Moment Every Day Thinking of Someone to Thank Relatives mutually committed between: 1. Spouses the husband and the wife, ascendants, descendants, relatives by affinity in the same line Example Darling nasan na yung alahas ko? Di ka na man nag aalahas ha. Binigay mo siguro sa babae mo. (Nagnakawan sila) 2. The widowed spouse 3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law, if living together. (Art. 332) Other Rules: 1. Relationship is aggravating if the victim is a relative of a higher or equal degree than the accused. 2. Relationship is neither mitigating nor aggravating if relationship is an ingredient of the crime. Example parricide 2. Intoxication Intoxication of the offender is mitigating - if the offender has committed a felony in a state of intoxication, if the same is not habitual or subsequent to the plan to commit a felony. If intoxication is habitual (G.S.M. Blue - morning, noon and night) or intentional it is aggravating but it must be subsequent to the plan to commit the crime. Q. Why is it aggravating? A. If it is subsequent to the plan or after your plan to commit the crime, uminom ka in order for you to commit the crime this is aggravating. But if intoxication is subsequent to the commission of the crime this is not aggravating because you already committed the crime. Your purpose for drinking is that you are celebrating 3. Degree of Instruction or Education of the Offender Generally, it is mitigating if the offender has a low degree of instruction or education but definitely not mitigating or aggravating in crimes against property or crimes against chastity, even in treason. Why? Because no need to be a lawyer to commit rape or robbery or theft. ARTICLE 16 WHO ARE CRIMINALLY LIABLE? Persons criminally liable 1. Principals 2. Accomplices 3. Accessories ARTICLE 17 PRINCIPALS Principals: 1. Principals by direct participation material perpetrator of the crime. The one who actually committed the crime. 2. Principals by inducement offering promises to another to commit the crime. The inducement must be the determining factor for the commission of the crime. 3. Principals by indispensable cooperation without him or without his cooperation, the crime would not have been committed. (relate this to accomplice) 1, 2, 3 for these principals to be liable, there must be evidence of conspiracy. Why? Because the act of 1 is the act of all. Even if you induced him and he was not induced, he is not liable. If no evidence of conspiracy only the one who materially perpetrated the crime is liable. Principals by indispensable cooperation vs. Accomplice Both cooperates only that in principals by indispensable cooperation the crime could not have been accomplishes without him or without his cooperation. Example He was the only 1 who owns a banca that could bring the offender to a very remote island. The crime could not have been accomplished without him. ARTICLE 18 ACCOMPLICES Page 25 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Smile at Strangers, Look into Their Eyes and Say Hello Accomplice cooperates but even without his cooperation, the crime could still have been committed. The cooperation of the accomplice is merely necessary to facilitate the commission of the crime. Rule: If there is a doubt with respect to the liability of a person who gives cooperation, whether he is a principal by indispensable cooperation or accomplice, doubt should be resolved in favor of the accused being considered as an accomplice. Use this principle only when there is doubt. Analyze if his cooperation is necessary. ARTICLE 19 ACCESSORIES Accessories takes part subsequent to the commission of the crime. He is an accessory after the fact of the commission of the crime. Note: PD 1612 Anti Fencing Law. Yung fence takes part subsequent to the commission of robbery or theft. This person will be charged as a fence under PD 1612 or if he takes part subsequent to the commission of robbery or theft. Example Sold articles if he profits. If the offender takes part subsequent to the commission of any other crime other than robbery or theft. He will be charged as an accessory under the RPC. Importance This is important because if you take part subsequent to the commission of robbery or theft, you are a fence, you are charged under special law the penalty is higher. But if you take part subsequent to the commission of any other crime other than theft or robbery, you will be charged as an accessory under RPC entitled to a penalty of 2 degrees lower. Accomplice 1 degree lower than the penalty of the principal Accessory 2 degrees lower but that would apply to accessories under the law and not those of taking part subsequent to the commission of theft or robbery. Q. Can there be conviction of an accomplice or accessory even without prosecution or conviction of the principal? A. Yes. If let us say that principal is acquitted because he is exempt from criminal liability. The importance is you have established the fact of the commission of the crime. Q. What if the principal is unknown or his whereabouts is unknown or the principal is at large or the principal is being tried separately, can there be a conviction of an accessory? A. Yes. For as long as the act of the commission of the crime had been established. For as long as corpus delicti have been established. Corpus delicti means the fact of the commission of the crime. ARTICLE 20 ACCESSORIES WHO ARE EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY Accessories under Art. 20 who are exempt from criminal liability exempt with respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, adopted brothers and sisters or relatives by affinity within the same degree except if they are accessories who profited by the effects of the crime or who assisted the offender to profit by the effects of the crime.
Meaning: They are exempt with respect to 2 and 3 (of Article 19) from criminal liability. ARTICLE 21 NO FELONY SHALL BE PUNISHABLE BY ANY PENALTY NOT PRESCRIBED BY LAW PRIOR TO ITS COMMISSION Even if the act appears to be illegal or immoral if there is no law punishing it, the same cannot be penalize if its not even defined or Page 26 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Set Aside Quiet Time, Everyday constitutive of a crime and there is no penalty provided by the law, hence cannot be penalize. ARTICLE 22 EXCEPTION WHEN THE LAW SHALL BE GIVEN RETROACTIVE APPLICATION ARTICLE 23 PARDON BY THE OFFENDED PARDON 1. By the Chief Executive (Art. 36) a. extinguishes criminal liability (absolute pardon) b. does not extinguish civil liability because the president cannot give away anything which does not belong to him/her 2. By the Offended party a. Does not extinguish criminal liability because the offended party is simply a witness in a criminal case. b. Extinguishes civil liability if the offended party waives the claim to such civil liability. ARTICLE 24 MEASURES OF PREVENTION NOT CONSIDERED AS PENALTY ARTICLES 25 - 113 PENALTIES INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW PROBATION ______________________________________ ___ SCALES OF PENALTIES under RPC (3) 1. Art 25 Penalties which may be impose (Principal and Accessory Penalities) 2. Art 70 Successive Service of Sentence (Penalties According to their Severity) 3. Art 71 Graduated Scales of Penalties < It is in this article where we would see the penalty next higher or lower in degree. Example If in the problem there exist a privilege mitigating circumstance and the imposable penalty is Reclusion Temporal it will be lowered to one (1) degree and to find out what is one (1) degree lower that Reclusion Temporal we would rely on Art. 71, which is Prision Mayor. We only have scales of penalties under the Revised Penal Code and none under Special Law, therefore as far as modifying circumstance are concerned, they are not to be considered in criminal actions involving violation of special law due absence of scale of penalties. As for violations of RPC the modifying circumstances should be considered since there is scale of penalties provided for in the same. DURATION OF PENALTIES Reclusion Perpetua : 20 years and 1 day 40 years Reclusion Temporal : 12 years and 1 day 20 years Prision Mayor and Temporary Disqualification : 6 years and 1 day 12 years Prision Correccional, Suspension and Destierro: 6 months and 1 day 6 years Arresto Mayor: 1 month and 1 day 6 months Arresto Menor: 1 day 30 days Bond to keep the peace: Such period of time as the court may determine. Page 27 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Imaging the People in Your Life as Tiny Infants and as 100-year old Adults Reclusion Perpetua Reclusion Perpetua (RP) has been given a duration (20 years and 1 day 40 years), by virtue of RA 7695 (Heinous Crime Law), upon its promulgation there has been a confusion. Everyone knows that RP is a indivisible penalty, hence no period. It is only in divisible penalty where we consider period, which consist of (3 periods, minimum; medium; maximum), in other words one period of a divisible penalty is one of 3 equal portions of periods. Nonetheless, RP remains to be an indivisible penalty, as enunciated by the Supreme Court (SC) in the case of Pp. v Lucas; the duration of RP was only for the purpose of determining the number of years when may a person be incarcerated or imprisoned. Reclusion Perpetua Life Imprisonment 1. A penalty under the RPC 1. Under the Special Law 2. as to duration: 20 years and 1 day 40 years 2. Indefinite 3. Has an accessory penalty 3. None Article 25 Classification of Penalties Principal Penalty Accessory Penalty 1. Prescribe by the RPC for the offense charge e.g. treason (RP death), espionage (Pri. Cor) 1. Perpetual or temporary absolute or or special disqualification, forfeiture, confiscation, civil interdiction. 2. Has to be expressly impose in the judgment 2. Need not be express since it is deemed impose in every judgment. e.g. is hereby sentence to suffer the RP with all the accessory penalties pertinent thereto pursuant to the RPC Preventive Imprisonment Subsidiary Imprisonment 1. There is yet no judgment or the accused is charged with a non- bailable offense or even if bailable, has no property or fund with which to post bail, who is being detained during trial. 1. Only after judgment has been rendered 2. This is not a penalty. If convicted he will given a credit for the period that he was detained. 