UP Law Criminal Law Reviewer Summary

CCCRRRIIIMMMIIINNNAAALLL
BAR REVIEWER
UP LAW2012
Criminal Law 1
Criminal Law 2
LAWDean Danilo L. Concepcion
Dean, UP College of Law
Prof. Concepcion L. Jardeleza
Associate Dean, UP College of Law
Prof. Ma. Gisella D. Reyes
Secretary, UP College of Law
Prof. Florin T. Hilbay
Faculty Adviser, UP Law Bar Operations
Commission 2012
Ramon Carlo F. Marcaida
Commissioner
Eleanor Balaquiao
Mark Xavier Oyales
Academics Committee Heads
Camille Umali
Charmaine Sto. Domingo
Criminal Law Subject Heads
Graciello Timothy Reyes
Layout
UP LAW BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
2
BAR REVIEWER
UP LAW2012
BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION 2012
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Ramon Carlo Marcaida |Commissioner
Raymond Velasco • Mara Kriska Chen |Deputy Commissioners
Barbie Kaye Perez |Secretary
Carmen Cecilia Veneracion |Treasurer
Hazel Angeline Abenoja|Auditor
COMMITTEE HEADS
Eleanor Balaquiao • Mark Xavier Oyales | Acads
Monique Morales • Katleya Kate Belderol • Kathleen Mae
Tuason (D) • Rachel Miranda (D) |Special Lectures
Patricia Madarang • Marinella Felizmenio |Secretariat
Victoria Caranay |Publicity and Promotions
Loraine Saguinsin • Ma. Luz Baldueza |Marketing
Benjamin Joseph Geronimo • Jose Lacas |Logistics
Angelo Bernard Ngo • Annalee Toda|HR
Anne Janelle Yu • Alyssa Carmelli Castillo |Merchandise
Graciello Timothy Reyes |Layout
Charmaine Sto. Domingo • Katrina Maniquis |Mock Bar
Krizel Malabanan • Karren de Chavez |Bar Candidates’ Welfare
Karina Kirstie Paola Ayco • Ma. Ara Garcia |Events
OPERATIONS HEADS
Charles Icasiano • Katrina Rivera |Hotel Operations
Marijo Alcala • Marian Salanguit |Day-Operations
Jauhari Azis |Night-Operations
Vivienne Villanueva • Charlaine Latorre |Food
Kris Francisco Rimban • Elvin Salindo |Transpo
Paula Plaza |Linkages
LAWCRIMINAL LAW TEAM 2012
Faculty Editor | Prof. Jay Batongbacal
Subject Heads | Camille Umali •
Charmaine Sto. Domingo
LAYOUT TEAM 2012
Layout Artists | Alyanna Apacible • Noel
Luciano • RM Meneses • Jenin Velasquez •
Mara Villegas • Naomi Quimpo • Leslie
Octaviano • Yas Refran • Cris Bernardino
Layout Head| Graciello Timothy Reyes

LAW
2012 UP Law Bar Reviewer
Copyright and all other relevant rights over this
material are owned jointly by the University of the
Philippines College of Law and the Student Editorial
Team.
The ownership of the work belongs to the University of
the Philippines College of Law. No part of this book
shall be reproduced or distributed without the consent
of the University of the Philippines College of Law.
All Rights reserved.

4 Criminal Law 1
CHAPTER I. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
OF CRIMINAL LAW ..........................14
A. Definition of Criminal Law ........ 14
1. Difference between Mala in Se and
Mala Prohibita.......................... 14
B. Scope of Application and
Characteristics of the Philippine Criminal
Law 16
0. Generality ........................ 16
1. Territoriality ..................... 17
2. Prospectivity ..................... 19
3. Legality (nullum crimen nulla
poena sine lege) ....................... 20
4. Strict Construction of Penal Laws
Against State: The ―Doctrine of Pro
Reo‖ ..................................... 20
C. Constitutional limitations on the
power of Congress to enact penal laws in
the Bill of Rights.......................... 20
1. Equal protection ................. 20
2. Due process....................... 20
3. Non-imposition of cruel and
unusual punishment or excessive fines
20
4. Bill of attainder .................. 20
5. Ex post facto law ................ 20
CHAPTER II. FELONIES .....................22
A. Preliminary matters ................ 22
1. Differentiating Felonies, Offense,
Misdemeanor and Crime .............. 22
1. Felonies: How Committed......... 22
2. How is Criminal Liability
Incurred?................................ 22
3. Discussion of Article 5........... 23
4. Wrongful Act Different from that
Intended ................................ 23
5. Omission .......................... 25
B. Classifications of Felonies......... 25
1. According to the Manner of Their
Commission............................. 26
2. According to the Stages of Their
Execution ............................... 26
3. According to Their Gravity ..... 26
4. As to Count ....................... 27
5. As to Nature ...................... 27
C. Elements of Criminal Liability .... 27
1. Elements of Felonies ............ 27
Intentional Felonies ................... 27
D. Impossible Crimes .................. 31
E. Stages of Execution................. 32
F. Conspiracy and Proposal ........... 36
G. Multiple Offenders.................. 39
1. Recidivism......................... 40
2. Habituality (Reiteracion) ....... 40
3. Quasi-Recidivism ................. 40
4. Habitual Delinquency............ 40
H. Complex Crimes and Special
Complex Crimes........................... 40
1. Complex Crimes.................. 41
2. Special Complex/Composite
crimes ................................... 42
3. Continued and Continuing Crimes
(Delito Continuado) ................... 42
CHAPTER III. CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH
AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY ..............44
A. Justifying Circumstances .......... 44
1. Self Defense ...................... 44
2. Defense of Relatives............. 46
3. Defense of Strangers ............ 46
4. Avoidance of a Greater Evil .... 46
5. Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful
Exercise of Right or office............ 47
6. Obedience to an order issued for
some lawful purpose .................. 47
B. Exempting Circumstances ......... 48
1. Insanity and Imbecility .......... 49
2. Minority............................ 49
3. Accident........................... 50
4. Irresistible Force................. 50
5. Uncontrollable Fear ............. 51
6. Insuperable or Lawful Causes .. 51
C. Mitigating Circumstances .......... 51
1. Incomplete Justification and
Exemption .............................. 52
2. Under 18 Or Over 70 Years Of Age
53
3. No Intention to Commit So Grave
A Wrong (Praeter Intentionem)...... 53
4. Sufficient Provocation or Threat
54
5. Immediate Vindication of A Grave
Offense.................................. 54
6. Passion or obfuscation (Arrebato
y Obsecacion) .......................... 55
7. Voluntary Surrender ............. 56
8. Plea Of Guilt...................... 57
9. Plea to a Lesser Offense ........ 57
10. Physical Defects............... 57
11. Illness........................... 57

LAW12. Analogous Mitigating
Circumstances.......................... 58
D. Aggravating Circumstances........ 58
1. Generic............................ 59
1. Taking Advantage of Public Office
59
2. In Contempt of or With Insult
to Public Authorities ............... 59
3. With Insult or Lack of Regard
Due to Offended Party by Reason of
Rank, Age or Sex.................... 60
4. Abuse of Confidence and
Obvious Ungratefulness............ 61
5. Crime in Palace or in Presence
of the Chief Executive ............. 62
6. Nighttime (Nocturnidad);
Uninhabited Place (Despoblado);
With a Band (Cuadrilla)............ 62
7. On Occasion of a Calamity .. 63
8. Aid of Armed Men or Means to
Ensure Impunity (Auxilio de Gente
Armada).............................. 63
9. Recidivism (Reincidencia) ... 64
10. Reiteracion/Habituality... 65
11. Prize, Reward or Promise. 66
12. lInundation, Fire, Poison.. 66
13. Evident Premeditation
(Premeditacion Conocida)......... 66
14. Craft (Astucia), Fraud
(Fraude) or Disguise (Disfraz)..... 67
15. Superior Strength or Means
to Weaken Defense................. 68
16. Treachery (Alevosia) ...... 69
17. Ignominy .................... 70
18. Unlawful Entry ............. 71
19. Breaking Wall, Floor, Roof 71
20. With Aid of Persons Under
15; By Motor Vehicle ............... 71
21. Cruelty ...................... 71
E. Alternative Circumstances ........ 75
1. Relationship ...................... 75
2. Intoxication....................... 76
3. Degree of Instruction/ Education
76
F. Absolutory Causes .................. 76
1. Instigation ........................ 76
2. Pardon ............................. 77
3. Other Absolutory Causes........ 77
4. Acts Not Covered By Law And In
Case Of Excessive Punishment ....... 77
CHAPTER IV.PERSONS CRIMINALLY
LIABLE/DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION .....78
A. PrincipalsError! Bookmark not
defined.
1. By Direct Participation .......... 78
2. By Inducement ................... 79
3. By Indispensable Cooperation.. 79
B. Accomplices ......................... 79
C. Accessories........................... 80
CHAPTER V. PENALTIES....................83
A. General Principles .................. 83
1. Purposes........................... 84
2. Classification ..................... 84
3. Duration and Effect.............. 84
B. Penalties which may be imposed . 84
1. Scale of Principal Penalties .... 84
2. Scale of Accessory Penalties ... 85
C. Specific Principal And Accessory
Penalties ................................... 86
1. Afflictive penalties .............. 86
1. Reclusion Perpetua .............. 86
2. Reclusion Temporal........... 87
3. Prision mayor .................. 87
1. Correctional penalties........... 87
1. Prision Correccional ............. 87
2. Arresto Mayor.................. 87
3. Light penalties ................... 89
1. Arresto Menor .................... 89
2. Public Censure................. 89
4. Penalties common to afflictive,
correctional, and light penalties .... 89
1. Fine ................................ 89
2. Bond to Keep the Peace ........ 89
D. Accessory penalties................. 90
1. Perpetual or Temporary Absolute
Disqualification ........................ 90
2. Perpetual or Temporary
Special Disqualification ............ 91

