RIMINAL LAW FINAL EXAMINATION Dean Gemy Lito L. Festin PART I.

MULTIPLE CHOICE
QUESTIONS. 40% (1 point each) 1. What court has jurisdiction when an Indonesian crew murders the
Filipino Captain on board a vessel of Russian registry while the vessel is anchored outside the
breakwaters of the Manila Bay? a. b. c. d.

The Indonesian court The Russian court The Philippine court Any court that first asserts jurisdiction over
the case

2. It is a matter of judicial knowledge that certain individuals will kill others or commit serious offenses
for no reason at all. For this reason, a. b. c. d.

Lack of motive can result in conviction where the crime and the accused’s part in it are shown. Motive is
material only where there is no evidence of criminal intent Lack of motive precludes conviction The
motive of an offender is absolutely immaterial

3. X inflicted serious injuries on Y. Because of delay in providing medical treatment to Y, he died. Is X

criminally liable for the death of Y? a. Yes because the delay did not break the causal in connection
between X’s felonious act and the injuries sustained by Y. b. Yes because any intervening cause between
the infliction of injury and death is immaterial. c. No because the infliction of injury was not the
immediate cause of the death. d. No because the delay in the administration of the medical treatment was
an intervening cause. 4. Three men gave Arnold fist blows and kicks causing him to fall. As they
surrounded and continued hitting him, he grabbed a knife he had in his pocket and stabbed one of the men
straight to the heart. What crime did Arnold commit? a. b. c. d.

Homicide with incomplete self-defense, since he could have run from his aggressors. Homicide, since he
knew that stabbing a person in the heart is fatal. Homicide mitigated by incomplete self-defense, since
stabbing a person to the heart is excessive. No crime, since he needed to repel the aggression, employing
reasonable means for doing so.

5. To save himself from crashing into an unlighted truck abandoned on the road, Jose swerved his car to
the right towards the graveled shoulder, killing two bystanders. Is he entitled to the justifying
circumstance of stare of necessity? a. b. c. d.

No, because the bystanders had nothing to do with the abandoned truck on the road. No, because the
injury gone is greater than the evil to be avoided. Yes, since the instinct if self-preservation takes priority
in an emergency. Yes, since the bystanders should have kept off the shoulder of the road.

6. Mr. Y, a Filipino, kills a person on board a Philippine Airlines flight en route to Los Angeles while the
flight is over Tokyo. The PAL flight makes an emergency landing in Tokyo and Mr. Y is arrested. What
may he be charged with and why? a. He may be charged with violating Japanese law under the principle
of generality of Japanese penal law. b. He may be charged with violating Philippine law under the
principle of generality of Philippines penal law. c. He may be charged with violating Philippine law under
the principle of territory principle of Philippine penal law. d. He may be charged with violating Philippine
law under an exception to the territory principle of Philippine penal law. 1|Page

7. When an act is performed with deliberate intent and that act results in a felony as well as a violation of
a special penal law, what can the person be charged with? a. b. c. d.
A special complex crime A complex crime The graver offense, as between the felony and the crime. A
felony as well as the crime punished under the special law

8. Deadpool points a gun which is not loaded, a fact of which he is unaware, at Scott and says, “say your
prayers because you’ll be dead soon.” He pulls the trigger but, because the gun is not loaded, no bullet is
discharged. What felony may Deadpool be charged with, if any at all? a. An attempted felony because not
all the act of execution were carried out but Deadpool did not desist. b. A frustrated felony because all the
acts of execution were carried out but the intended result was not achieved due to a cause external to
Deadpool’s actions. c. An impossible crime because of the inherent impossibility of its achievement d. An
impossible crime because of the inadequacy of the means employed to carry it out. 9. Sheldon, Raj and
Penny, who were classmates in law school, chanced upon each other at a bar and got around to talking
about their other classmate and common “enemy,” Wheaton. Penny said, “I really want to see Wheaton
dead,” to which Sheldon and Raj expressed their agreement. While the three were talking, Wheaton
suddenly walked through the door. Upon seeing Wheaton, Sheldon hurled a beer bottle at Wheaton,
hitting him on the head, while Raj grabbed a steak knife and stabbed Wheaton. Penny then started kicking
Wheaton while he is on the floor. Wheaton succumbed to all the injuries he sustained. What are the
respective liabilities of Sheldon, Raj and Penny? a. b. c. d.