2. This is a principal penalty, if convict is sentence to pay fine, but there is no fund to enable him to pay, he may be imprisoned. Being a principal penalty must be expressly imposed in the decision. Example If in the judgment it is stated that he is hereby imposed to pay a fine of P10K with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency (expressly imposed) Example If it is stated only he is hereby imposed to Page 28 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Seek First to Understand pay a fine of P10K no express declaration as to subsidiary imprisonment, hence, he cannot be made to undergo subsidiary imprisonment since it is not stated in the judgment Confiscation and Forfeiture of Proceeds of a crime: an accessory penalty hence need not be expressly imposed in the judgment. COMPLEX CRIME 1. Regular (Article 48) a. Compound Crime one act producing 2 or more grace or less grave felonies (Concurso Ideal) Example throwing of hand grenade (Pp. v. Hernandez), the single act of throwing the grenade, killing several and seriously wounding others (multiple homicide, multiple physical injuries) fAs distinguished from Continuing, Continued, Continuous Crime there is a single crime consisting of series of crime, all arising from one criminal resolution, committed at or about the same time and place. (Concurso Real). In our jurisdiction, this concept is no longer adopted. What is being used instead is the concept of Transitory Crimes, which usually contemplates prosecution, and where several elements or a crime occurred in different places for purposes of venue. b. Complex Crime Proper one crime is a necessary means to commit the other crime. Example Estafa thru falsification of public document; forcible abduction with rape 2. Special - arising in the course of, by reason of, on occasion of: (the law specifically provides what penalty is to be imposed). E.g. in the course of, by reason of, on occasion of robbery someone is killed Robbery with homicide; in the course of, by reason of, on occasion of robbery someone is rape Robbery with rape Compound Crime Q. What if one act produces 2 or more grave, less grave and light felonies, will there be a compound crime? A. Yes, with respect to the grave and the less grave and the light felony would be segregated which cannot be complex. People vs. Lawas (1960) Involves a single act of pulling the trigger of an machine gun which produces several bullets and so several persons were killed. SC in this case held that the single act of producing the trigger and producing several deaths is a compound crime. In this case there were several accused holding a machine gun, and all of them fired at the same time and it cannot be determine, from whose gun the bullets came from. In this case it was considered a compound complex crime. Pp. v. Tabaco (1992) `Involves gunfire from a rifle, which resulted to 4 killings. It cannot be considered as compound complex crime even a single act of pulling the trigger, it is not the act of pulling the trigger and producing several deaths because that is the determining factor but the number of bullets which are actually fired and produces several death that would be determinative whether it is complex or not. Each person hit by different bullets is a victim of separate homicide or murder. In this there is only one accused, so he has been identified as the person who killed several persons from whose gun the bullets were fire. In Pp. v. Lawas it cannot be determined from whose gun the bullets came so what the SC held is that the crime involves a compound crime. Q. What if one of the components of a complex crime has not been proved? What is the effect? Can the accused nevertheless be held liable of the other crime? A. Yes, provided that the other crime is proven beyond reasonable doubt and the other crime not proven he shall be deemed acquitted. Q. What if both crimes were proved? What is the penalty? Page 29 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Become a Better Listener A. The penalty for the most serious offense shall be imposed in its maximum period. There lies the difference between a regular and special complex crime for in the latter, the law specifically provides a penalty for that special complex crime. While in the former, the penalty for the most serious crime in its maximum period shall be imposed. Divisible Penalty it is composed of 3 periods, 1 period of a divisible penalty is one of the 3 equal portions of a divisible penalty (Period: Minimum, Meduium, Maximum). A period is different from a degree. C A period is one of the 3 equal portions of a divisible penalty, a PENALTY is 1 DEGREE. However if one penalty consist of a period; For example the penalty is PRISION MAYOR MAXIMUM as illustrated below: Prision Maximum 1 period 2 periods Mayor Medium Minimum Q. If 1 penalty is 1 degree, what is the penalty next lower in degree? A. Prision Mayor Medium If penalty consist of 2 periods, then the penalty next lower in degree would be that 2 periods lower as well. For instance, the penalty prescribe by the law for the offense charged is PM medium and maximum, that is one penalty, one degree lower consist of 2 periods, then 2 periods down so the penalty next lower in degree of PM medium and maximum, would be PRISION CORRECIONAL MAXIMUM AND PRISION MAYOR MINIMUM. If the penalty consist of the whole extent of PRISION MAYOR, one degree lower consist of 3 periods is PRISION CORRECIONAL. Penalty for the Principal (P), Accessory (*A) and Accomplices (A) The numbers represent the degrees Consummated Frustrate d Attempted P 0 1 2 A 1 2 3 *A 2 3 X =The basis in determining the imposable penalty would always be the penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge. That penalty is always imposed on the principal; the penalty for the principal in the consummated stage of the felony is the penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge, represented in the table as 0. (Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony, in general terms it shall be understood as applicable to the consummated felony). The reckoning point is penalty prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage, which is the penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge =The penalty for the accomplice in the consummated stage of the felony is 1 degree lower than that prescribe by the code for the offense charged. Example The penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge is Reclusion Temporal (for the principal in the consummated stage) Accomplice-Consummated (Prision Mayor) 1 degree lower than the penalty prescribe by for the principal in the consummated stage Accessory- Consummated (Prision Correcional) 2 degrees lower than that prescribe by for the principal in the consummated stage Principal Frustrated 1 degree lower than the penalty prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage Accomplice Frustrated 2 degrees lower than the penalty prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage Accessory Frustrated 3 degrees lower than the penalty prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage Page 30 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Choose Your Battles Wisely Maximum Rules for the Applicable of Divisible Penalties (Article 62) Divisible Penalty (Where it contain periods) Example RT Medium Minimum 1M + 0A = minimum 0M + 1A = maximum 0M + 0A = medium Principal Attempted - 2 degrees lower than the penalty prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage Accomplice Attempted - 3 degrees lower than the penalty prescribe by law for the principal in the consummated stage Rules for the Applicable of Indivisible Penalties (Article 63) The ff are Indivisible Penalties (where there are no Periods) 1. Death 2. Reclusion Perpetua 1 st Paragraph: in all cases where the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty, it shall be impose regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance that may have attended the commission of the deed. Example If the court says, the penalty for this offense is RP (single indivisible); impose the same irrespective of any mit / agg circumstance except: if it is a privilege mitigation which operates to, lower the same to one degree. The law itself did not qualify, but in jurisprudence, it held that in cases where the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty, it shall be applied by the courts regardless of agg/mit cir. except: if it is a privilege mitigation (incomplete justifying exempting) which operates to, lower the same to one degree. In this case, RP lower by one degree is RT. If on the other hand the law says the penalty for this offense is RP and there is in attendance voluntary surrender, still is RP because voluntary surrender is only Mitigating. 2 nd Paragraph: in all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty compose of 2 indivisible penalties the following rule shall be observed Example If one penalty consist of two indivisible penalties RP TO DEATH, now consider the following circumstance: 1M + 0A = impose the lesser penalty 0M + 1A = impose the greater penalty 0M + 0A = impose the lesser penalty Successive Service of Sentences (Article 70) 1 st Paragraph: When the offender has to serve 2 or more penalties he shall serce them simultaneously if the nature of the penalties will so permit. Example Q. If has to serve 10 yrs, 3 years, 2, years and fine of 10,000, can this be serve simultaneously? A. Yes, with respect to fine pay them then imprisonment. Example Q. If has to serve 10 yrs, 5 years, 3 years, 2 years of imprisonment, Can he serve them successively? A. No. It has to be served successively. Page 31 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia
Become Aware of Your Moods and Dont Allow Yourself to be Fooled by the Low Ones If it cannot be served simultaneously, serve it in accordance with order of their severity in the following: Death Reclusion Perpetua Reclusion Temporal Prision Mayor Prision Correccional Arrestom Menor Destierro Perpetual Absolute Disqualification Temporary Absolute Disqualification Suspension from Public Office, the right to vote and be voted for, the right to follow a profession or calling Public Censure Note: Notwithstanding the following rule, the maximum duration of the convicts sentences shall not be more than three-fold , the length of time corresponding to the most sever of the penalties impose upon him. Requirements: 1. The convict has serves at least 4 sentences/penalties 2. The total sentences exceed the most sever times 3 but in no case exceeds 40 years Example 10 yrs, 20 yrs, 6 yrs, 10 yrs = 46 ; the most sever is 20 x 3 = 60 (3-fold length of time) -In this case, the three-fold service of sentence rule does not apply because the total sentence is 46 and it does not exceed 60. But in no case it should still exceed 40 yrs in the case -In case where it would be the other way around, where the three fold length of time is 46 and the total sentence is 60 yrs, then adopt the three fold length of time which is 46, but still in no case it would exceed 40 yrs, so in this case, the year of imprisonment is still 40. INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW
Purpose: redeem valuable human material, the offender is given another chance, in case where he had served the minimum of the indeterminate penalty he would be eligible of parole. This law does not apply to: a. indivisible penalties of Death, Life Imprisonment, Reclusion Perpetua (pursuant to Article 63 parg. 1) that when the penalty impose is single and indivisible, the same shall be imposed without regard to any of modifying circumstance b. Prison terms: of not more than 1 year. c. Crimes of: Treason, Proposal or Conspiracy to Commit Treason, Misprision of Treason, Rebellion, Espionage, Sedition, Piracy. d. Offenders who are: Habitual delinquents, escapees from confinement, evaders of sentence violators of conditional pardon granted by the Chief Executive. e. Non-prision sentences of: destierro, disqualification etc. Note: it happen it the Bar, where the examinees are asked to compute the imposable indeterminate penalty, they went through the motions of computing. when in fact the offender involve is disqualified. Application Always remember that the indeterminate penalty always consist of 2 penalties, the maximum and the minimum. For purposes of Page 32 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Life is a Test. It is Only a Test indeterminate penalty this are not considered as periods of a divisible penalties, but are considered penalties in itself. The indeterminate sentence law applies to both crimes penalized by the RPC and other special law, but only that the application would differ, but both always consist of 2 penalties still. the application of ISL is mandatory provided that the offender does not fall to any of those disqualified under the ISL How to get the Minimum and Maximum. Example In the bar where a question gives a penalty (which is considered the reckoning point: the penalties prescribe by the code for the offense charge is the reckoning period) Application in Special law: Take note that: Special law has no scale of penalties, so one does not consider the modifying circumstances, since it provides its own penalty for the violation of such law. Ex: 2 years to 10 years imprisonment (as given in the problem). Determine now the imposable indeterminate penalty. The rules said that if its an offense penalize under the special law, the minimum of the indeterminate penalty should not be below the minimum provided in the law and the maximum should not be beyond the maximum provided in the law o So the penalty that may be imposed is: he is hereby sentence to suffer the indeterminate penalty of 2 years as minimum to 8 years as maximum. o What is indicative that the penalty given is indeterminate? The phrase: as minimum as maximum Application if RPC: Take note that: Even if a crime is penalized under the RPC one cannot deviated from the rule that indeterminate penalty always consist of 2 penalties (minimum and maximum) Example If the penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge is RT (always the reckoning point as given in the exam). Apply now the ISL, or determine the imposable indeterminate penalty. To get the minimum: it is fixed at 1 degree lower that the maximum penalty impose of RT in this case 1 degree lower is Prision Mayor (6 yrs and 1 day to 12 yrs). O So the minimum is anywhere within the range of the penalty next lower in degree that that prescribe the code in the offense charge. (within: 6yrs and 1 day to 12 yrs as minimum) To get the maximum: is determined by considering the presence of modifying circumstances applying Rule 64. Remember that Privilege Mitigating Circumstance must be first considered before applying the said rules. The basis is still the penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge which here is RT. 1M + 0A = minimum 0M + 1A = maximum 0M + 0A = medium So for instance if there is 1M,0A the indeterminate penalty would be: o the convict is hereby sentence to suffer the indeterminate penalty of, anywhere within the range of PM as minimum to RT minimum as maximum (6 yrs. And 1 day as minimum to RT minimum as maximum) Page 33 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Praise and Blame are all the Same Another Example The penalty prescribe by the code for the offense charge is Prision Mayor Minimum: (1 degree agad) = Prision Correccional 6 mon. and 1 day to 6 yrs. Maximum: (0M + 0A) = Prision Mayor medium Indeterminate Penalty: is anywhere within the range of PC as minimum to PM medium as maximum Q. What if in the problem there is an attendance of Privilege Mitigating Circumstance? A. Lower the penalty impose to 1 degree at the beginning before applying the same rule. Example The penalty imposed is RT, with attendance of privilege mitigating circumstance, determine the indeterminate penalty. < Immediately lower to 1 degree, which is PM (now would be the reckoning point) Minimum: (1 degree agad) = Prision Correccional 6 mon. and 1 day to 6 yrs. Maximum: (0M + 1A) = Prision Mayor maximum Indeterminate Penalty: is anywhere within the range of PC as minimum to PM maximum as maximum. Execution of Penalty: No penalty shall be executed except by virtue of Final Judgment. The judgment must have attained finality before I may be executed. Q. When does a judgment attain its finality: A. O If one failed to file notice of appeal within the reglementary period of 15 days, reckoned from promulgation or notice of judgment. O there is waiver of right to appeal, O total or partial service of sentence O filing application for probation Suspension of Sentence + 15-18 years old acting with discernment (suspended sentence) + Suspension of Sentence in case of Insanity When a convict becomes insane or imbecile after final sentence has been pronounce, execution of sentence only as regards the personal penalty not payment of his civil or pecuniary liability. If he recovers reason his sentence shall be executed unless the penalty has prescribe If while serving sentence becomes insane, above provision applies. + Death sentence shall be suspended when: o W oman while pregnant o W oman within 1 year from delivery o Pe rson over 70 yrs of age o Co nvict who becomes insane, after final sentence of death has been pronounced. Total Extinction of Criminal Liability D - death of convict that occurred before final judgment Only as to his personal liability A - absolute Pardon of Chief Executive S - service of sentence\ P - prescription of offense A - amnesty (extinguishes the penalty and all its effects) M - marriage of the offended woman with the offender in the crimes of rape, seduction, abduction, and acts of lasciviousness that must be contracted in good faith P - prescription of penalty Effect of death of the Accused pending appeal of his Conviction Page 34 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Practice Random Acts of Kindness The death of the accused pending the appeal of his conviction will extinguish his criminal liability as well as his civil liability arising from the crime committed. However, civil liability arising from sources other than the crime committed survives and maybe pursued in separate civil action. (law, contract, quasi contract, quasi delict) Prescription of Crimes: is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute the offender, after lapse of certain time. Commence to run on the date discovered by the offended party, authorized person or agents. Base on penalty prescribe by RPC 1. Crimes punishable by: a. Death, reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal - 20 years b. Afflictive penalties - 15 years c. Correccional penalties 10 years, except: Arresto Mayor 5 years When the penalty prescribe by law is a compound one, the highest penalty shall be made the basis of the application of the rules contained above. 2. Crime of Libel 1 year 3. Crime Oral defamation and Slander by Deed 6 months a. Simple Slander 2 months b. Grave Slander 6 months 4. Light Offenses 2 months 5. Crimes punishable by fines: a. If the fine is afflictive 15 years b. If the fine is correccional 10 years c. If it is light 2 months. The subsidiary penalty for nonpayment of fine should not be considered in determining the period of such crimes When fine is an alternative penalty higher than the on the penalty which is imprisonment, prescription of the crime is base on the fine Prescription of Penalties: loss or forfeiture of the right of the State to execute the final sentence or penalty after certain lapse of time. 1. Death and RP 20 years 2. Other Afflictive Penalties 15 years 3. Correccional Penalties 10 years except; Arresto Mayor 5 years 4. Light Penalties 1 years Pursuant to the rule that a judgment is executed only when it becomes final, hence we only talk of prescription of penalty after the judgment has become final The penalty must be imposed by final judgment. Hence, when the convict appealed and thereafter fled to the mountain, the penalty impose upon him would never prescribe, because pending the appeal, the sentence is not final. In prescription of crimes It is the penalty prescribe by law that should be considered In prescription of penalty it is the penalty imposed that is considered. Commence to run: from the date when the culprit evaded the service of sentence. Interrupted when the convict: Surrenders Arrested Goes to a foreign country with which we have no extradition treaty, or Commits any crime before the expiration of the period of prescription o Within the he period of prescription of penalty it has to be executed, the convict would have to be made to serve the penalty Page 35 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Look Beyond Behavior Difference between Amnesty and Absolute Pardon Amnesty 1. Applies only to Political Offenses 2. Looks backward and abolishes the offense, and the person would stand before the law as though he committed no offense. Makes an ex-convict no longer a recidivist, because it obliterates the crime itself 3. Granted by presidential proclamation with concurrence of the Congress and there for it has to be taken judicial notice of by the courts. Ones the court takes judicial notice of such fact, one does not have to present evidence to prove such fact. It is an official act of the Chief Executive. 4. Amnesty may be granted even before trial or during investigation, a conviction is not necessary. Pardon 1. includes any crime 2. Looks forward and relieves the offender from the consequence of his conviction 3. Private act on the part of the Chief Executive, therefore it must be pleaded and proved by the person who has been pardoned. 4. Pardon applies only when the person has already been convicted Every person criminally liable is also civilly liable. This means he is civilly liable only for the consequence of the crime, which is the basis of the criminal action. This is the only civil action which is impliedly instituted with the criminal action, the civil action flowing from the crime subject of the criminal case. Subsidiary Liability Subsidiary Liability of the employer of the convict; a. Is not automatic. If the accused- employee fails to pay, the subsidiary liability of the employer will set in. It is not automatic in the sense that there must first be conviction of the employee. b. A reservation to prosecute the employer for his subsidiary liability is not necessary. The subsidiary liability of the employer is not determined in the same criminal case against the employee; hence there is no need to reserve. What Civil Liability Includes: 1. Restitution the thing itself must be restored, even though it is found in possession of third person who acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter his action against the proper person who may be liable to him. 2. Reparation the court shall determine the amount of damage, taking into consideration the price of the thing whenever possible, and its special sentimental value to the injured party. 