6
3. Suspension from Public Office,
the Right to Vote and Be Voted for,
the Right to Practice a Profession or
Calling................................... 91
4. Civil Interdiction.............. 91
5. Indemnification or Confiscation
of Instruments or Proceeds of the
Offense............................... 91
6. Payment of Costs ............. 91
Perpetual or Temporary Special
Disqualification ........................... 92
E. Measures not considered penalty 92
F. Application .......................... 93
1. Indeterminate Sentence Law
(R.A. 4013, as amended) ............. 94
2. The Three-fold rule ............. 96
3. Subsidiary imprisonment........ 97
G. Special rules for certain situations
104
1. Complex Crimes.................104
2. Crimes Different from That
Intended ...............................105
3. Where the Offender Is Below 18
Years ...................................106
H. Execution and Service ............107
1. Probation Law (P.D. 968, as
amended) ..............................108
CHAPTER VI. MODIFICATION AND
EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY .. 113
A. Prescription of crimes (Art. 90) .113
B. Prescription of penalties (Art. 92)
114
C. Pardon by the offended party ...115
D. Pardon by the Chief Executive...115
E. Amnesty.............................115
Criminal Law 2
Title I. Crimes against National Security
and the Law of Nations.................. 155
A. Crimes against Security...........155
1. Article 114 – Treason...........155
2. Article 115 - Conspiracy and
Proposal to Commit Treason........156
3. Article 116 - Misprision of
Treason.................................156
4. Article 117 – Espionage.........157
B. Crimes against the Law of Nations
157
1. Article 118 - Inciting to War or
Giving Motives for Reprisals .........157
2. Article 119 - Violation of
Neutrality ..............................157
3. Article 120 - Correspondence
with Hostile Country .................157
4. Article 121 - Flight to Enemy's
Country.................................157
5. Article 122 - Piracy in General
and Mutiny on the High Seas or in
Philippine Waters .....................157
6. Article 123 - Qualified Piracy.158
Title II. Crimes against Fundamental Laws
of the State ................................ 158
1. Article 124 - Arbitrary Detention
158
2. Article 125 - Delay in the Delivery
of Detained Persons to the Proper
Judicial Authorities...................159
3. Article 126 - Delaying Release 159
4. Article 127 – Expulsion .........160
5. Article 128 - Violation of Domicile
160
6. Article 129 - Search Warrants
Maliciously Obtained, and Abuse in the
Service of Those Legally Obtained .160
7. Article 130 - Searching Domicile
without Witnesses ....................161
8. Article 131 - Prohibition,
Interruption and Dissolution of
Peaceful Meetings ....................161
9. Article 132 - Interruption of
Religious Worship .....................161
10. Article 133 - Offending the
Religious Feelings.....................162
Title III. Crimes against Public Order . 162
A. Chapter I – Rebellion, Coup d‘etat,
Sedition and Disloyalty..................162
1. Article 134 - Rebellion
/Insurrection ..........................162
2. Article 134-A - Coup d‘ État...163
3. Article 135 - Penalty for
Rebellion, Insurrection or Coup d‘ État
163

LAW4. Article 136 - Conspiracy and
Proposal to Commit Coup d‘ État,
Rebellion or Insurrection ............164
5. Article 137 - Disloyalty of Public
Officers or Employees................164
6. Article 138 - Inciting to Rebellion
or Insurrection ........................164
7. Article 139 - Sedition...........164
8. Article 140 - Persons Liable for
Sedition ................................165
9. Article 141 - Conspiracy to
Commit Sedition ......................165
10. Article 142 – Inciting to
Sedition ................................165
B. Chapter II - Crimes against Popular
Representation...........................166
1. Article 143 - Acts Tending to
Prevent the Meeting of the Congress
of the Philippines and Similar Bodies
166
2. Article 144 - Disturbance of
Proceedings............................166
3. Article 145 - Violation of
Parliamentary Immunity.............166
C. Chapter III – Illegal Assemblies and
Associations ..............................166
1. Article 146 - Illegal Assemblies
166
2. Article 147 - Illegal Associations
167
D. Chapter IV - Assault upon and
Resistance and Disobedience to, Persons
in Authority and Their Agents .........167
1. Article 148 - Direct Assault....167
2. Article 152 - Persons in Authority
and Agents of Persons in Authority 168
3. Article 149 - Indirect Assault..168
4. Article 150 - Disobedience to
Summons Issued by Congress, Its
Committees or Subcommittees, by the
Constitutional Commissions, Its
Committees, Subcommittees or
Divisions................................168
5. Article 151 - Resistance and
Disobedience to a Person in Authority
or the Agents of Such Persons ......168
E. Chapter V - Public Disorders .....169
1. Article 153 - Tumults and Other
Disturbances of Public Order........169
2. Article 154 - Unlawful Use of
Means of Publication and Unlawful
Utterances .............................169
3. Article 155 - Alarms and Scandals
169
4. Article 156 - Delivering Persons
from Jail ...............................170
F. Chapter VI - Evasion of Service of
Sentence ..................................170
1. Article 157 - Evasion of Service of
Sentence ...............................170
2. Article 158 - Evasion of Service of
Sentence on the Occasion of
Disorders, Conflagrations,
Earthquakes, or Other Calamities ..171
3. Article 159 - Other Cases of
Evasion of Service of Sentence .....171
G. Chapter VII - Commission of Another
Crime during Service of Penalty Imposed
for Another Previous Offense ..........171
1. Article 160 - Quasi Recidivism 171
H. Title IV. Crimes against Public
Interest....................................171
1. Acts of Counterfeitin ...........172
1. Article 161 - Counterfeiting the
Great Seal of the Government of the
Philippine Islands, Forging the
Signature or Stamp of the Chief
Executive...............................172
2. Article 162 - Using Forged
Signature or Counterfeit Seal or
Stamp................................172
3. Article 163 - Making and
Importing and Uttering False Coins
172
4. Article 164 - Mutilation of
Coins.................................173
5. Article 165 - Selling of False or
Mutilated Coin, Without Connivance
173

8
6. Article 166 - Forging Treasury
or Bank Notes or Other Documents
Payable to Bearer; Importing and
Uttering Such False or Forged Notes
and Documents.....................173
7. Article 167 - Counterfeiting,
Importing, and Uttering Instruments
Not Payable to Bearer ............174
2. Acts of Forgery..................174
1. Article 168 - Illegal Possession
and Use of False Treasury or Bank
Notes and Other Instruments of Credit
174
2. Article 169 - How Forgery is
Committed.............................174
3. Acts of Falsification ............174
1. Article 170 - Falsification of
Legislative Documents ...............174
2. Article 171 - Falsification by
Public Officer, Employee or Notary
or Ecclesiastical Minister .........175
3. Article 172 - Falsification by
Private Individual and Use of
Falsified Documents...............177
4. Article 173 - Falsification of
Wireless, Cable, Telegraph and
Telephone Messages, and Use of
Said Falsified Messages ...........178
5. Article 174 - False Medical
Certificates, False Certificates of
Merits or Service, etc. ............178
6. Article 175 - Using False
Certificates.........................178
7. Article 176 - Manufacturing and
Possession of Instruments or
Implements for Falsification .....179
4. OTHER FALSITIES................179
1. Article 177 - Usurpation of
Authority or Official Functions .....179
2. Article 178 - Using Fictitious
and Concealing True Name.......179
3. Article 179 - Illegal Use of
Uniforms and Insignia .............179
4. Article 180 - False Testimony
Against a Defendant...............180
Favorable to the Defendant......180
in Civil Cases .......................180
in Other Cases and Perjury in
Solemn Affirmation ................180
8. Article 184 - Offering False
Testimony in Evidence ............181
9. Article 185 - Machinations in
Public Auctions.....................181
10. Article 186 – Monopolies and
Combinations in Restraint of Trade
181
11. Article 187 – Importation and
Disposition of Falsely Marked
Articles or Merchandise Made of
Gold, Silver, or other Precious
Metals or their Alloys..............182
Title V. Crimes Relative to Opium and
Other Prohibited Drugs .................. 182
A. Acts Punished:......................182
B. Penalties for Unlawful Acts: .....182
C. Definition of Important Terms ...183
D. Other Important Points ...........183
Title VI. Crimes against Public Morals 184
CHAPTER I: Gambling and Betting.....184
A. Chapter I - Gambling and Betting
184
1. Article 195 - What Acts Are
Punishable in Gambling ..............184
2. Article 196 - Importation, Sale
and Possession of Lottery Tickets or
Advertisements........................185
3. Article 197 – Betting in Sports
contents................................185
4. Article 198 - Illegal Betting on
Horse Race.............................185
5. Article 199 (as amended by PD
449) 186
B. Chapter II. Offenses against
Decency and Good Customs ............186
0.........................................186
1. Article 200 - Grave Scandal ...186
2. Article 201 - Immoral Doctrines,
Obscene Publications and Exhibitions
and Indecent Shows ..................186
3. Article 202 - Vagrancy and
Prostitution ............................187
Title VII. Crimes Committed by Public
Officers ..................................... 188

LAWA. Chapter I: Preliminary Provisions189
B. Chapter II: Malfeasance and
Misfeasance in Office ...................189
1. Article 204 - Knowingly Rendering
Unjust Judgment .....................189
2. Article 205 - Judgment Rendered
Through Negligence ..................189
3. Article 206 - Unjust Interlocutory
Order ...................................190
4. Article 207 - Malicious Delay in
the Administration of Justice.......190
5. Article 208 - Prosecution of
Offenses; Negligence and Tolerance
190
6. Article 209 – Betrayal of Trust by
an Attorney or a Solicitor – Revelation
of Secrets..............................190
7. Article 210 - Direct Bribery....191
8. Article 211 - Indirect Bribery .191
9. Article 211-A - Qualified Bribery
192
10. Article 212 - Corruption of
Public Officials........................192
C. Chapter III: Frauds and Illegal
Exactions and Transactions ............192
1. Article 213 - Fraud against the
Public Treasury and Similar Offenses
192
2. Article 214 - Other Frauds.....193
3. Article 215 - Prohibited
Transactions...........................193
4. Article 216 - Possession of
Prohibited Interest by a Public Officer
194
D. Chapter IV: Malversation of Public
Funds or Property .......................194
1. Article 217 - Malversation of
Public Funds or Property -
Presumption of Malversation........194
2. Article 218 - Failure of
Accountable Officer to Render
Accounts ...............................195
3. Article 219 - Failure of a
Responsible Public Officer to Render
Accounts Before Leaving the Country
195
4. Article 220 - Illegal Use of Public
Funds or Property.....................195
5. Article 221 - Failure to Make
Delivery of Public Funds or Property
196
6. Article 222 - Officers Included in
the Preceding Provisions.............196
E. Chapter V: Infidelity of Public
Officers....................................196
1. Article 223 - Conniving With or
Consenting to Evasion ................196
2. Article 224 - Evasion through
Negligence .............................196
3. Article 225 - Escape of Prisoner
under the Custody of a Person Not a
Public Officer..........................196
4. Article 226 - Removal,
Concealment, or Destruction of
Documents .............................197
5. Article 227 - Officer Breaking
Seal 197
6. Article 228 - Opening of Closed
Documents .............................197
7. Article 229 - Revelation of
Secrets by an Officer.................197
8. Article 230 - Public Officers
Revealing Secrets of Private
Individuals .............................198
F. Chapter VI: Other Offenses or
Irregularities by Public Officers .......198
1. Article 231 - Open Disobedience
198
2. Article 232 - Disobedience to the
Order of Superior Officer When Said
Order Was Suspended by Inferior
Officer..................................198
3. Article 233 - Refusal of Assistance
198
4. Article 234 - Refusal to Discharge
Elective Office ........................198
5. Article 235 - Maltreatment of
Prisoners ...............................199
6. Article 236 - Anticipation of
Duties of a Public Officer............199
7. Article 237 - Prolonging
Performance of Duties and Powers.199