They are separately liable for their individual acts because there was no conspiracy on their part. Their
acts indicate an implied conspiracy so they can each be held liable for the acts of the others. They can be
charged with conspiracy to commit murder They cannot be held liable because there is no such felony as
conspiracy to commit murder.

10. Mr. X is on trial for murder which he committed while already in detention for rape. He is informed
that his appeal to the Supreme Court from the rape conviction has been denied with finality. What
circumstances will affect his criminal liability in relation to the murder charge? a. b. c. d.

Habitual Delinquency and recidivism Recidivism Recidivism and Habituality Habituality and Quasi-
recidivism

11. Marshall and Chandler meet in a bar. After finding out that they both have a shared dislike for
Barney, they agree and decide to kill Barney. Before they can decide on the method, Barney enters the
bar. Marshall stands up and punches Barney in the face as Chandler immediately follows up by stabbing
Barney in the stomach. Barney dies as a result of the assault. Marshall and Chandler are charged with
killing Barney. Chandler argues in his defense that he cannot be held criminally liable for killing Barney
because he only intended to stab Barney and not kill him. Decide on Chandler’s contentions. a. He is
correct because the can only be held liable for the consequences he intended b. He is incorrect because his
first act was already unlawful and he must bear the consequences of his unlawful act. c. He is correct
because it is unclear what killed Barney. d. He is incorrect because a conspiracy may be implied and the
act of one is the act of all. 12. Ruffa found herself alone in the LV shop when the guard leaves for a health
break and the attendant is busy with another customer. Because no one was looking, she tool one of the
smaller bags and substitutes her fake LV bag for it. As she was about to leave the shop, the guard
accosted her and noted that her bag still has a price tag on it. They discover the substitution and she is
arrested. What can Ruffa be charged with? a. b. c. d.

Consummated theft because the taking was already complete Frustrated theft because the result was not
achieved when the guard accosted her. Attempted theft because she commenced but did not complete the
last act of taking Impossible crime because of the ineffectual means employed 2|Page

13. Gene is a frustrated soldier and has long been a gun aficionado. He finds a kindred soul in Tony, who
deals in guns. One day, Tony lends Gene his brand new Sig Sauer automatic with laser scopes; Gene is
naturally ecstatic and brings it everywhere he goes. Gene is apprehended at a checkpoint and, because he
cannot produce the proper authorization for the firearm, is charged with violation of Presidential Decree
No. 1866, which punishes unauthorized possession of firearms and/or ammunition. Gene claims, by way
of defense, that he is innocent because he had no criminal intent. Decide on Gene’s contention. a. Gene is
correct because Tony, as the owner, is the one responsible for having it licensed. b. Gene is wrong
because Presidential Decree No. 1866 is a malum prohibitum and a violation of this law does not require
criminal intent c. Gene is correct because he did not have intent to possess the firearm illegally d. Gene is
wrong because ignorance of the law excuses no one. 14. For purposes of Article 14, an “uninhabited
place” is: a. b. c. d.

Any empty space Any space that is not lived in Any space that does not have people Any space that
prevents meaningful help from being given

15. Who are criminally liable for light felonies? a. b. c. d.

Only principals Both principals and accomplices Only accomplices Principals or accomplices, depending
on the circumstances

16. It is the law which provides that members of the official household or retinue of a foreign ambassador
to the Philippines enjoy the diplomatic immunity of the foreign ambassador if their names are submitted
to the Department of Foreign Affairs and provided further that the country of the foreign ambassador
provides reciprocal immunity to the members of the official household or retinue of the Philippine
Ambassador. a. b. c. d.

RA 54 RA 79 RA 74 RA 75

17. Deborah has a bank deposit of P50,000.00. She was able to withdraw P150,000.00 because of the
manipulation made by Jessie, the manager of the bank, who certified that Deborah has more than the
amount to be withdrawn. Jessie is: a. b. c. d.