3. Indemnification of consequential damages include not only those caused the injured party, but also those suffered by his family or by a third person by reason of the crime Set Indemnification (by jurisprudence) a. Homicide, murder 50,000php b. Rape of the first form 50,000php + moral damages of 50,000php c. Rape of the second form 25,000php + moral damages of 25,000php d. Rape committed under the circumstances where previously punishable by death 75,000php+ moral damages 75,0000php e. Rape with homicide 100,000php + 100,000 moral damages Partial Extinction 1. Conditional Pardon 2. Commutation of Sentence Page 36 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia See the Innocence 3. Good Conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is serving his sentence 4. Parole because after you shall have served the minimum indeterminate penalty, he could be release. CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY Crimes Covered: 1. Treason 2. Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit Treason 3. Misprision of Treason 4. Espionage 5. Inciting to War and Giving Motives for Reprisal 6. Violation of Neutrality 7. Correspondence with Hostile Country 8. Flight to Enemy Country 9. Piracy and Mutiny Crimes Against National Security 1. Treason (Art. 114); 2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason (Art. 115); 3. Misprision of treason (Art. 116); and 4. Espionage (Art. 117). Crimes Against the Law of Nations 1. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals (Art. 118); 2. Violation of neutrality (Art. 119); 3. Corresponding with hostile country (Art. 120); 4. Flight to enemy's country (Art. 121); 5. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas (Art. 122). Crimes Against National Security are Committed During a State of War except for: 1. Espionage 2. Inciting to War and Giving Motives for Reprisal 3. Violation of Neutrality 4. Mutiny and Piracy ARTICLE 114 TREASON + Committed only in times of war Elements 1. Offender is a Filipino or resident alien; Note: Must commit the act here in the Philippines 2. THERE IS A WAR IN WHICH THE PHILIPPINES IS INVOLVED; 3. Offender either (Acts of Treason) A. LEVIES WAR AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT; OR Page 37 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia CRIMINAL LAW 2 B. Adheres to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort within the Philippines or elsewhere Requirements of levying war 1. Actual assembling of men; 2. To execute a treasonable design by force; 3. Intent is to deliver the country in whole or in part to the enemy; and 4. Collaboration with foreign enemy or some foreign sovereign Two ways of proving treason 1. Testimony of at least two witnesses to the same overt act; or Note: The 2-witness rule is restrictive. They must testify to the same overt acts of treason committed in the same place, time and occasion. 2. Confession of the accused in open court. ARTICLE 115 CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT TREASON Elements of Conspiracy to Commit Treason 1. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved; 2. At least two persons come to an agreement to a. levy war against the government; or b. adhere to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort; 3. They decide to commit it. Elements of Proposal to Commit Treason 1. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved; 2. At least one person decides to A. LEVY WAR AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT; OR B. adhere to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort; 3. He proposes its execution to some other persons. Kinds of Conspiracy 1. Conspiracy as a Crime expressly made a crime under RPC. 2. Conspiracy as a Mode of Incurring Criminal Liability not stated in the RPC. Examples A, B and C conspired to kill D but failed to kill D. A, B and C liable? It is not expressly made a crime A proposed to commit treason to B. B refuses, is A liable? Yes, because it is expressly proposal to commit treason. A proposes to C to kill B. C agreed. But C was the one who killed, A liable? Yes, because of conspiracy. Q. Why is there conspiracy? A. The fact that he already accepted the proposal, there is already an agreement. Q. What if Treason has already been committed? A. It will not fall under Art. 115. Q. Is the 2-witness rule applicable in conspiracy and proposal to commit treason? A. No. because it is a separate crime Note: Any conspiracy conspiracy to overthrow government in times of peace rebellion ARTICLE 116 MISPRISION OF TREASON + Not yet committed + Committed by a native or local + The person is aware of the conspiracy of treason and does not disclose it to authorities +Article 20 (Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability) does not apply Elements 1. Offender owes allegiance to the government, and not a foreigner; 2. He has knowledge of conspiracy to commit treason against the government; 3. He conceals or does not disclose and make known the same as soon as possible to the governor or fiscal of the province in which he resides, or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which he resides. Q. What if treason is actually committed. You learned the commission but you did not report. Are you liable? A. No. Liable as accessory only. ARTICLE 117 ESPIONAGE Acts punished 1. By entering, without authority therefore, a warship, fort or naval or military establishment or reservation to obtain any information, plans, photograph or other data of a Page 38 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippines; Elements a. Offender enters any of the places mentioned; b. He has no authority therefore; c. His purpose is to obtain information, plans, photographs or other data of a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippines. 2. By disclosing to the representative of a foreign nation the contents of the articles, data or information referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 117, which he had in his possession by reason of the public office he holds. Elements a. Offender is a public officer; b. He has in his possession the articles, data or information referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 117, by reason of the public office he holds; c. He discloses their contents to a representative of a foreign nation. 1 This crime is committed in times of war and peace Q. The offender goes to Camp Crame and gets confidential information relative to national security. Is he liable? A. No. Crame or PNP is not a military establishment or institution. *ARTICLE 118 INCITING TO WAR OR GIVINING MOTIVES FOR REPRISALS *ARTICLE 119 VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY *ARTICLE 120 CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY ARTICLE 121 FLIGHT TO ENEMYS COUNTRY Elements 1. There is a war in which the Philippines is involved; 2. Offender must be owing allegiance to the government; 3. Offender attempts to flee or go to enemy country; 4. Going to the enemy country is prohibited by competent authority. ARTICLE 122 & 123 Amended by R.A. 7659 or Heinous Crime Law ARTICLE 122 PIRACY IN GENERAL AND MUTINY ON THE HIGH SEAS OR IN PHILIPPINE WATERS Acts Punished as Piracy 1. Attacking or seizing a vessel on the high seas or in Philippine waters; 2. Seizing in the vessel while on the high seas or in Philippine waters the whole or part of its cargo, its equipment or personal belongings of its complement or passengers. Elements of Piracy 1. The vessel is on the high seas or Philippine waters; 2. Offenders are neither members of its complement nor passengers of the vessel; 3. Offenders either a. attack or seize a vessel on the high seas or in Philippine waters; or b. seize in the vessel while on the high seas or in Philippine waters the whole or part of its cargo, its equipment or personal belongings of its complement or passengers; 4. There is intent to gain. Originally, the crimes of piracy and mutiny can only be committed in the high seas, that is, outside Philippine territorial waters. But in August 1974, Presidential Decree No. 532 (The Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law of 1974) was issued, punishing piracy, but not mutiny, in Philippine territorial waters. Thus came about two kinds of piracy: (1) that which is punished under the Revised Penal Code if committed in the high seas; and (2) that which is punished under Presidential Decree No. 532 if committed in Philippine territorial waters. Amending Article 122, Republic Act No. 7659 included therein piracy in Philippine waters, thus, pro tanto superseding Presidential Decree No. 532. As amended, the article now punishes piracy, as well as mutiny, whether committed in the high seas or in Philippine territorial waters, and the penalty has been increased to reclusion perpetua from reclusion temporal. But while under Presidential Decree No. 532, piracy in Philippine waters could be committed by any Page 39 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia person, including a passenger or member of the complement of a vessel, under the amended article, piracy can only be committed by a person who is not a passenger nor member of the complement of the vessel irrespective of venue. So if a passenger or complement of the vessel commits acts of robbery in the high seas, the crime is robbery, not piracy. Note, however, that in Section 4 of Presidential Decree No. 532, the act of aiding pirates or abetting piracy is penalized as a crime distinct from piracy. Said section penalizes any person who knowingly and in any manner aids or protects pirates, such as giving them information about the movement of the police or other peace officers of the government, or acquires or receives property taken by such pirates, or in any manner derives any benefit therefrom; or who directly or indirectly abets the commission of piracy. Also, it is expressly provided in the same section that the offender shall be considered as an accomplice of the principal offenders and punished in accordance with the Revised Penal Code. This provision of Presidential Decree No. 532 with respect to piracy in Philippine water has not been incorporated in the Revised Penal Code. Neither may it be considered repealed by Republic Act No. 7659 since there is nothing in the amendatory law is inconsistent with said section. Apparently, there is still the crime of abetting piracy in Philippine waters under Presidential Decree No. 532. Considering that the essence of piracy is one of robbery, any taking in a vessel with force upon things or with violence or intimidation against person is employed will always be piracy. It cannot co-exist with the crime of robbery. Robbery, therefore, cannot be committed on board a vessel. But if the taking is without violence or intimidation on persons of force upon things, the crime of piracy cannot be committed, but only theft. PIRACY is a crime against humanity (hostes humanes generis) Notes: PD 532 offenders are passengers and committed in territorial waters. Vessel includes bancas, rafts, or any water raft used in transporting people who commute from one place to another. Mutiny vs. Piracy 1. Piracy is the unlawful taking of personal property (basically its robbery) with intent to gain while mutiny is the raising of commotion to defy authorities. 