10
8. Article 238 - Abandonment of
Office or Position .....................199
Legislative Powers....................199
Executive Functions..................200
Judicial Functions ....................200
12. Article 242 - Disobeying
Request for Disqualification ........200
13. Article 243 - Orders or Request
by Executive Officer to Any Judicial
Authority...............................200
14. Article 244 - Unlawful
Appointments .........................200
15. Article 245 - Abuses against
Chastity ................................200
Title VIII. Crimes against Persons...... 201
A. Chapter I: Destruction of Life....201
1. Article 246 - Parricide .........201
2. Article 247 - Death or Physical
Injuries Under Exceptional
Circumstances.........................202
3. Article 248 - Murder............202
4. Article 249 - Homicide .........203
5. Article 250 - Penalty for
Frustrated Parricide, Murder or
Homicide...............................204
6. Article 251 - Death Caused in
Tumultuous Affray....................204
7. Article 252 - Physical Injuries
Caused in Tumultuous Affray .......204
8. Article 253 - Giving Assistance to
Suicide .................................204
9. Article 254 - Discharge of
Firearms ...............................204
10. Article 255 - Infanticide ....205
11. Article 256 - Intentional
Abortion................................205
12. Article 257 - Unintentional
Abortion................................205
13. Article 258 - Abortion
Practiced by the Woman Herself or by
Parents.................................206
14. Article 259 - Abortion by a
Physician or Midwife and Dispensing of
Abortives...............................206
15. Article 260 - Responsibility of
Participants in a Duel ................206
16. Article 261 - Challenging to a
Duel 206
B. Chapter II: Physical Injuries ......207
1. Article 262 - Mutilation ........207
2. Article 263 - Serious Physical
Injuries .................................207
3. Article 264 - Administering
Injurious Substances or Beverages .207
4. Article 265 - Less Serious Physical
Injuries .................................208
5. Article 266 - Slight Physical
Injuries and Maltreatment...........208
6. Article 266-A - Rape (amended by
RA 8353)................................208
Title IX. Crimes against Personal Liberty
and Security ............................... 212
A. Chapter I: Crimes against Liberty
212
1. Article 267 - Kidnapping and
Serious Illegal Detention.............212
2. Article 268 - Slight Illegal
Detention ..............................214
3. Article 269 - Unlawful Arrest..214
4. Article 270 - Kidnapping and
Failure to Return a Minor............214
5. Article 271 - Inducing a Minor to
Abandon His Home....................215
6. Article 272 - Slavery............215
7. Article 273 - Exploitation of Child
Labor ...................................215
8. Article 274 - Services Rendered
Under Compulsion in Payment of Debt
215
B. Chapter II: Crimes against Security
216
Persons in Danger and Abandonment
of Own Victim .........................216
2. Article 276 - Abandoning a Minor
216
Minor by Person Entrusted With
Custody; Indifference of Parents ...216
4. Article 278 - Exploitation of
Minors ..................................216
5. Article 280 - Qualified Trespass to
Dwelling................................217
6. Article 281 - Other Forms of
Trespass ................................218
7. Article 282 - Grave Threats....218
8. Article 283 - Light Threats.....218
9. Article 284 - Bond for Good
Behavior................................219

LAW10. Article 285 – Other Light
Threats.................................219
11. Article 286 - Grave Coercions
219
12. Article 287 - Light Coercions
219
13. Article 288 - Other Similar
Coercions ..............................220
14. Article 289 - Formation,
Maintenance, and Prohibition of
Combination of Capital or Labor
through Violence or Threats ........220
C. Chapter III: Discovery and
Revelation of Secrets ...................220
1. Article 290 - Discovering Secrets
through Seizure of Correspondence220
2. Article 291 - Revealing Secrets
with Abuse of Office .................221
3. Article 292 - Revelation of
Industrial Secrets .....................221
Title X. Crimes against Property....... 222
A. Chapter I: Robbery in General...222
1. Article 293 - Who Are Guilty of
Robbery ................................222
2. Article 294 - With Violence or
Intimidation of Persons ..............223
3. Article 295 - Robbery with
Physical Injuries, in an Uninhabited
Place and by a Band..................223
4. Article 296 - Definition of a Band
and Penalty Incurred by the Members
Thereof.................................224
5. Article 297 - Attempted and
Frustrated Robbery with Homicide 224
6. Article 298 - Execution of Deeds
through Violence or Intimidation...224
7. Article 299 - Robbery in an
Inhabited House or Public Building or
Edifice Devoted to Worship .........224
8. Article 300 – Robbery in an
Uninhabited Place and by a Band ..226
9. Article 302 - In an Uninhabited
Place or Private Building ............226
10. Article 303 - Robbery of
Cereals, Fruits or Firewood in an
Inhabited Place or Private Building 226
11. Article 304 - Possession of
Picklock or Similar Tools.............226
12. Article 305 - Defines False Keys
226
B. Chapter 2: Brigandage (Articles 306-
307) 226
1. Article 306 - Who Are Brigands226
2. Article 307 - Aiding and Abetting
a Band of Brigands....................227
C. Chapter 3: Theft ...................227
1. Article 308 - Who Are Liable for
Theft....................................227
2. Article 309 - Penalties..........228
3. Article 310 - Qualified Theft ..228
4. Article 311 - Theft of the
Property of the National Library and
National Museum......................230
D. Chapter 4: Usurpation.............230
1. Article 312 - Occupation of Real
Property or Usurpation of Real Rights
in Property.............................230
2. Article 313 - Altering Boundaries
or Landmarks ..........................230
E. Chapter 5: Culpable Insolvency..230
1. Article 314 - Fraudulent
Insolvency..............................230
F. Chapter 6: Swindling and Other
Deceits ....................................230
1. Article 315 - Estafa .............230
a. With Unfaithfulness or Abuse of
Confidence (315 par. 1(a) (b) (c))..231
b. Estafa by Means of False Pretenses
or Fraudulent Acts (315 par. 2(a) (b)
(c) (d) (e); BP22):.....................233
c. Through Other Fraudulent Means
(315 Par 3 (a) (b) (c)) ................235
2. Article 316 - Other Forms of
Swindling and Deceits ................236
3. Article 317 - Swindling of a Minor
237
4. Article 318 - Other Deceits ....237
G. Chapter 7: Chattel Mortgage.....237

12
1. Article 319 - Removal, Sale, or
Pledge of Mortgaged Property ......237
H. Chapter 8: Arson and Other Crimes
Involving Destruction....................238
I. Chapter 9: Malicious Mischief....239
1. Article 327 - Who Are Responsible
239
2. Article 328 - Special Cases of
Malicious Mischief ....................239
3. Article 329 - Other Mischiefs..239
4. Article 330 - Damage and
Obstruction to Means of
Communication .......................239
5. Article 331 – Destroying or
Damaging Statues, Public Monuments
or Paintings............................239
J. Chapter 10: Exemption from
Criminal Liability ........................239
1. Article 332 - Exemption from
Criminal Liability in Crimes Against
Property................................239
Title XI. Crimes against Chastity....... 242
1. Article 333 - Adultery ..........242
2. Article 334 - Concubinage .....242
3. Article 335 – Rape ..............243
4. Article 336 - Acts of
Lasciviousness.........................243
5. Article 337 - Qualified Seduction
244
6. Article 338 - Simple Seduction245
7. Article 339 - Acts of
Lasciviousness with the Consent of the
Offended Party........................245
8. Article 340 - Corruption of Minors
246
9. Article 341 - White Slave Trade
246
10. Article 342 - Forcible
Abduction..............................246
11. Article 343 - Consented
Abduction..............................247
12. Article 344 - Prosecution of
Private Offenses ......................248
13. Article 345: Civil Liability ..249
14. Article 346 – Liability of
ascendants, guardians, teachers and
other persons entrusted with the
custody of the offended party ......249
Title XII. Crimes against the Civil Status
of Persons .................................. 250
1. Article 349 - Bigamy ............251
2. Article 350 - Marriage Contracted
against Provisions of Laws ...........251
3. Article 351 - Premature Marriage
251
4. Article 352 - Performance of
Illegal Marriage Ceremony...........251
Title XIII. Crimes against Honor ........ 253
A. Chapter I: Libel ....................253
1. Article 353 - Definition of Libel
253
2. Article 354 - Requirement for
Publicity................................254
3. Article 355 - Libel by Writing or
Similar Means..........................254
4. Article 356 - Threatening to
Publish and Offer to Prevent Such
Publication for a Compensation ....254
5. Article 357 - Prohibited
Publication of Acts Referred to in the
Course of Official Proceedings (Gag
Law)255
6. Article 358 - Slander............255
7. Article 359 - Slander by Deed .255
8. Article 360 - Persons Responsible
for Libel ................................255
9. Article 361 - Proof of Truth ...256
10. Article 362 - Libelous Remarks
256
B. Chapter II: Incriminatory
Machinations..............................256
1. Article 363 - Incriminating
innocent person.......................256
2. Article 364 - Intriguing against
Honor ...................................256
Title XIV. Quasi-Offenses................ 259
1. Article 365 - Imprudence and
Negligence .............................259