Liable as principal by direct participation Liable as principal by indispensable cooperation As accomplice

Liable as principal by inducement

18. There are four mitigating circumstance and one aggravating circumstance. Under the rules on
offsetting, there remain three mitigating circumstances. The judge therefore lowered the penalty by one
degree and applied the penalty in the medium period. Is the judge correct? a. Yes, because there are three
mitigating circumstance left. b. Yes, because the aggravating circumstance was offset by one mitigating
circumstance. c. No, because the penalty should not be lowered by one degree considering that there is an
aggravating circumstance present. d. No, because the penalty can be lowered only if the penalty is
divisible 19. Which rule on jurisdiction over crimes committed on foreign vessels on Philippine waters is
not followed in the Philippines? a. The French Rule – The crimes are not triable in the Philippines unless
the crimes affect the peace and security or safety of the Philippines is endangered.
3|Page

b. The Anglo-American Rule or the English Rule – the crimes are triable in the Philippines unless the
crimes affect merely the internal management of the vessel. c. If the foreign vessel is a warship,
Philippines Courts have no jurisdiction because a warship is an extension of the country to which it
belongs and it is not subject to the laws of another state. d. The Philippines Courts have jurisdiction to try
continuing crimes committed in a vessel sailing from a foreign port into Philippines waters, even if the
crimes are punishable under Philippine laws. 20. An escaped prisoner, then armed with a bamboo lance,
was asked by a policeman to surrender, refused to do so and instead answered the latter with a stroke of
his lance, the policeman in pursuing the prisoner fired his revolver and caused the death of the prisoner. Is
the act of the policeman on resorting to extreme means will always be justified? a. Yes, since an arresting
officer is required to act within the performance of his duty, he must stand his ground and cannot, like a
private individual, take refuge in fight, his duty requires to overcome his opponent. b. No, it was provided
under the Rules of Court that no violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest. Such
provision accepts no exception. c. It depends, the reasonableness of the force employed by the arresting
officer must be adjudged in the light of the circumstances as they appeared to the officer at the time he
acted, and the means is generally considered to that which an ordinary prudent and intelligent person with
knowledge would have deemed necessary under the circumstances. 21. Which if the following is not a
source of criminal law? a. The Constitution b. Acts of legislature c. Presidential Decrees and Executive
Orders issued by Marcos during Martial Law and by Cory Aquino during her Revolutionary Government
d. Implementing rules and regulations providing a penalty as authorized by the basic law. 22. Which of
the following is an absolutory cause? a. b. c. d. e. f.

Aberratio ictus Prater intentionem Mistake of fact Proximate cause Error in persona Impossible crime

23. The Revised Penal Code (RPC) belongs to the Classical Theory, the main purpose is retribution under
a system where gravity of the penalty is proportionate to the gravity of the crime committed. However,
there are some articles in the RPC that are positivistic in orientation intended to curb the dreadful and
dangerous tendencies of the individual. Which of the following articles in the RPC does not pertain to the
Positivist School? a. b. c. d. e.

Article 4, RPC – impossible crimes Article 13, paragraph 7, RPC – on the mitigating circumstances of
voluntary surrender and plea of guilty Article 11, paragraph 1, RPC – on self-defense Three fold rule
Extenuating and absolutory causes

24. Which of the following is not a punishable conspiracy? a. b. c. d. e. f.

Conspiracy to commit treason Conspiracy to commit rebellion Conspiracy to commit coup d’etat
Conspiracy to commit murdered Conspiracy to commit sedition Monopolies and combination in restraint
of trade

25. Which of the following is not a justifying circumstances?

4|Page

a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h.
Self-defense Defense of property Defense of honor Defense of relatives Accident Avoidance of greater
evil or injury Battered woman syndrome Defense of strangers

26. Which of the following is not an exempting circumstances? a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i.

Imbecility Insanity Insuperable cause Minor exactly 9 years old at the time of the commission of the
offense Entrapment Irresistible force Impulse of uncontrollable fear Instigation Accident

27. Which of the following is not ordinary mitigating circumstances? a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i.