2. As to offenders Mutiny is committed by members of the complement or the passengers of the vessel. Piracy is committed by persons who are not members of the complement or the passengers of the vessel. (Comes from outside the vessel) Note: What is important is that the principal offender is neither a passenger nor a member. Strength of the offender is immaterial. 3. As to criminal intent In mutiny, there is no criminal intent. In piracy, the criminal intent is for gain. ARTICLE 123 QUALIFIED PIRACY Elements 1. The vessel is on the high seas or Philippine waters; 2. Offenders may or may not be members of its complement, or passengers of the vessel; 3. Offenders either a. attack or seize the vessel; or b. seize the whole or part of the cargo, its equipment., or personal belongings of the crew or passengers; The preceding were committed under any of the following circumstances: a. whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding or firing upon the same; b. whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves; or c. whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape Q. Why is it qualified? A. Because it has circumstances. Note: Irrespective of the number of persons murdered, injured or raped in the course of piracy. There is only one composite crime of piracy. CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE STATE Crimes against the fundamental laws of the State 1. Arbitrary detention (Art. 124); 2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities (Art. 125); 3. Delaying release (Art. 126); 4. Expulsion (Art. 127); 5. Violation of domicile (Art. 128); 6. Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in the service of those legally obtained (Art. 129); 7. Searching domicile without witnesses (Art. 130); 8. Prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of Page 40 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia peaceful meetings (Art. 131); 9. Interruption of religious worship (Art. 132); 10. Offending the religious feelings (Art. 133);
ARTICLE 124 ARBITRARY DETENTION Elements 1. Offender is a public officer or employee; 2. He detains a person; 3. The detention is without legal grounds. Meaning of absence of legal grounds 1. No crime was committed by the detained; 2. There is no violent insanity of the detained person; and 3. The person detained has no ailment which requires compulsory confinement in a hospital. Notes: The offender is a public officer or employee who has the authority to detain a person Detention is unlawful from the beginning Consider the period of detention If detention is with legal ground, do not consider the period of detention (legal grounds commission of a crime, insanity) ARTICLE 125 DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES Elements 1. Offender is a public officer or employee; 2. He detains a person for some legal ground; 3. He fails to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities within a. 12 hours for light penalties; b. 18 hours for correctional penalties; and c. 36 hours for afflictive or capital penalties Notes: The detention is legal in the beginning but it becomes illegal after the lapse of a certain period of time Applies only in cases of warrantless arrest (but take note of the exceptions ROC arrest is legal even if without warrant of arrest) Sec. 5, Rule 113, Rules of Court: A peace officer or a private person may without a warrant, arrest a person: a.) When in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing or is attempting to commit an offense b.) When an offense has just been committed and he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it. c.) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while his case is pending or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another d.) Sec. 13, Rule 113 If a person lawfully arrested escapes or is rescued, any person may immediately pursue or retake him without a warrant at any time and in any place within the Philippines. There is a legal ground for detention Arrest is legal if it is effected with warrant of arrest The person lawfully arrested must be brought to the fiscal for purposes of inquest The fiscal is not a judicial officer so he cannot issue a warrant of arrest or confinement Q. Arresting officer Charles lawfully arrested Ayce without a warrant. She was brought to Fiscal Saskia xxx What if Fiscal Saskia did not act on the case, can the arresting officer be held liable for Art. 125? A. Yes. Because the fiscal is not a judicial authority. Note: If fiscal did not act on the case, sue the him administratively *ARTICLE 126 DELAYING RELEASE ARTICLE 127 EXPULSION Elements 1. Offender is a public officer or employee; 2. He either a. expels any person from the Philippines; or b. compels a person to change residence; 3. Offender is not authorized to do so by law. Note: Only the President can order expulsion ARTICLE 128 VIOLATION OF DOMICILE Elements 1. Offender is a public officer or employee; 2. He is not authorized by judicial order to enter the dwelling or to make a search therein for papers or other effects. Page 41 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Acts punished 1. Entering any dwelling against the will of the owner thereof; 2. Searching papers or other effects found therein without the previous consent of such owner; or 3. Refusing to leave the premises, after having surreptitiously entered said dwelling and after having been required to leave the same Q. When it is unlawful? A. Without will or consent of the occupant, surreptitiously, with express or implied prohibition Art. 128 vs. Art. 280 Art. 128 Art. 280 Offender is a public officer or employee Offender is a private individual Notes: Warrant of arrest makes the arrest of a person lawful Search warrant makes the entry lawful If with search warrant but it was used with excessive authority or caused unnecessary damage or destruction, officers will be liable for violation of domicile ARTICLE 129 SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED AND ABUSE IN THE SERVICE OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED Acts punished 1. Procuring a search warrant without just cause; Elements a. Offender is a public officer or employee; b. He procures a search warrant; c. There is no just cause. 2. Exceeding his authority or by using unnecessary severity in executing a search warrant legally procured. Elements a. Offender is a public officer or employee; b. He has legally procured a search warrant; c. He exceeds his authority or uses unnecessary severity in executing the same. Notes: Still liable in addition to whatever liability attaching to the offender for the commission of any other offense Application of search warrant is made under oath in the court Q. What if the public officer obtained a search warrant but made a false statement under oath, what are his liabilities? A. Art. 129 + perjury (maliciously obtained) *ARTICLE 130 SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESS *ARTICLES 131 PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION AND DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETINGS *ARTICLE 132 INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP *ARTICLE 133 OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER Crimes against public order 1. Rebellion or insurrection (Art. 134); 2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion (Art. 136); 3. Disloyalty to public officers or employees (Art. 137); 4. Inciting to rebellion (Art. 138); 5. Sedition (Art. 139); 6. Conspiracy to commit sedition (Art. 141); 7. Inciting to sedition (Art. 142); 8. Acts tending to prevent the meeting of Congress and similar bodies (Art. 143); 9. Disturbance of proceedings of Congress or similar bodies (Art. 144); 10. Violation of parliamentary immunity (Art. 145); 11. Illegal assemblies (Art. 146); 12. Illegal associations (Art. 147); 13. Direct assaults (Art. 148); 14. Indirect assaults (Art. 149); 15. Disobedience to summons issued by Congress, its committees, etc., by the constitutional commissions, its committees, etc. (Art. 150); 16. Resistance and disobedience to a person in authority or the agents of such person (Art. 151); 17. Tumults and other disturbances of public order (Art. 153); 18. Unlawful use of means of publication and unlawful utterances (Art. 154); 19. Alarms and scandals (Art. 155); 20. Delivering prisoners from jails (Art. 156); Page 42 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia 21. Evasion of service of sentence (Art. 157); 22. Evasion on occasion of disorders (Art. 158); 23. Violation of conditional pardon (Art. 159); 24. Commission of another crime during service of penalty imposed for another previous offense (Art. 160). ARTICLE 134 REBELLION OR INSURRECTION Purpose: to overthrow the duly constituted government Elements 1. There is a public uprising and taking arms against the government; 2. The purpose of the uprising or movement is a. to remove from the allegiance to the government or its laws Philippine territory or any part thereof, or any body of land, naval, or other armed forces; or b. to deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, wholly or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives. Notes: Always with public uprising If committed for private purpose without any political reason separate The purpose is to overthrow the government Civilians backed-up by military Common crimes committed in pursuance of rebellion are absorbed in rebellion (absorption theory). It is absorbed because it is part of the commission of rebellion Common Crimes with Rebellion: 1. Murder 2. Homicide 3. Physical Injuries 4. Theft illegal possession of firearms if done or used in the commission of murder or homicide, shall be considered as aggravating (it is not treated separately) but if used in committing another crime other than murder or homicide, absorbed in rebellion Simple illegal possession penalty depending on the caliber ARTICLE 134-A COUP D ETAT Elements 1. Offender is a person or persons belonging to the military or police or holding any public office or employment; 2. It is committed by means of a swift attack accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth; 3. The attack is directed against the duly constituted authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, or any military camp or installation, communication networks, public utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise and continued possession of power; 4. The purpose of the attack is to seize or diminish state power. Rebellion vs. Coup d etat Rebellion Coup d etat 1. Purpose is to overthrow the duly constituted government 1. Purpose is not to overthrow but to diminish state powers 2. Always with public uprising 2. By violence, intimidation or threat 3. Persons involved are civilians backed up by military 3. Persons involved are military backed up by civilians ARTICLE 136 CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT COUP D ETAT, REBELLION OR INSURRECTION Conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion are two different crimes, namely: 1. Conspiracy to commit rebellion; and 2. Proposal to commit rebellion. Conspiracy to commit rebellion - when two or more persons come to an agreement to rise publicly and take arms against government for any of the purposes of rebellion and decide to commit it. *ARTICLE 137 DISLOYALTY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS OR EMPLOYEES ARTICLE 138 INCITING TO REBELLION OR INSURRECTION Elements 1. Offender does not take arms or is not in open hostility against the government; 2. He incites others to the execution of any of the acts of rebellion; 3. The inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, banners or other representations tending to the same end. Page 43 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Inciting urging the people to rise-up ARTICLE 139 SEDITION Elements 1. Offenders rise publicly and tumultuously; 2. Offenders employ force, intimidation, or other means outside of legal methods; 3. Purpose is to attain any of the following objects: a. To prevent the promulgation or execution of any law or the holding of any popular election; b. To prevent the national government or any provincial or municipal government, or any public officer from exercising its or his functions or prevent the execution of an administrative order; c. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the person or property of any public officer or employee; d. To commit, for any political or social end, any act of hate or revenge against private persons or any social classes; e. To despoil for any political or social end, any person, municipality or province, or the national government of all its property or any part thereof. Notes: Memorize the objects of sedition Sedition creating commotion, no purpose of overthrowing, to express dissent Maybe for political reasons Public uprising + objects of sedition = sedition Common crimes committed are not absorbed (no absorption theory) so they are penalized separately Rebellion vs. Sedition Rebellion Sedition To overthrow the government / there must be taking up or arms against the government Public uprising but not to overthrow / sufficient that the public uprising be tumultuous. The purpose is always political. Purpose may be political or social Persons liable for sedition under Article 140 1. The leader of the sedition; and 2. Other person participating in the sedition. ARTICLE 141 CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION There must be an agreement and a decision to rise publicly and tumultuously to attain any of the objects of sedition. There is no proposal to commit sedition. ARTICLE 142 INCITING TO SEDITION Acts punished 1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, etc.; 2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb the public peace; 3. Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous libels against the government or any of the duly constituted authorities thereof, which tend to disturb the public peace. Elements 1. Offender does not take direct part in the crime of sedition; 2. He incites others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition; 3. Inciting is done by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, cartoons, banners, or other representations tending towards the same end. Rules relative to seditious words: 1. Clear and Present Danger Rule the words must be of such nature that by uttering them there is a danger of a public uprising and that such danger should be both clear and imminent. There must be reasonable ground to believe that the danger apprehended is imminent and that the evil to be prevented is a serious one. There must be probability of serious injury to the State. Present refers to time element. The danger must not only be probable but very likely inevitable. 2. Dangerous Tendency Rule if the words used tend to create a danger of public uprising then those words could properly be the subject of a penal clause. There is inciting to sedition when the words uttered or published could easily produce disaffection among the people and a state of feeling in them incompatible with a disposition to remain loyal to the Government and obedient to the laws. Note: Page 44 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia R.A. 1700 did not repeal all other laws relating to subversion *ARTICLE 143 ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE MEETING OF THE CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES AND SIMILAR BODIES *ARTICLE 144 DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS *ARTICLE 145 VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY ARTICLE 146 ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES Acts punished 1. Any meeting attended by armed persons for the purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable under the Code; Elements a. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of persons, whether in fixed place or moving; b. The meeting is attended by armed persons; c. The purpose of the meeting is to commit any of the crimes punishable under the Code. 2. Any meeting in which the audience, whether armed or not, is incited to the commission of the crime of treason, rebellion or insurrection, sedition, or assault upon person in authority or his agents. Elements a. There is a meeting, a gathering or group of persons, whether in a fixed place or moving; b. The audience, whether armed or not, is incited to the commission of the crime of treason, rebellion or insurrection, sedition or direct assault. Notes: There must be an assembly actual assemblage of persons whether armed or unarmed Offender should have attended the assembly ARTICLE 147 ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS Illegal associations 1. Associations totally or partially organized for the purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable under the Code; 2. Associations totally or partially organized for some purpose contrary to public morals Persons liable 1. Founders, directors and president of the association; 2. Mere members of the association. Note: It is the purpose that makes it illegal ARTICLE 148 DIRECT ASSAULT Acts punished 1. Without public uprising, by employing force or intimidation for the attainment of any of the purposes enumerated in defining the crimes of rebellion and sedition; Elements a. Offender employs force or intimidation; b. The aim of the offender is to attain any of the purposes of the crime of rebellion or any of the objects of the crime of sedition; c. There is no public uprising. 2. Without public uprising, by attacking, by employing force or by seriously intimidating or by seriously resisting any person in authority or any of his agents, while engaged in the performance of official duties, or on occasion of such performance. Elements a. Offender makes an attack, employs force, makes a serious intimidation, or makes a serious resistance; b. The person assaulted is a person in authority or his agent; c. At the time of the assault, the person in authority or his agent is engaged in the actual performance of official duties, or that he is assaulted by reason of the past performance of official duties; d. Offender knows that the one he is assaulting is a person in authority or his agent in the exercise of his duties. e. There is no public uprising. Forms of Direct Assault: 1. Shall employ force or intimidation xxx Rebellion vs. Direct Assault Rebellion Direct Assault With public uprising Without public uprising (1 st form of direct assault) 2. Shall attack, employs force, makes a serious intimidation xxx Persons in authority see Art. 152 Page 45 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Agent must also be performing an official duty Engaged in the performance motive is immaterial so whatever is the reason of the attack or even if it is a private matter and nothing to do with the functions of the person On the occasion of such performance or past performance (must prove that the motive to assault was because of past performance) If not past performance physical injuries not assault Example Judge Faye was attacked by an ex-convict (judge was the one who sentenced the convict) ARTICLE 149 INDIRECT ASSAULT Elements 1. A person in authority or his agent is the victim of any of the forms of direct assault defined in Article 148; 2. A person comes to the aid of such authority or his agent; 3. Offender makes use of force or intimidation upon such person coming to the aid of the authority or his agent.
Notes: Can only be committed when there is direct assault There are 3 persons involved Agents of persons in authority when the agent is performing his own official duty and not acting as a third person Example A teacher (person in authority) was attacked and somebody helped the teacher and was also attacked. No indirect assault. Note that teachers and professors will apply only to Articles 148 and 151 only. *ARTICLE 150 DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUED BY CONGRESS, ITS COMMITTEES OR SUBCOMMITTEES, BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS, ITS COMMITTEES, SUBCOMMITTEES OR DIVISIONS *ARTICLE 151 RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO A PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR THE AGENTS OF SUCH PERSON Who are deemed persons in authority and agents of persons in authority under Article 152 Person in authority - one directly vested with jurisdiction, that is, the power and authority to govern and execute the laws. An agent of a person in authority is one charged with: (1) the maintenance of public order and (2) the protection and security of life and property. Examples of persons in authority 1. Municipal mayor; 2. Division superintendent of schools; 3. Public and private school teachers; 4. Teacher-nurse; 5. President of sanitary division; 6. Provincial fiscal; 7. Justice of the Peace; 8. Municipal councilor; 9. Barrio captain and barangay chairman. Note: The third paragraph is not applicable to indirect assault because it is only for the purpose of Articles 148 and 151. Hence, when a person comes to the aid of a teacher there is no indirect assault. *ARTICLE 153 TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBCANCES OF PUBLIC ORDER *ARTICLE 154 UNLAWFUL USE OF MEANS OF PUBLICATION AND UNLAWFUL UTTERANCES ARTICLE 155 ALARMS AND SCANDALS Acts Punished 1. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other explosive within any town or public place, calculated to cause (which produces) alarm of danger; 2. Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari or other disorderly meeting offensive to another or prejudicial to public tranquility; 3. Disturbing the public peace while wandering about at night or while engaged in any other nocturnal amusements; Page 46 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia 4. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public places while intoxicated or otherwise, provided Article 153 in not applicable. When a person discharges a firearm in public, the act may constitute any of the possible crimes under the Revised Penal Code: (1) Alarms and scandals if the firearm when discharged was not directed to any particular person; (2) Illegal discharge of firearm under Article 254 if the firearm is directed or pointed to a particular person when discharged but intent to kill is absent; (3) Attempted homicide, murder, or parricide if the firearm when discharged is directed against a person and intent to kill is present. Notes: Crime against public order, hence, offender cannot avail of probation Not aimed at anybody and discharged If aimed and not discharged grave threats If aimed (must be particular) at someone and discharged but no intent to kill Art. 254 (Discharge of firearm) If directed at someone with intent to kill and it was discharged attempted homicide or murder Art. 155 vs. Art. 254 (Discharge of firearm) Art. 155 Art. 254 Purpose is to scare Purpose is to shoot another. It is aimed & discharged but with no intent to kill. ARTICLE 156 DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAIL Elements 1. There is a person confined in a jail or penal establishment; 2. Offender removes therefrom such person, or helps the escape of such person. Note: Preventive imprisonment non-bailable offense or with bail but the person has no money to bail. Art. 156 vs. Art. 157 Art. 156 Art. 157 Without final judgment With final judgment. Does not cover detention period. ARTICLE 157 EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE Elements 1. Offender is a convict by final judgment; 2. He is serving sentence which consists in the deprivation of liberty; 3. He evades service of his sentence by escaping during the term of his imprisonment. Notes: There must be final judgment. Does not apply to detention prisoners. *ARTICLE 158 EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE ON THE OCCASION OF DISORDERS, CONFLAGRATIONS, EARTHQUAKES OR OTHR CALAMITIES ARTICLE 159 OTHER CASES OF EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE Elements of violation of conditional pardon 1. Offender was a convict; 2. He was granted pardon by the Chief Executive; 3. He violated any of the conditions of such pardon. Notes: Violation of conditional pardon There must be conviction of a new crime before it can be applicable ARTICLE 160 COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME DURING SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED FOR ANOTHER PREVIOUS OFFENSE Elements 1. Offender was already convicted by final judgment of one offense; 2. He committed a new felony before beginning to serve such sentence or while serving the same. Notes: Quasi-recidivism Person after having been convicted by final judgment shall commit a new felony before Page 47 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia beginning to serve such sentence or while serving the same The penalty for the new crime in its maximum, mitigating circumstance will not be considered Second crime must be a felony CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC INTEREST Crimes against public interest 1. Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippines (Art. 161); 2. Using forged signature or counterfeiting seal or stamp (Art. 162); 3. Making and importing and uttering false coins (Art. 163); 4. Mutilation of coins, importation and uttering of mutilated coins (Art. 164); 5. Selling of false or mutilated coins, without connivance (Art. 165); 6. Forging treasury or bank notes or other documents payable to bearer, importing and uttering of such false or forged notes and documents (Art. 166); 7. Counterfeiting, importing and uttering instruments not payable to bearer (Art. 167); 8. Illegal possession and use of forged treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit (Art. 168) 9. Falsification of legislative documents (Art. 170); 10. Falsification by public officer, employee or notary (Art. 171); 11. Falsification by private individuals and use of falsified documents (Art. 172); 12. Falsification of wireless, cable, telegraph and telephone messages and use of said falsified messages (Art. 173); 13. False medical certificates, false certificates of merit or service (Art. 174); 14. Using false certificates (Art. 175); 15. Manufacturing and possession of instruments or implements for falsification (Art. 176); 16. Usurpation of authority or official functions (Art. 177); 17. Using fictitious name and concealing true name (Art. 178); 18. Illegal use of uniforms or insignia (Art. 179); 19. False testimony against a defendant (Art. 180); 20. False testimony favorable to the defendant (Art. 181); 21. False testimony in civil cases (Art. 182); 22. False testimony in other cases and perjury (Art. 183); 23. Offering false testimony in evidence (Art. 184); 24. Machinations in public auction (Art. 185); 25. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade (Art. 186); 26. Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or merchandise made of gold, silver, or other precious metals or their alloys (Art. 187); 27. Substituting and altering trademarks and trade names or service marks (Art. 188); 28. Unfair competition and fraudulent registration of trademark or trade name, or service mark; fraudulent designation of origin, and false description (Art. 189). *Article 161 Counterfeiting the Great Seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands, Forging the Signature or Stamp of the Chief Executive *Article 162 Using Forged Signature or Counterfeit Seal or Stamp *Article 163 Making and Importing and Uttering False Coins *Article 164 Mutilation of Coins Reducing the quality of coins. Reduction of content. *Article 165 Selling of False or Mutilated Coin, without Connivance *Article 166 Forging Treasury or Bank Notes or Other Documents Payable to Bearer; Importing and Uttering Such False or Forged Notes and Documents Utterance you deliver or issue *Article 167 Counterfeiting, Importing, and Uttering Instruments Not Payable to Bearer ARTICLE 168 ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND USE OF FALSE TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT Elements Page 48 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia 1. Any treasury or bank note or certificate or other obligation and security payable to bearer, or any instrument payable to order or other document of credit not payable to bearer is forged or falsified by another person; 2. Offender knows that any of those instruments is forged or falsified; 3. He either a. uses any of such forged or falsified instruments; or b. possesses with intent to use any of such forged or falsified instruments Note: It is not enough that you caught him in possession xxx make sure that it is falsified How forgery is committed under Article 169 1. By giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer or to order mentioned therein, the appearance of a true and genuine document; 2. By erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by any means the figures, letters, words, or sign contained therein. *Article 170 Falsification of Legislative Documents ARTICLE 171 FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER, EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER Elements 1. Offender is a public officer, employee, or notary public; 2. He takes advantage of his official position; 3. He falsifies a document by committing any of the following acts: a. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric; b. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so participate; c. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than those in fact made by them; d. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts; e. Altering true dates; f. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaning; g. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original document when no such original exists, or including in such a copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original; or h. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, or official book. 4. In case the offender is an ecclesiastical minister who shall commit any of the offenses enumerated, with respect to any record or document of such character that its falsification may affect the civil status of persons. Example - No. 3 (b) Deed of Sale executed by A and B in favor of C. A and B did not really sell the property. Example No. 3 (g) Attesting or certifying to the fact that the document is genuine. Making a false statement of a document. Example No. 3 (h) Omitting words or inserting words. Volume 3 making it volume 5. Art. 171 vs. Art. 172 Art. 171 Art. 172 Both refer to falsification Offender is a public officer, employee, notary public, ecclesiastical minister Offender is a private individual It covers public documents It covers public or private documents ARTICLE 172 FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL AND USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS Acts punished 1. Falsification of public, official or commercial document by a private individual; 2. Falsification of private document by any person; 3. Use of falsified document. Elements under paragraph 1 1. Offender is a private individual or public officer or employee who did not take advantage of his official position; 2. He committed any act of falsification; Page 49 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia 3. The falsification was committed in a public, official, or commercial document or letter of exchange. Elements under paragraph 2 1. Offender committed any of the acts of falsification except Article 171(7), that is, issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original document when no such original exists, or including in such a copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original; 2. Falsification was committed in any private document; 3. Falsification causes damage to a third party or at least the falsification was committed with intent to cause such damage. Note: Intent to cause damage is not an element for a public document Elements under the last paragraph In introducing in a judicial proceeding 1. Offender knew that the document was falsified by another person; 2. The false document is in Articles 171 or 172 (1 or 2); 3. He introduced said document in evidence in any judicial proceeding. Notes: For possession, use or introduction Establish first that the document is falsified Perjury also contains false statements. Perjury should relate to the subject matter of the litigation while falsification is making a false statement whether or not it is material to the investigation. If notarized and made under oath public document Regular Complex Crimes: 1. Compound crime 2. Complex crime proper - one crime is a necessary means to commit the other crime. Example Estafa thru falsification of public document. You first commit falsification then estafa (2 crimes). Please correct page 29 under complex crime proper. This should be the example. Q. Why is there no complex crime of estafa thru falsification of private documents? A. Because falsification under Art. 172 and estafa have the same element which is intent to cause damage. A single element cannot be used for 2 crimes. Note that intent to cause damage is not an element of a public document. *Article 173 Falsification of Wireless, Cable, Telegraph and Telephone Messages, and Use of Said Falsified Messages *Article 174 False Medical Certificates, False Certificates of Merits or Service, Etc. *Article 175 Using False Certificates *Article 176 Manufacturing and Possession of Instruments or Implements for Falsification ARTICLE 177 USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OR OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS Acts punished 1. Usurpation of authority; Elements a. Offender knowingly and falsely represents himself; b. As an officer, agent or representative of any department or agency of the Philippine government or of any foreign government. 