13
LAW
BAR OPERATIONS COMMISSION 2012
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Ramon Carlo Marcaida |Commissioner
Raymond Velasco •Mara KriskaChen |Deputy Commissioners
Barbie Kaye Perez |Secretary
Carmen Cecilia Veneracion |Treasurer
Hazel Angeline Abenoja|Auditor
COMMITTEE HEADS
Eleanor Balaquiao • Mark Xavier Oyales | Acads
Monique Morales • Katleya Kate Belderol • Kathleen Mae Tuason (D) • Rachel
Miranda (D) |Special Lectures
Patricia Madarang • Marinella Felizmenio |Secretariat
Victoria Caranay |Publicity and Promotions
Loraine Saguinsin • Ma. Luz Baldueza |Marketing
Benjamin Joseph Geronimo • Jose Lacas |Logistics
Angelo Bernard Ngo • Annalee Toda|HR
Anne Janelle Yu • Alyssa Carmelli Castillo |Merchandise
Graciello Timothy Reyes |Layout
Charmaine Sto. Domingo • Katrina Maniquis |Mock Bar
Krizel Malabanan •Karren de Chavez |Bar Candidates’ Welfare
Karina Kirstie Paola Ayco • Ma. Ara Garcia |Events
OPERATIONS HEADS
Charles Icasiano • Katrina Rivera |Hotel Operations
Marijo Alcala • Marian Salanguit |Day-Operations
Jauhari Azis |Night-Operations
Vivienne Villanueva • Charlaine Latorre |Food
Kris Francisco Rimban • Elvin Salindo |Transpo
Paula Plaza |Linkages
Criminal Law 1
BAR REVIEWER
UP LAW2012
CRIMINAL LAW TEAM 2012
Faculty Editor | Prof. Jay
Batongbacal
Subject Heads | Camille
Umali • Charmaine Sto.
Domingo
LAYOUT TEAM 2012
Layout Artists | Alyanna
Apacible • Noel Luciano • RM
Meneses • Jenin Velasquez •
Mara Villegas • Naomi
Quimpo • Leslie Octaviano •
Yas Refran • Cris Bernardino
Layout Head| Graciello
Timothy Reyes

Criminal Law 1
CRIMINAL LAW
Criminal Law 1
Criminal Law 2
I. Fundamental Principles of Criminal
Law
II. Felonies
III. Circumstances which affect
criminal liability
IV. Persons criminally liable/Degree of
participation
V. Penalties
VI. Modification and extinction of
criminal
REVISED PENAL CODE/SPECIAL
LAWS, PRESIDENTIAL DECREES,
AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS
A. Book 1 (Articles 1-99, RPC,
excluding provisions on civil
liability), including related Special
Laws
CHAPTER I. FUNDAMENTAL
PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW
A. DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL LAW
B. SCOPE OF APPLICATION AND
CHARACTERISTICS
C. CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS
A. Definition of Criminal Law
Criminal law is that branch of public substantive law
which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and
provides for their punishment.
1. Difference between Mala in Se and
Mala Prohibita (ASKED TWICE IN BAR
EXAMS)
Mala in Se Mala Prohibita
As to nature Wrong from
its very
nature.
Wrong because
it is prohibited
by law
As to use of
good faith as
defense
GF a valid
defense,
unless the
crime is the
result of
culpa
GF is not a
defense.
As to WON
criminal intent
is an element
Criminal
intent is an
element.
Criminal intent
is immaterial,
BUT still
requires
intelligence &
voluntariness
As to degree of
accomplishment
Degree of
accomplish
0. The
of crime ment is taken
into account
for the
punishment.
act
gives
rise
to a
crime
only
when
consu
mmat
ed.
As to mitigating
and aggravating
circumstances
They are
taken into
account in
imposing
penalty
They are not
taken into
account.
As to degree of
participation
When there is
more than
one offender,
the degree of
participation
of each in the
commission is
taken into
account.
Degree of
participation is
generally not
taken into
account. All
who
participated in
the act are
punished to the
same extent.
As to stage of
accomplishment
Penalty is
computed on
the basis of
whether he is
a principal
offender or
merely an
accomplice or
accessory
Penalty on
offenders is
same whether
they acted as
mere
accomplices or
accessories
As to what laws
are violated
Generally,
the RPC.
Generally,
special laws.
Note:
 Dolo is not required in crimes mala prohibita.
 In those crimes which are mala prohibita, the
act alone irrespective of its motives, constitutes
the offense.
 Good faith and absence of criminal intent are
not valid defenses in crimes mala prohibita.
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan (2001): Estrada is
challenging the plunder law. One of the issues he
raised is whether plunder is a malum prohibitum
or malum in se.
Held: Plunder is a malum in se which requires
proof of criminal intent.
Precisely because the crimes constituting plunder
are mala in se the element of mens rea must be
proven in a prosecution for plunder.
i. While intentional felonies are always mala in se,
it does not follow that prohibited acts done in
violation of special laws are always mala
prohibita.
ii. Even if the crime is punished under a special
law, if the act punished is one which is inherently
wrong, the same is malum in se, and, therefore,

15
good faith and the lack of criminal intent are valid
defenses; unless it is the product of criminal
negligence or culpa.
Likewise when the special laws require that the
punished act be committed knowingly and
willfully, criminal intent is required to be proved
before criminal liability may arise.
Note: Where malice is a factor, good faith is a
defense.
CRIMINAL LAW VS. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure
It is substantive. It is remedial.
Prospective in
application.
Exception: If it is
favorable to the
accused.
Exception To The
Exception:
1.When the accused is a
habitual delinquent.
(Art. 22)
2.Where the new law
expressly made
inapplicable to
pending actions or
existing causes of
actions. (Tavera v.
Valdez)
Retroactive in
application.
Statutory; it is passed by
the Legislature.
May be promulgated by
the Legislature (e.g.
jurisdiction of courts) or
the Judiciary (e.g. Rules
of Court)
STATE AUTHORITY TO PUNISH CRIME (ASKED ONCE
IN BAR EXAMS)
Art. II, Sec. 5 (1987 Constitution) Declaration of
Principles and State Policies. The maintenance of
peace and order, the protection of life, liberty and
property, and promotion of the general welfare are
essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the
blessings of democracy.
SOURCES OF CRIMINAL LAW
a. The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815) -
Created pursuant to Administrative Order
No. 94; enacted January 1, 1932; based on
the Spanish Penal Code, US Penal Code, and
Phil. Supreme Court decisions.
b. Special penal laws and penal Presidential
Decrees issued during Martial Law.
PENAL LEGISLATION
a. Schools of Thought (ASKED ONCE IN BAR
EXAMS) (PUCE)
(1) Utilitarian Theory
Primary purpose: Protection of society from actual or
potential wrongdoers.
(2) Classical Theory
Primary purpose: Retribution.
Basis of criminal liability: Human free will.
Endeavored to establish a mechanical and direct
proportion between crime and penalty; there is
scant regard to human element.
(3) Positivist Theory
Primary purpose: Reformation; prevention/ correction.
Basis of criminal liability: The sum of the social,
natural and economic phenomena to which the actor
is exposed.
(4) Eclectic/Mixed
Combines both positivist and classical thinking.
Crimes that are economic and social by nature
should be dealt with in a positivist manner; thus,
the law is more compassionate.
Heinous crimes should be dealt with in a classical
manner; thus, capital punishment.
Note: The Revised Penal Code today follows the
mixed or eclectic philosophy. For example:
 Intoxication of the offender is considered to
mitigate his criminal liability, unless it is
intentional or habitual;
 Age of the offender is considered;
 A woman who killed her child to conceal her
dishonor has in her favor a mitigating
circumstance.
RELATION OF RPC TO SPECIAL LAWS: SUPPLETORY
APPLICATION OF RPC
Art. 10, RPC. Offenses not subject to the provisions
of this Code. – Offenses which are or in the future
may be punishable under special laws are not
subject to the provisions of this Code. This Code
shall be supplementary to such laws, unless the
latter should specially provide the contrary.
General Rule: RPC provisions supplement the
provisions of special laws.
Exceptions:
(1) Where the special law provides otherwise
(Art.10)
(2) When the provisions of the Code are impossible
of application, either by express provision or by
necessary implication, as in those instances
where the provisions in question are peculiar to
the Code. (Regalado, Criminal Law Prospectus)
Ladonga v People (2005):
Spouses Ladonga were convicted by the RTC for

16
violation of B.P. Blg. 22 (3 counts). The husband
applied for probation while the wife appealed
arguing that the RTC erred in finding her
criminally liable for conspiring with her husband
as the principle of conspiracy is inapplicable to
B.P. Blg. 22 which is a special law.
Held:
1. B.P. Blg. 22 does not expressly prescribe the
suppletory application of the provisions of
the RPC.
2. Thus, in the absence of contrary provision in
B.P. Blg. 22, the general provisions of the
RPC which, by their nature, are necessarily
applicable, may be applied suppletorily.
3. The court cited the case of Yu vs. People,
where the provisions on subsidiary
imprisonment under Art. 39 of the RPC to
B.P. Blg. 22 was applied suppletorily.
People vs. Rodriguez (1960):
It was held that a violation of a special law can
never absorb a crime punishable under the
Revised Penal Code, because violations of the
Revised Penal Code are more serious than a
violation of a special law.
But a crime in the Revised Penal Code can absorb
a crime punishable by a special law if it is a
necessary ingredient of the felony defined in the
Code.
People vs. Martinada:
The crime of cattle-rustling is not malum
prohibitum but a modification of the crime of
theft of large cattle.
So Presidential Decree No. 533, punishing cattle-
rustling, is not a special law, but a law amending
provisions of the RPC (Arts. 309 and 310).
It can absorb the crime of murder. If in the
course of cattle rustling, murder was committed,
the offender cannot be prosecuted for murder.
Note: Murder would be a qualifying circumstance in
the crime of qualified cattle rustling.1
B. Scope of Application and
Characteristics of the
Philippine Criminal Law
1. GENERALITY (WHO?)
2. TERRITORIALITY (WHERE?)
3. PROSPECTIVITY (WHEN?)
Criminal law has three (3) characteristics: General,
Territorial, and Prospective.
1
Sec. 8, P.D. No. 533
1. Generality
General Rule:
Art. 14, NCC. The penal law of the country is
binding on all persons who live or sojourn in
Philippine territory, subject to the principles of
public international law and to treaty stipulations.
Limitations:
Art. 2, RPC. ―Except as provided in the treaties or
laws of preferential application xxx‖
a. Treaty Stipulations
Examples:
 Bases Agreement entered into by the
Philippines and the US on Mar. 14, 1947 and
expired on Sept. 16, 1991.
 Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA)2
signed on
Feb. 10, 1998.
Article V
Criminal Jurisdiction
1. Subject to the provisions of this article:
(a) Philippine authorities shall have jurisdiction
over United States personnel with respect to
offenses committed within the Philippines and
punishable under the law of the Philippines.
(b) United States military authorities shall have the
right to exercise within the Philippines all criminal
and disciplinary jurisdiction conferred on them by
the military law of the United States over United
States personnel in the Philippines.
2. (a) Philippine authorities exercise exclusive
jurisdiction over United States personnel with
respect to offenses, including offenses relating to
the security of the Philippines, punishable under
the laws of the Philippines, but not under the laws
of the United States.
(b) United States authorities exercise exclusive
jurisdiction over United States personnel with
respect to offenses, including offenses relating to
the security of the United States, punishable under
the laws of the United States, but not under the
laws of the Philippines.
(c) For the purposes of this paragraph and
paragraph 3 of this article, an offense relating to
security means:
(1) treason;
(2) sabotage, espionage or violation of any law
relating to national defense.
3. In cases where the right to exercise jurisdiction
is concurrent, the following rules shall apply:
2
Take note of Art. V, which defines criminal jurisdiction over
United States military and civilian personnel temporarily in
the Philippines in connection with activities approved by the
Philippine Government.