Incomplete self-defense, incomplete defense of relatives and strangers Illness that diminishes the exercise
of will power Lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong Sufficient provocation Immediate (proximate)
vindication of a grave offense Passion or obfuscation Voluntary plea of guilty Confession of guilt Being
deaf and dump or blind

28. Which of the following is not a privileged mitigating circumstances? a. b. c. d. e. f.

Incomplete self-defense, incomplete defense of relatives and strangers The offender is 13 years old
Schizophrenia Article 255, RPC – concealment of honor of the mother in infanticide Article 268, RPC –
voluntary release of a person detained within 3 days without the accused attaining his purpose and before
institution of criminal action Article 333, RPC – unjustified abandonment of the spouse in the crime of
adultery

29. Which of the following is not an alternative circumstance? a. b. c. d. e.

Relationship Age Intoxication Degree of Instruction and Education of the offender All of the above

30. What is meant by the term “mens rea”? a. b. c. d.

No intent to commit so grave a wrong Good faith in the commission of the crime No malice in
committing the crime Unlawful intent

31. Proximate cause means: a. The motive in committing the crime b. The unlawful intent in committing
the crime 5|Page

c. The efficient cause uninterrupted by any supervening event without which the result would not have
occurred d. The reason of the offender in committing the crime e. Direct cause 32. In mala prohibita, the
criminal liability of the offender is determined by his: a. b. c. d. e.

Criminal intent Intent to penetrate the act Negligence, lack of foresight, lack of skill Ignorance of the law
Mistake of fact

33. To overcome intelligence as an element of criminal liability one has to prove: a. b. c. d.

Deprivation of cognition Under the compulsion of an irresistible force Mistake of fact Mistake of identity
34. When the aggravating circumstance of recidivism is present in the commission of a crime, the
offender is called a ____________. a. b. c. d.

Quasi-recidivist Recidivist Habitual criminal Habitual delinquent

35. The phrase, “Stand ground when in the right” means: a. b. c. d.

A person need not retreat against an unlawful aggressor but he is not expected to fight back A person
need not retreat against an unlawful aggressor but he must defend himself by fighting back A person
attacked must retreat but must fight back when caught by his aggressor None of the above

36. A penal law is always prospective in its application a. b. c. d.

True False, it is retroactive False, it may be given retroactive effect if favorable to the accused who is not
a habitual delinquent False, it is retroactive if the new law imposes a heavier penalty

37. A crime may be committed even without criminal intent. a. b. c. d.

True False, intent in an element of a felony False, motive is an element of the crime None of the above

38. Conspiracy to commit murder is punishable. a. b. c. d.

True False, conspiracy to commit murder is not punishable under the Revised Penal Code False, mere
conspiracy is not punishable None of the above

39. Crimes mala prohibita are: a. b. c. d.

Generally embodied in the Revised Penal Code Punishable with life imprisonment and never with
reclusion perpetua Always wrong acts hence should be penalized Generally not required to be attended by
malice and evil intent 6|Page

e. Heinous crimes 40. Justifying and exempting circumstances allow the actor to escape criminal
liabilities. Aside from these circumstances, other factors likewise prevent the incarceration of a
wrongdoer except for: a. b. c. d. e. f.

Probation Absolutory cause Mistake of fact Absolute pardon Amnesty Indeterminate Sentence Law

PART II. ESSAY. 60% (10 points each) Read each question carefully. A mere “ Yes” or “No” answer is
not sufficient. Be able to give legal basis to your answer. 1. Wenceslao and Loretta were staying in the
same boarding house, occupying different rooms. One late evening, when everyone in the house was
asleep, Wenceslao entered Loretta’s room with the use of a picklock. Then, with force and violence,
Wenceslao ravished Loretta. After he had satisfied his lust, Wenceslao stabbed Loretta to death and,
before leaving the room, took her jewelry. What crime or crimes, if any, did Wenceslao commit? Explain.
(10%) 2.