2. Usurpation of official functions. Elements a. Offender performs any act; b. Pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the Philippine government or any foreign government, or any agency thereof; c. Under pretense of official position; d. Without being lawfully entitled to do so. 2 Crimes: 1. Usurpation of authority any person who knowingly and falsely represent himself. What is penalized is your false representation. Representation is verbal. Example Buksan nyo ito pulis ako! Then the police committed robbery. (Verbal false representation) Page 50 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia 2. Usurpation of official functions you perform an act in pretense of an official function. Example Akin na ang lisensya mo! Titiketan kita! (but you have no authority) *Article 178 Using Fictitious Name and Concealing True Name Purpose: to conceal a crime / evade execution of judgment or cause damage *Article 179 Illegal Use of Uniforms or Insignia ARTICLE 180 FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A DEFENDANT Elements 1. There is a criminal proceeding; 2. Offender testifies falsely under oath against the defendant therein; 3. Offender who gives false testimony knows that it is false. 4. Defendant against whom the false testimony is given is either acquitted or convicted in a final judgment. Three forms of false testimony 1. False testimony in criminal cases under Article 180 and 181; 2. False testimony in civil case under Article 182; 3. False testimony in other cases under Article 183. ARTICLE 181 FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENDANT Elements 1. A person gives false testimony; 2. In favor of the defendant; 3. In a criminal case. ARTICLE 182 FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES Elements 1. Testimony given in a civil case; 2. Testimony relates to the issues presented in said case; 3. Testimony is false; 4. Offender knows that testimony is false; 5. Testimony is malicious and given with an intent to affect the issues presented in said case. ARTICLE 183 FALSE TESTIMONY IN OTHER CASES AND PERJURY IN SOLEMN AFFIRMATION Acts punished 1. By falsely testifying under oath; 2. By making a false affidavit. Elements of perjury 1. Offender makes a statement under oath or executes an affidavit upon a material matter; 2. The statement or affidavit is made before a competent officer, authorized to receive and administer oaths; 3. Offender makes a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood in the statement or affidavit; 4. The sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is required by law, that is, it is made for a legal purpose. Two Crimes: 1. False testimony in other cases making untruthful statements 2. Perjury in solemn affirmation false statement material to the subject matter. Not simply pertinent to the issue. Material matter subject of investigation or resolution of an issue Notes: Applies to other cases other than civil and criminal cases Competent person typing clerk not included Perjury there is an execution of a sworn statement or affidavit which is untruthful and material to the subject of the inquiry; deliberate assertion of falsehood contained in a sworn affidavit upon a material matter before a person authorized to administer oath Untruthful statements in documents falsification Q. What is the effect if you swore a document before a typing clerk? Is it perjury? A. No. Because a typing clerk is not authorized to administer oath Subornation of perjury when you induced somebody to execute an affidavit containing a false statement upon a material matter (different from pertinent matter). This is not a crime but the one who induced shall be liable for perjury as principal Page 51 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia by inducement and the one induced for perjury as principal by direct participation. Note: liable only when conspiracy is proven. Q. What if the person induced executed the affidavit? Is the person who induced the other liable for subornation? A. The person who induced the other is not liable. There is no subornation of perjury. But he will be liable for perjury by inducement because there is conspiracy between them. Q. What if the person induced refused to execute the document, will he be held liable? A. No. Art. 180 vs. Art. 181 vs. Art. 182 vs. Art. 183 Art. 180 Art. 181 Art. 182 Art. 183 Criminal cases Criminal Case Ordinary civil cases Other cases other than criminal case and ordinary civil cases Ex. special proceedings hospitalization of insane person Against the defen- dant In favor of the defen- dant *ArtIcle 184 Offering False Testimony in Evidence ARTICLE 185 MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS Purposes: 1. To cause the reduction of the price of the thing auctioned. 2. To prevent bidders to take part in the auction. Acts punishable: 1. By soliciting any gift or promise as a consideration for refraining from taking part in any public auction 2. By attempting to cause bidders to stay away from an auction by threats, gifts, promises or any other artifice. Elements of soliciting gift or promise: 1. That there be a public auction. 2. That the accused solicited any gift or a promise from any of the bidders 3. That such gift or promise was the consideration for his refraining from taking part in the public auction. 4. That the accused had the intent to cause the reduction of the price of the thing auctioned. Elements of attempting to cause bidders to stay away: 1. That there be a public auction 2. That the accused attempted to cause the bidders to stay away from that public auction 3. That it was done by threats, gifts, promises or any other artifice 4. That the accused had the intent to cause the reduction of the price of the thing auctioned. Example There is a public auction and you threaten the other bidder so he will not participate in the auction. ARTICLE 186 MONOPOLIES AND COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAIN OF TRADE Acts punished: 1. Combination to prevent free competition in the market. 2. Monopoly to restrain free competition in the market. 3. Manufacturer, producer, or processor or importer combining, conspiring or agreeing with any person to make transactions prejudicial to lawful commerce or to increase the market price of merchandise. Monopoly controlling one industry in restraint of trade. Combination join forces to exclude others in restraint of trade. Example You try to control one business or industry. Note that the mere monopoly is not penalized but there should be monopoly in restraint of trade. *Article 187 Importation and disposition of falsely marked articles or merchandise made of gold, silver, or other precious metals or their alloys *Article 188 Substituting and altering trademarks, trade names or service marks. Page 52 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia *Article 189 Unfair competition, fraudulent registration of trade name, trademark or service mark, fraudulent designation of origin and false description Articles 188 and 189 are covered by the Intellectual Property Code. Articles 190, 191, 192 and 193 were repealed by R.A. 9165 known as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC MORALS 1. Gambling (Art. 195 2. Importation, sale and possession of lottery tickets or advertisements (Art. 196) 3. Betting in sport contests (Art. 197) 4. Illegal betting on horse races (Art. 198) 5. Illegal cockfighting (Art. 199) 6. Grave scandal (Art. 200) 7. Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions (Art. 201) 8. Vagrancy and prostitution (Art. 202) *Note: The provisions of Article 195- 199 as well as those of PD 483 and 449, which are inconsistent with PD 1602 are repealed ARTICLE 200 GRAVE SCANDAL Elements: 1. That the offender performs an act or acts 2. That such act or acts be highly scandalous as offending against decency or good customs 3. That the highly scandalous conduct is not expressly falling within any other article of this Code. 4. That the act or acts complained of be committed in a public place or within the public knowledge or view. Grave Scandal consists of acts which are offensive to decency and good customs which having been committed publicly, have given rise to public scandal to persons who have accidentally witnessed the same. ARTICLE 201 IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS AND INDECENT SHOWS This offense in any of the forms mentioned in the article is committed only when there is publicity. ARTICLE 202 VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES Vagrants must be either 1. An idle or dissolute person who lodges in houses of ill-fame 2. Ruffian or pimp 3. One who habitually associates with prostitutes Q. Who are prostitutes? A. A woman is a prostitute when: 1. She habitually indulges in a.) sexual intercourse or b.) lascivious conduct 2. for money or for profit Page 53 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 54 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 55 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 56 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 57 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 58 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 59 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 60 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 61 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 62 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 63 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 64 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 65 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 66 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 67 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 68 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 69 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 70 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 71 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 72 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 73 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 74 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 75 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia Page 76 Faye Marie C. Martinez Jessica Lopez Chato Cabigas July 2008 Moral Support & Entertainment by Ayce, Gerard, Ariel, Charles & Saskia