17
(a) Philippine authorities shall have the primary
right to exercise jurisdiction over all offenses
committed by United States personnel, except in
cases provided for in paragraphs l (b), 2 (b), and 3
(b) of this Article.
(b) United States military authorities shall have the
primary right to exercise jurisdiction over United
States personnel subject to the military law of the
United States in relation to:
(1) offenses solely against the property or security
of the United States or offenses solely against the
property or person of United States personnel; and
(2) offenses arising out of any act or omission done
in performance of official duty.
(c) The authorities of either government may
request the authorities of the other government to
waive their primary right to exercise jurisdiction in
a particular case.
(d) Recognizing the responsibility of the United
States military authorities to maintain good order
and discipline among their forces, Philippine
authorities will, upon request by the United States,
waive their primary right to exercise jurisdiction
except in cases of particular importance to the
Philippines. If the Government of the Philippines
determines that the case is of particular
importance, it shall communicate such
determination to the United States authorities
within twenty (20) days after the Philippine
authorities receive the United States request.
(e) When the United States military commander
determines that an offense charged by authorities
of the Philippines against United States personnel
arises out of an act or omission done in the
performance of official duty, the commander will
issue a certificate setting forth such determination.
This certificate will be transmitted to the
appropriate authorities of the Philippines and will
constitute sufficient proof of performance of
official duty for the purposes of paragraph 3(b)(2)
of this article. In those cases where the
Government of the Philippines believes the
circumstances of the case require a review of the
duty certificate, United States military authorities
and Philippine authorities shall consult
immediately. Philippine authorities at the highest
levels may also present any information bearing on
its validity. United States military authorities shall
take full account of the Philippine position. Where
appropriate, United States military authorities will
take disciplinary or other action against offenders
in official duty cases, and notify the Government of
the Philippines of the actions taken.
(f) If the government having the primary right does
not exercise jurisdiction, it shall notify the
authorities of the other government as soon as
possible.
(g) The authorities of the Philippines and the
United States shall notify each other of the
disposition of all cases in which both the
authorities of the Philippines and the United States
have the right to exercise jurisdiction.
b. Laws of Preferential Application
Examples:
 Members of Congress are not liable for libel or
slander for any speech in Congress or in any
committee thereof. (Sec. 11, Art. VI, 1987
Constitution)
 Any ambassador or public minister of any
foreign State, authorized and received as such
by the President, or any domestic or domestic
servant of any such ambassador or minister are
exempt from arrest and imprisonment and
whose properties are exempt from distraint,
seizure and attachment.3
(R.A. No. 75)
 Warship Rule – A warship of another country,
even though docked in the Philippines, is
considered an extension of the territory of its
respective country. This also applies to
embassies.
c. Principles of Public International Law
Art. 14, NCC. ―xxx subject to the principles of
public international law and to treaty stipulations.‖
The following persons are exempt from the
provisions of the RPC:
(1) Sovereigns and other heads of state
(2) Ambassadors, ministers, plenipotentiary,
minister resident and charges d‘ affaires.
(Article 31, Vienna Convention on Diplomatic
Relations)
Note: Consuls and consular officers are NOT
exempt from local prosecution. (See Article 41,
Vienna Convention on Consular Relations)
Public vessels of a friendly foreign power are not
subject to local jurisdiction.
Note: Generality has NO reference to territoriality.
2. Territoriality
GENERAL RULE: Penal laws of the country have
force and effect only within its territory.
 It cannot penalize crimes committed outside its
territory.
 The territory of the country is not limited to the
land where its sovereignty resides but includes
also its maritime and interior waters as well as
its atmosphere. (Art. 2, RPC)
3
R.A. No. 75 penalizes acts which would impair the proper
observance by the Republic and inhabitants of the
Philippines of the immunities, rights, and privileges of duly
accredited foreign diplomatic representatives in the
Philippines

18
(1) Terrestrial jurisdiction is the jurisdiction
exercised over land.
(2) Fluvial jurisdiction is the jurisdiction exercised
over maritime and interior waters.
(3) Aerial jurisdiction is the jurisdiction exercised
over the atmosphere.
EXCEPTIONS
(1) Extraterritorial crimes, which are punishable
even if committed outside the Philippine
territory (Art. 2, RPC) (ASKED 4 TIMES IN BAR
EXAMS)
Art. 2 embraces two scopes of applications:
General rule - Intraterritorial refers to the
application of the RPC within the Philippine territory
(land, air and water).
Exception - Extraterritorial4
refers to the application
of the Revised Penal Code outside the Philippine
territory.
(a) Par. 1: Crimes committed aboard
Philippine ship or airship:
The RPC is applied to Philippine vessels5
if the
crime is committed while the ship is treading:
i. Philippine waters (intraterritorial), or
ii. The high seas i.e. waters NOT under the
jurisdiction of any State (extraterritorial)
Two rules as to jurisdiction over crimes
committed aboard merchant vessels while in the
territorial waters of another country (i.e. a
foreign vessel treading Philippine waters OR
Philippine vessels treading foreign waters):
i. FRENCH RULE: It is the flag or
nationality of the vessel which
determines jurisdiction UNLESS the
crime violates the peace and order of
the host country.
ii. ENGLISH RULE: the location or situs of
the crime determines jurisdiction
UNLESS the crime merely relates to
internal management of the vessel.
The Philippines adheres to the ENGLISH RULE.
However, these rules are NOT applicable if the
vessel is on the high seas when the crime was
committed. In these cases, the laws of the
nationality of the ship will always apply.
When the crime is committed in a war vessel of
a foreign country, the nationality of the vessel
will always determine jurisdiction because war
vessels are part of the sovereignty of the
country to whose naval force they belong.
International Theories on Aerial Jurisdiction
4
R.A. 9327 (The Human Security Act) contains provisions
for extraterritorial application.
5
The country of registry determines the nationality of the
vessel, NOT ITS OWNERSHIP. A Filipino-owned vessel
registered in China must fly the Chinese flag.
i. Free Zone Theory
The atmosphere over the country is
free and not subject to the jurisdiction
of the subjacent state, except for the
protection of its national security and
public order.
ii. Relative Theory
The subjacent state exercises
jurisdiction over the atmosphere only
to the extent that it can effectively
exercise control thereof.
iii. Absolute Theory
The subjacent state has complete
jurisdiction over the atmosphere above
it subject only to the innocent passage
by aircraft of a foreign country.
Under this theory, if the crime is
committed in an aircraft, no matter
how high, as long as it can be
established that it is within the
Philippine atmosphere, Philippine
criminal law6
will govern.
Note: The Philippines adopts this theory.
(b) Par. 2: Forging/Counterfeiting and Coins
or Currency Notes in the Philippines
i. Forgery is committed abroad, and
ii. It refers only to Philippine coin,
currency note, obligations and
securities.
(c) Par. 3: Should introduce into the country
the above-mentioned obligations and
securities.
i. The reason for this provision is that the
introduction of forged or counterfeited
obligations and securities into the
Philippines is as dangerous as the forging
or counterfeiting of the same, to the
economical interest of the country.
(d) Par. 4: When public officers or employees
commit an offense in the exercise of their
functions.
Crime committed pertains to the exercise of the
public official’s functions:
The crimes which may be committed are:
i. Direct bribery (A.210)
ii. Qualified Bribery (A. 211-A)
iii. Indirect bribery (A.211)
iv. Corruption (A.212)
v. Frauds against the public treasury
(A.213)
vi. Possession of prohibited interest (A.216)
vii. Malversation of public funds or property
(A. 217)
viii. Failure to render accounts (A.218)
6
See Anti-Hijacking Law, (Other part of the reviewer)

19
ix. Illegal use of public funds or property
(A.220)
x. Failure to make delivery of public funds
or property (A.221)
xi. Falsification by a public officer or
employee committed with abuse of his
official position (A.171)
xii. Those having to do with the discharge of
their duties in a foreign country.
The functions contemplated are those, which are,
under the law:
i. to be performed by the public officer;
ii. in the foreign service of the Phil.
government;
iii. in a foreign country.
(e) Par. 5: Commit any of the crimes against
national security and the law of nations,
(Title One, Book 2, RPC)
Crimes against national security:
i. Treason (A.114)
ii. Conspiracy and proposal to commit
treason (A.115)
iii. Misprision of treason (A.116)
iv. Espionage (A.117)
Crimes against the law of nations:
i. Inciting to war or giving motives for
reprisals (A.118)
ii. Violation of neutrality (A.119)
iii. Correspondence with hostile country
(A.120)
iv. Flight to enemy‘s country (A.121)
v. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high
seas or in Philippine waters (A.122)
Note:
Crimes against public order (e.g., rebellion, coup
d‘etat, sedition) committed abroad is under the
jurisdiction of the host country.
Terrorism is now classified as a crime against
national security and the law of nations. (See R.A.
9372, otherwise known as Human Security Act of
2007).
3. Prospectivity
GENERAL RULE: Acts or omissions will only be
subject to a penal law if they are committed AFTER
a penal law has taken effect.
Conversely, acts or omissions which have been
committed before the effectivity of a penal law
could not be penalized by such penal law.
EXCEPTION:
Art. 22 RPC. Penal laws shall have a retroactive
effect, insofar as they favor the person guilty of a
felony who is not a habitual criminal, as this term is
defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code, although
at the time of the publication of such laws a final
sentence has been pronounced and the convict is
serving the same.
Art. 62(5) RPC. xxx For the purpose of this article, a
person shall be deemed to be a habitual delinquent,
if within a period of 10 years from the date of his
release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or
less serious physical injuries, robo(robbery),
hurto(theft), estafa, or falsification, he is found
guilty of any crimes a third time or oftener.
EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION:
(1) The new law is expressly made inapplicable to
pending actions or existing cause of actions; or
(2) The offender is a habitual criminal.
Effects of repeal of penal law
(1) If the repeal makes the penalty lighter in the
new law,
(a) The new law shall be applied,
(b) EXCEPT when the offender is a habitual
delinquent or when the new law is made
not applicable to pending action or existing
causes of action.
(2) If the new law imposes a heavier penalty
(a) Law in force at the time of the commission
of the offense shall be applied.
(3) If the new law totally repeals the existing law so
that the act which was penalized under the old
law is no longer punishable,
(a) The crime is obliterated.
(b) Pending cases are dismissed.
(c) Unserved penalties imposed are remitted.
(4) Rule of prospectivity also applies to judicial
decisions,7
administrative rulings and circulars.
Co vs. CA, (1993): In this case, Circular No. 4 of
the Ministry of Justice, dated December, 15,
1981, provided that ―where the check is issued as
part of an arrangement to guarantee or secure
the payment of an obligation, whether pre-
existing or not, the drawer is not criminally liable
for either estafa or violation of B.P. 22.‖
Subsequently, the administrative interpretation was
reversed in Circular No. 12, issued on August 8,
1984, such that the claim that the check was issued
as a guarantee or part of an arrangement to secure
an obligation or to facilitate collection, is no longer
a valid defense for the prosecution under B.P. 22.
Hence, it was ruled that under the new circular, a
check issued merely to guarantee the performance
of an obligation is covered by B.P. 22 [Que vs.
People].
However, consistent with the principle of
prospectivity, the new doctrine should not apply to
parties who had relied on the old Circular and acted
on the faith thereof. No retrospective effect.
7
Art. 8, Civil Code