Virgilio, armed with a gun, stopped a van along a major thoroughfare in Manila, pointed the gun at the
driver and shouted: "Tigil! Kidnap ito!" Terrified, the driver, Juanito, stopped the van and allowed
Virgilio to board. Inside the van were Jeremias, a 6-year-old child, son of a multi-millionaire, and Daday,
the child’s nanny. Virgilio told Juanito to drive to a deserted place, and there, ordered the driver to alight.
Before Juanito was allowed to go, Virgilio instructed him to tell Jeremias’ parents that unless they give a
ransom of P10-million within two (2) days, Jeremias would be beheaded. Daday was told to remain in the
van and take care of Jeremias until the ransom is paid. Virgilio then drove the van to his safehouse. What
crime or crimes, if any, did Virgilio commit? Explain. (10%)

3. Frank borrowed P1,000,000 from his brother Eric. To pay the loan, Frank issued a postdated check to
be presented for payment a month after the transaction. Two days before maturity, Frank called Eric
telling him he had insufficient funds and requested that the deposit of the check be deferred. Nevertheless,
Eric deposited the check and it was dishonored. When Frank failed to pay despite demand, Eric filed a
complaint against him for violation of Batas Pambansa Big. 22 (The Bouncing Checks Law). Was the
charge brought against Frank correct? (10%) 4. Ponciano borrowed Ruben’s gun, saying that he would
use it to kill Freddie. Because Ruben also resented Freddie, he readily lent his gun, but told Ponciano: "O,
pagkabaril mo kay Freddie, isauli mo kaagad, ha." Later, Ponciano killed Freddie, but used a knife
because he did not want Freddie’s neighbors to hear the gunshot. What, if any, is the liability of Ruben?
Explain (10%)

7|Page

ANSWERS KEY: PART I. MCQ (1 point each) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

CAADCDDCBB

11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

BABDBDBCAC

21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30.

ACADEEAABD

31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40.

CBACBCBBDF

PART II. ESSAY (10 points each) I.

Wenceslao committed the following crimes: (1) the special complex crime of rape with homicide (2) theft
and (3) unlawful possession of picklocks and similar tools under Art. 304, RPC. His act of having carnal
knowledge of Loretta against her will and with the use of force and violence constituted rape, plus the
killing of Loretta by reason or on the occasion of the rape, gave rise to the special complex crime of rape
with homicide. Since the taking of the jewelry was an afterthought as it was dome only when he was
about to leave the room and when Loretta was already dead, the same constitutes theft. His possession
and use of the picklock “without lawful cause” is by itself punishable under Art. 304, RPC

II.
(4%) The crime committed against Jeremias, the 6 year-old child, is Kidnapping with Serious Illegal
Dtention under Art. 267(4), RPC. The evident criminal intent of the offender, Virgilio, is to lock up the
child to demand ransom. Whether or not the ransom was eventually obtained will not affect the crime
committed because the demand for ransom is not an element of the crime; it only qualifies the penalty to
death but the imposition of the penalty is now prohibited by Rep. Act. No. 9346. (3%) As to Daday, the
nanny of the child who was told to remain in the van and take care of the child until the ransom is paid,
the crime committed is Serious Illegal Detention because the offended party deprived of liberty is a
female (Art. 267, par.4, RPC). (3%) As to Juanito, the driver of the van who was seriously intimidated
with a gun pointed at him and directed to stop the van and allow the gun-man to board the same, and
thereafter to drive to a deserted place, the crime committed by Virgilio I Grave Coercion (Art. 286, RPC)
and Slight Illegal Detention (Art. 268, RPC) for holding the driver before he was allowed to go.

III.

Yes, the charges brought against Frank is correct. Violation of BP 22 is malum prohibitum which is
committed by mere issuance of a check. Good faith is not a defense. As long as the check was issued on
account or for value, the purpose for which the check was issued, the terms and conditions relating to the
issuance are irrelevant to the prosecution of the offender. For this reason, the request of Frankto defer the
deposit of the check as it ahs insufficient funds will not militate 8|Page

against his prosecution for BP 22. Despite notice, Frank can still be charged. Moreover, if what is charged
is Estafa, Frank, being a brother of the offended party, cannot be held criminally liable under Article 332,
RPC.

IV.

Ruben‟s liability is that of an accomplice only because he merely cooperated in Ponciano‟s determination
to kill Freddie. Such cooperation is not indispensable to the killing, as in fact the killing was carried out
without the use of Ruben‟s gun. Neither way Ruben may be regarded as a co-conspirator since he was not
a participant in the decision-making of Ponciono to kill Freddie; he merely cooperated in carrying out the
plan which was already in place (Art. 18, RPC).