20
Rationale for the prospectivity rule: the
punishability of an act must be reasonably known for
the guidance of society [citing Peo v. Jabinal].
[NOTE: The SC outline does not include the next
two characteristics.]
4. Legality (nullum crimen nulla
poena sine lege)
Art. 21. No felony shall be punishable by any penalty
not prescribed by law prior to its commission.
There is no crime when there is no law punishing the
same.
Limitation:
Not every law punishing an act or omission may be
valid as a criminal law. If the law punishing an act is
ambiguous, it is null and void.
5. Strict Construction of Penal Laws
Against State: The ―Doctrine of
Pro Reo‖
Pro reo doctrine: Whenever a penal law is to be
construed or applied and the law admits of two
interpretations - one lenient to the offender and one
strict to the offender, that interpretation which is
lenient or favorable to the offender will be adopted.
Basis: The fundamental rule that all doubts shall be
construed in favor of the accused and presumption
of innocence of the accused.
Art. III, Sec. 14(2), 1987 Const. In all criminal
prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed
innocent until the contrary is proved.
Note: This is peculiar only to criminal law.
EQUIPOISE RULE:
When the evidence of the prosecution and the
defense are equally balanced, the scale should be
tilted in favor of the accused in obedience to the
constitutional presumption of innocence.8
C. Constitutional limitations on
the power of Congress to enact
penal laws in the Bill of Rights
(i) Equal protection
(ii) Due process
(iii)Non-imposition of cruel and unusual
punishment or excessive fines
(iv) Bill of attainder
(v) Ex post facto law
8
Ursua v. CA (1996); Corpuz v. People (1991)
1. Equal protection
Article III, Section 1, 1987 Const. No person shall
be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due
process of law, nor shall any person be denied the
equal protection of the laws.
2. Due process
Art. III, Sec. 14 (1), 1987 Const. No person shall be
held to answer for a criminal offense without due
process of law.
 Must be general in application.
3. Non-imposition of cruel and
unusual punishment or excessive
fines
Art III, Sec. 19, 1987 Const. Excessive fines shall
not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman
punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be
imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving
heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for
it. Any death penalty already imposed shall be
reduced to reclusion perpetua.
a. Act Prohibiting the Imposition of
Death Penalty in the Philippines (R.A.
9346)
Republic Act 9346
An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death
Penalty.
Repealed the law imposing lethal injection (R.A.
8177) and the law imposing the death penalty (R.A.
7659) (Sec. 1).
This Act also imposes the punishment of reclusion
perpetua for offenses under any act using the
nomenclature of the RPC (Sec. 2 (a)) and the
punishment of life imprisonment for offenses under
any act which does not use the nomenclature of the
RPC (Sec. 2(b))
4. Bill of attainder
Art III, Sec. 22, 1987 Const. No ex post facto law or
bill of attainder shall be enacted.
Bill of attainder - a legislative act that inflicts
punishment without trial, its essence being the
substitution of legislative fiat for a judicial
determination of guilt.
5. Ex post facto law
Art III, Sec. 22, 1987 Const. No ex post facto law or
bill of attainder shall be enacted.
Ex post facto law is one which:
(1)Makes criminal an act done before the passage
of the law and which was innocent when done,
and punishes such an act.
(2) Aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it
was, when committed;

21
(3)Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater
punishment than the law annexed to the crime
when committed;
(4)Alters the legal rules of evidence, and
authorizes conviction upon less or different
testimony than the law required at the time of
the commission of the offense;
(5)Assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies
only, in effect imposes penalty or deprivation
of a right for something which when done was
lawful; and
(6)Deprives a person accused of a crime some
lawful protection to which he has become
entitled, such as the protection of a former
conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of
amnesty. (Reyes, The Revised Penal Code
citing In re: Kay Villegas Kami, Inc.)
Other constitutional limitations
 Must not provide imprisonment for non-payment
of debts or poll tax. [1987 Const. Art. III, Sec. 19
(1)]
 Must not restrict other constitutional freedoms,
e.g. due process, religion, free speech, and
assembly.
Basic Maxims in Criminal Law
a. Actus Non Facit Reum, Nisi Mens Sit Rea
―The act cannot be criminal where the mind is not
criminal.‖
U.S. vs. Catolico (18 Phil. 504, 508)
Facts: Accused was a justice of the peace who
rendered decisions for damages based on breach
of contract. The defendants failed to pay the
bonds required on time, so upon petition of the
plaintiffs, the accursed dismissed the appeals and
ordered the sums attached and delivered to
plaintiffs in satisfaction of the judgment. Accused
was prosecuted for malversation.
Held: The general rule is that, if it is proved that
the accused committed the criminal act charged,
it will be presumed that the act was done with
criminal intention. However, it must be borne in
mind that the act from which such presumption
springs must be a criminal act. In this case, the
act of the accused was not unlawful. Everything
he did was done in good faith under the belief
that he was acting judiciously and correctly. The
act of a person does not make him a criminal,
unless his mind be criminal.
b. Actus Me Invito Factus Non Est Meus Actus
―An act done by me against my will is not my act.‖
c. El Que Es Causa De La Causa Es Causa Del Mal
Causado
―He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the
evil caused.‖
 This is the rationale in par. 1 of Art. 4 which
enunciates the doctrine of proximate cause.
He who commits an intentional felony is responsible
for all the consequences which may naturally and
logically result therefrom, whether foreseen or
intended or not.

22
CHAPTER II. FELONIES
A. PRELIMINARY MATTERS
B. CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES
C. ELEMENTS OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY
D. IMPOSSIBLE CRIME
E. STAGES OF EXECUTION
F. CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL
G MULTIPLE OFFENDERS
H. COMPLEX CRIME AND SPECIAL COMPLEX
CRIMES
A. Preliminary matters
1. Differentiating Felonies, Offense,
Misdemeanor and Crime
Felony: refers only to violations of the Revised Penal
Code.
 A crime punishable under a special law is not
referred to as a felony. ―Crime‖ or ―offense‖
are the proper terms. (ASKED 3 TIMES IN BAR
EXAMS)
Importance: There are certain provisions in the
Revised Penal Code where the term ―felony‖ is used,
which means that the provision is not extended to
crimes under special laws.
Example:
Art. 160. Quasi-Recidivism: ―A person who shall
commit a felony after having been convicted by final
judgment, before beginning to serve sentence or
while serving the same, shall be punished under the
maximum period of the penalty.‖
Note that the word ―felony‖ is used.
Offense: A crime punished under a special law is
called a statutory offense.
Misdemeanor: A minor infraction of the law, such as
a violation of an ordinance.
Crime: Whether the wrongdoing is punished under
the Revised Penal Code or under a special law, the
generic word ―crime‖ can be used.
1. Felonies: How Committed
Art. 3. Definitions (RPC) — Acts and omissions
punishable by law are felonies (delitos).
Felonies are committed not only by means of deceit
(dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa).
There is deceit when the act is performed with
deliberate intent; and there is fault when the
wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence,
lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
Intentional Felony v. Culpable Felony
Intentional Culpable
Act is malicious. Not malicious.
With deliberate intent. Injury caused is
unintentional, being just
an incident of another act
performed without
malice.
Has intention to cause
an injury.
Wrongful act results from
imprudence, negligence,
lack of foresight, or lack
of skill.
2. How is Criminal Liability Incurred?
Art. 3 describes the manner of incurring criminal
liability under the Revised Penal Code.
 Intentional felony v. Culpable Felony. – It means
performing or failing to do an act, when either
is punished by law, by means of deceit (with
dolo) or fault (with culpa)
 It is important to note that if the criminal
liability arises from an omission, such as
misprision of treason or abandonment of
helpless persons, there must be a law requiring
the performance of such act.
 In Par. 1 of Art. 4, the law uses the word
―felony,‖ that whoever commits a felony incurs
criminal liability.
 Par. 2 of Art. 4 makes a person liable even if the
accomplishment of his crime is inherently
impossible.
 Art. 6 also provides for liability for the
incomplete elements of a crime.
 There are certain felonies committed by
conspiring in or proposing the commission of
certain acts, the principle behind this can be
found in Art. 8.
 Plural crimes on the other hand are discussed
under Art. 48.
Requisites of Dolo or Malice
(1) He must have FREEDOM while doing an act or
omitting to do an act.
(2) He must have INTELLIGENCE while
doing/omitting an act.
(3) He must have INTENT while doing/omitting the
act.
(a) Intent which is a mental process
presupposes the exercise of freedom and
the use of intelligence.
(b) If an act is proven to be unlawful, then
intent will be presumed prima facie. (U.S.
v. Apostol)
(c) An honest mistake of fact destroys the
presumption of criminal intent which arises
from the commission of a felonious act.
(People v. Oanis)
General v. Specific Intent
In some particular felonies, proof of specific intent is
required. In certain crimes against property, there

23
must be intent to gain (Art. 293 – robbery, Art 308 –
theft). Intent to kill is essential in attempted and
frustrated homicide (Art 6 in relation to Art 249), as
well as in murder. In forcible abduction (Art. 342),
specific intent of lewd designs must be proved.
Requisites of Culpa
(1) He must have FREEDOM while doing/omitting to
do an act
(2) He must have INTELLIGENCE while doing the
act/omitting to do an act
(3) He is IMPRUDENT, NEGLIGENT, or LACKS
FORESIGHT or SKILL while doing the
act/omitting to do an act.
3. Discussion of Article 5
Art. 5 RPC. Duty of the court in connection with
acts which should be repressed but which are not
covered by the law, and in cases of excessive
penalties.
1) Whenever a court has knowledge of any act
which it may deem proper to repress and which
is not punishable by law,
2) it shall render the proper decision, and shall
report to the Chief Executive, through the
Department of Justice, the reasons which induce
the court to believe that said act should be
made the subject of legislation.
3) In the same way, the court shall submit to the
Chief Executive, through the Department of
Justice, such statement as may be deemed
proper, without suspending the execution of the
sentence,
4) when a strict enforcement of the provisions of
this Code would result in the imposition of a
clearly excessive penalty, taking into
consideration the degree of malice and the
injury caused by the offense.
Art. 5 covers two situations:
a. Where the court cannot convict the accused
because the act he committed is not punishable
under the law, but the court deems it proper to
repress such act.
 The proper judgment is acquittal.
 The judge must report to the Chief
Executive that said act be made subject of
penal legislation and the reasons therefore.
b. Where the court after trial finds the accused
guilty, and the penalty prescribed for the crime
appears too harsh considering the conditions
surrounding the commission of the crime,
 The judge should impose the law (not
suspend the execution of the sentence).
 The most that he could do is recommend to
the Chief Executive to grant executive
clemency.
4. Wrongful Act Different from that
Intended
When a person commits a felony with malice, he
intends the consequences of his felonious act.
Art. 4. RPC. Criminal liability shall be incurred:
1. By any person committing a felony (delito)
although the wrongful act done be different from
that which he intended. xxx xxx xxx
Rationale: el que es causa de la causa es causa del
mal causado (he who is the cause of the cause is the
cause of the evil caused).
Requisites:
(1) An intentional felony has been committed.
(a) The felony committed should be one
committed by means of dolo (with malice)
because Art. 4, Par. 1 speaks of wrongful
act done different from that which he
intended.
(b) The act should not be punished by a special
law because the offender violating a special
law may not have the intent to do an injury
to another.
(c) No felony is committed when:
i. the act or omission is not punishable by
the RPC,
ii.the act is covered by any of the justifying
circumstances enumerated in Art. 11.
(2) The wrong done to the aggrieved party be the
direct, natural and logical consequence of the
felony committed by the offender.
(a) Proximate Cause - That cause, which, in a
natural and continuous sequence, unbroken
by any efficient intervening cause, produces
the injury without which the result would
not have occurred.
Criminal liability exists from the concurrence of the
mens rea and the actus reus.
Illustration:
Dave and JR are supposed to meet in Audrey‘s home
but when JR arrived Dave was not home. JR received
an SMS from Dave telling the former to get the house
key from under the doormat. Dave lets himself in
and saw an iPod on the table. JR took the iPod.
What is JR’s criminal liability? He is liable only for
theft and not robbery because the intent to gain
concurred only with the act of taking BUT NOT with
the act of using the owner‘s keys to enter the house.
Note: Criminal liability for some felonies arises only
upon a specific resulting harm:
(1) HOMICIDE AND ITS QUALIFIED FORMS requires
DEATH of the victim to be consummated.
(2) ESTAFA: requires that the victim incur damage
for criminal liability for the consummated felony
to arise
Vda. De Bataclan v. Medina (1957):
SC laid down the definition of proximate cause:
―that cause, which, in natural and continuous
sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening
cause, produces the injury, and without which the
result would not have occurred. And more

24
comprehensively, 'the proximate legal cause is that
acting first and producing the injury, either
immediately or by setting other events in motion, all
constituting a natural and continuous chain of
events, each having a close causal connection with
its immediate predecessor, the final event in the
chain immediately effecting the injury as a natural
and probable result of the cause which first acted,
under such circumstances that the person
responsible for the first event should, as an ordinary
prudent and intelligent person, have reasonable
ground to expect at the moment of his act or default
that an injury to some person might probably result
therefrom.‖
GENERAL RULE: The offender is CRIMINALLY LIABLE
for ALL the natural and logical consequences of his
felonious act, although not intended, if the felonious
act is the proximate cause of the resulting harm.
Thus, the person is still criminally liable although
the wrongful act done be different from that which
he intended in the following cases:
(1) Error in personae - mistake in the identity of
the victim; injuring one person mistaken for
another (Art. 49 – penalty for lesser crime in its
maximum period)
(a) At least two subjects
(b) A has intent to kill B, but kills C
(c) Under Art. 3, if A hits C, he should have no
criminal liability. But because of Art. 4, his
act is a felony.
(2) Aberratio ictus - mistake in the blow; when
offender intending to do an injury to one person
actually inflicts it on another (Art. 48 on
complex crimes – penalty for graver offense in
its maximum period)
(a) There is only one subject.
(b) The intended subject is a different subject,
but the felony is still the same.
(3) Praeter intentionem - injurious result is greater
than that intended (Art. 13 – mitigating
circumstance)
(a) If A‘s act constitutes sufficient means to
carry out the graver felony, he cannot claim
praeter intentionem.
Proximate Cause v. Immediate Cause v. Remote
Cause
Illustrations:
A, B, C, D, and E were driving their vehicles along
Ortigas Ave. A‘s car was ahead, followed by those of
B, C, D, and E.
When A‘s car reached the intersection of EDSA and
Ortigas Avenue, the traffic light turned red so A
immediately stepped on his brakes, followed by B,
C, and D.
However, E was using his cellphone and therefore
was not aware that the traffic light had turned to
red, so he bumped the car of D, then D hit the car of
C, then C hit the car of B, then, finally, B hit the car
of A.
In this case, the immediate cause of the damage to
the car of A is the car of B, but that is not the
proximate cause.
The proximate cause is the negligence of E (using
his cellphone while driving) because it sets into
motion the collision of all the cars.
US v. Valdez (1921):
The deceased is a member of the crew of a vessel.
Accused is in charge of the crew members engaged
in the loading of cargo in the vessel.
Because the offended party was slow in his work, the
accused shouted at him. The offended party replied
that they would be better if he would not insult
them.
The accused resented this, and rising in rage, he
moved towards the victim, with a big knife in hand
threatening to kill him.
The victim believing himself to be in immediate peril
threw himself into the water. The victim died of
drowning. The accused was prosecuted for homicide.
His contention that his liability should be only for
grave threats since he did not even stab the victim,
that the victim died of drowning, and this can be
considered as a supervening cause.
Held:
The deceased, in throwing himself into the river,
acted solely in obedience to the instinct of self-
preservation, and was in no sense legally responsible
for his own death. As to him, it was but the exercise
of a choice between two evils, and any reasonable
person under the same circumstance might have
done the same.
This case illustrates that proximate cause does not
require that the offender needs to actually touch the
body of the offended party.
It is enough that the offender generated in the mind
of the offended party an immediate sense of danger
that made him place his life at risk. In this case, the
accused must, therefore, be considered the author
of the death of the victim.
Urbano v. IAC (1988):
A and B had a quarrel and A started to hack B with a
bolo. B was wounded at the back.
Upon intervention, the two settled their differences.
A agreed to shoulder all the expenses for the
treatment of the wound of B, and to pay him also
whatever loss of income B may have suffered.
B, on the other hand, signed a statement of his
forgiveness towards A and on that condition, he
withdrew the complaint that he filed against A.

25
After so many weeks of treatment in a clinic, the
doctor pronounced that the wound was already
healed. Thereafter, B went back to his farm.
A month later, B came home and was chilling. Before
midnight, he died out of tetanus poisoning.
The heirs of B filed a case of homicide against A.
Held:
The Supreme Court held that A is not liable. A, if at
all, is only liable for the physical injuries inflicted
upon B.
The Court took into account the incubation period of
tetanus toxic. Medical evidence was presented, that
tetanus toxic is good only for two weeks. If, indeed,
the victim had incurred tetanus poisoning out of the
wound inflicted by A, he would not have lasted for
around a month (22 days).
What brought about the tetanus to infect his body
was his work in the farm using his bare hands.
The rule is that the death of the victim must be
the direct, natural, and logical consequence of the
wounds inflicted upon him by the accused. However,
the act of B working in his farm where the soil is
filthy, using his own hands, is an efficient
supervening cause which relieves A of any liability
for the death of B.
There is a likelihood that the wound was but
the remote cause and its subsequent infection, for
failure to take necessary precautions, with tetanus
may have been the proximate cause of Javier's death
with which the petitioner had nothing to do.
The felony committed is not the proximate cause
of the resulting injury when:
(1)There is an active force that intervened
between the felony committed and the
resulting injury, and the active force is a
distinct act or fact absolutely foreign from the
felonious act of the accused; or
(2)The resulting injury is due to the intentional act
of the victim.
The following are not efficient intervening cause:
(1)The weak or diseased physical condition of the
victim, as when one is suffering from
tuberculosis or heart disease. (People v.
Illustre).
(2)The nervousness or temperament of the victim,
as when a person dies in consequence of an
internal hemorrhage brought on by moving
about against the doctor‘s orders, because of
his nervous condition due to the wound
inflicted on the accused. (People v. Almonte).
(3)Causes which are inherent in the victim, such
(a) the victim not knowing to swim and (b) the
victim being addicted to tuba drinking. (People
v. Buhay and People v. Valdez).
(4)Neglect of the victim or third person, such as
the refusal by the injured party of medical
attendance or surgical operation, or the failure
of the doctor to give anti-tetanus injection to
the injured person. (U.S. v. Marasigan).
(5)Erroneous or unskillful medical or surgical
treatment, as when the assault took place in
anu outlaying barrio where proper modern
surgical service was not available. (People v.
Moldes).
5. Omission
It is inaction, the failure to perform a positive duty
which a person is bound to do.
There must be a law requiring the doing or
performing of an act.
Punishable omissions in the RPC:
(1) Art. 116: Misprision of treason.
(2) Art. 137: Disloyalty of public officers or
employees.
(3) Art. 208: Negligence and tolerance in
prosecution of offenses.
(4) Art. 223: Conniving with or consenting to
evasion.
(5) Art. 275: Abandonment of person in danger and
abandonment of one‘s own victim.
(6) Art. 276: Abandoning a minor.
B. Classifications of Felonies
FELONIES ARE CLASSIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
1. According to the manner of their commission
2. According to the stages of their execution
(ASKED 9 TIMES IN BAR EXAMS)
3. According to their gravity
OTHER CLASSIFICATIONS:
4. As to count
5. As to nature
This question was asked in the bar examination: How
do you classify felonies and how are felonies
defined?
 TIP: What the examiner had in mind was Articles
3, 6 and 9. Do not write the classification of
felonies under Book 2 of the Revised Penal
Code.
 The question does not require the candidate to
classify but also to define.
 The purpose of classifying penalties is to bring
about a proportionate penalty and equitable
punishment.
 The penalties are graduated according to their
degree of severity.
◦ The stages (Art. 6) may not apply to all
kinds of felonies.
◦ There are felonies which do not admit of
division.

26 1. According to the Manner of Their
Commission
Under Art. 3, they are classified as:
a. Intentional felonies or those committed with
deliberate intent; and
b. Culpable felonies or those resulting from
negligence, reckless imprudence, lack of
foresight or lack of skill.
2. According to the Stages of Their
Execution
Under Art. 6, they are classified as:
a. Attempted
b. Frustrated
c. Consummated
Note: The classification of stages of a felony in
Article 6 are true only to crimes under the Revised
Penal Code. It does NOT apply to crimes punished
under special laws.
However, even certain crimes which are punished
under the Revised Penal Code do not admit of these
stages.
Related to this, classification of felonies as to:
a. Formal Crimes: Crimes which are consummated
in one instance.
Example: ILLEGAL EXACTION under Art. 213
 Mere demanding of an amount different
from what the law authorizes him to collect
will already consummate a crime, whether
the taxpayer pays the amount being
demanded or not.
b. Material Felonies: crimes that have various
stages of execution
c. Felonies by omission: Crimes which have no
attempted stage.
d. Crimes which have NO FRUSTRATED STAGE:
the essence of the crime is the act itself.
Example: in rape, the slightest penetration
already consummates the crime; the same is
true for arson where the slightest burning
already renders the crime complete.
Valenzuela vs. People (2007):
No crime of frustrated theft.
Facts: A grocery boy was caught trying to abscond a
box of Tide Ultrabar laundry soap from the Super
Sale Club. The guards apprehended him at the store
parking lot while trying to board a taxi. He claimed
the theft was merely frustrated for he was not able
to dispose of the goods.
Held: The Revised Penal Code provisions on theft
have not been designed in such fashion as to
accommodate the Adiao, Dino and Empelis rulings.
Again, there is no language in Article 308 that
expressly or impliedly allows that the ―free
disposition of the items stolen‖ is in any way
determinative of whether the crime of theft has
been produced. We thus conclude that under the
Revised Penal Code, there is no crime of frustrated
theft.
3. According to Their Gravity
Under Art. 9, felonies are classified as:
a. Grave felonies or those to which the law
attaches
(1) the capital punishment or
(2) penalties which in any of their periods are
afflictive;
(a) Reclusion perpetua
(b) Reclusion temporal
(c) Perpetual or Absolute DQ
(d) Perpetual or Temporary Special DQ
(e) Prision mayor
(f) Fine more than P6,000
b. Less grave felonies or those to which the law
punishes
(1) with penalties which in their maximum
period is correctional;
(a) Prision correccional
(b) Arresto mayor
(c) Suspension
(d) Destierro
(e) Fines equal to or more than P200
c. Light felonies or those infractions of law for the
commission of which
(1) the penalty is arresto menor, or a fine not
exceeding P200, or both. (ASKED 4 TIMES IN
BAR EXAMS)
Why is it necessary to determine whether the crime
is grave, less grave or light?
(1) To determine
 whether these felonies can be
complexed or not;
 the prescription of the crime and
 the prescription of the penalty.
(2) In other words, these are felonies classified
according to their gravity, stages and the
penalty attached to them.
Take note that when the Revised Penal Code speaks
of grave and less grave felonies, the definition
makes a reference specifically to Art. 25 of the
Revised Penal Code.
Do not omit the phrase ―In accordance with Art. 25‖
because there is also a classification of penalties
under Art. 26 that was not applied.
This classification of felony according to gravity is
important with respect to the question of
prescription of crimes.
(3) Ex. If the penalty is a fine and exactly
P200.00, it is only considered a light felony
under Art. 9. If the fine is imposed as an
alternative penalty or as a single penalty, the
fine of P200.00 is considered a correctional
penalty under Art. 26, hence a less grave
penalty.

27
If the penalty is exactly P200.00, apply Art. 26
(with respect to prescription of penalties). It is
considered as a correctional penalty and it
prescribes in 10 years. If the offender is
apprehended at any time within ten years, he
can be made to suffer the fine.
4. As to Count
Plurality of crimes may be in the form of:
a. Compound Crime,
b. Complex crime; and
c. Composite crime.
5. As to Nature
(ASKED 4 TIMES IN BAR EXAMS)
a. Mala in se
b. Mala prohibita
Art. 10. Offenses not subject to the provisions of
this Code. - Offenses which are or in the future may
be punishable under special laws are not subject to
the provisions of this Code. This Code shall be
supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should
specially provide the contrary.
NOTE: Please refer to p. [1] for the table comparing
mala in se and mala prohibita
C. Elements of Criminal Liability
1. Elements of Felonies
a. There must be an act or omission
ACTUS REUS/PHYSICAL ACT to be considered as a
felony, there must be an act or omission;
 Act: Any kind of body movement which tends to
produce some effect in the external world;
includes possession.
 Omission: The failure to perform a positive duty
which one is bound to do under the law.
It is important that there is a law requiring the
performance of an act; if there is no positive duty,
there is no liability.
Examples: Failure to render assistance,9
failure to
issue receipt or non-disclosure of knowledge of
conspiracy against the government.10
Mens rea: "A guilty mind, a guilty or wrongful
purpose or criminal intent."11
Sometimes referred to in common parlance as the
gravamen of the offense (bullseye of the crime), or
criminal or deliberate intent.
9
Art. 275. Abandonment of person in danger and
abandonment of one's own victim.
10
Art. 116. Misprision of treason.
11
Black's Law Dictionary, 5th ed., p. 889
For an act to be punishable, there must be a
CONCURRENCE BETWEEN THE ACT and the INTENT.
b. That the act or omission must be
punishable by the RPC;
c. That the act is performed or the
omission incurred by means of dolo or
culpa.
Dolo is DELIBERATE INTENT otherwise referred to as
criminal intent, and must be coupled with freedom
of action and intelligence on the part of the
offender as to the act done by him.
Liability even in the absence of criminal intent
There are two exceptions to the requirement of
criminal intent:
(a) Felonies committed by CULPA. (infra)
(b) Offenses MALA PROHIBITA. (infra)
Intentional Felonies
The act or omission is performed or incurred with
deliberate intent (with malice) to cause an injury to
another.
Requisites
i. Freedom
Voluntariness on the part of the person who commits
the act or omission.
If there is lack of freedom, the offender is exempt
from liability (i.e., presence of irresistible force or
uncontrollable fear)
ii. Intelligence
Capacity to know and understand the consequences
of one‘s act.
This power is necessary to determine the morality of
human acts, the lack of which leads to non-existence
of a crime.
If there is lack of intelligence, the offender is
exempt from liability. (i.e., offender is an imbecile,
insane or under 15 years of age)
iii. Criminal intent
The purpose to use a particular means to effect a
result.
The intent to commit an act with malice, being
purely a mental state, is presumed (but only if the
act committed is unlawful). Such presumption arises
from the proof of commission of an unlawful act.
However, in some crimes, intent cannot be
presumed being an integral element thereof; so it
has to be proven.
Example: In frustrated homicide, specific intent to
kill is not presumed but must be proven, otherwise it
is merely physical injuries.

28 Recuerdo v. People (2006):
 General criminal intent is an element of all
crimes but malice is properly applied only to
deliberate acts done on purpose and with
design.
 Evil intent must unite with an unlawful act for
there to be a felony. A deliberate and unlawful
act gives rise to a presumption of malice by
intent.
 On the other hand, specific intent is a definite
and actual purpose to accomplish some
particular thing.
The general criminal intent is presumed from the
criminal act and in the absence of any general intent
is relied upon as a defense, such absence must be
proved by the accused.
Generally, a specific intent is not presumed. Its
existence, as a matter of fact, must be proved by
the State just as any other essential element.
This may be shown, however, by the nature of the
act, the circumstances under which it was
committed, the means employed and the motive of
the accused
Note: If any of the elements is absent, there is no
dolo. If there is no dolo, there could be no
intentional felony.12
Categories of Intent
General Criminal Intent Specific Criminal Intent
The intention to do
something wrong.
The intention to commit
a definite act.
Presumed from the
mere doing of a wrong
act.
Existence is not
presumed.
The burden is upon the
wrong doer to prove
that he acted without
such criminal intent.
Since the specific intent
is an element of the
crime, the burden is
upon the prosecution to
establish its existence.
Illustration:
Ernie, without any provocation, stabbed Bert.
The very act of stabbing is the quantum of proof
needed to establish the fact that Ernie intended to
do something wrong. This is the GENERAL CRIMINAL
INTENT.
However, Ernie can be liable for more than one
crime; thus, prosecution must establish Ernie‘s
SPECIFIC INTENT in order to determine whether he
planned to kill Bert or merely to inflict a whole lot
of pain.
Ernie can overturn the presumption of general
criminal intent by proving that he was justified
(infra), entitled to any exempting circumstances
12
Visbal vs. Buban (2003)
(due to lack of discernment) or there was a mistake
of fact (infra).
If he is successful, then the presumption that he
intended to do something wrong is overcome along
with the need to determine specific intent.
However, the result of Ernie‘s act will now
determine his liability. Was his act justified that he
incurs no liability? Is he entitled to any exemption?
Or is his liability only mitigated?
DISTINCTION Between Intent, Discernment and
Motive (ASKED 4 TIMES IN BAR EXAMS)
INTENT DISCERNMENT MOTIVE
Determination
to do a
certain thing,
an aim or
purpose of
the mind.
The mental
capacity to tell
right from
wrong.
It is the moving
power which
impels one to
do an act (ex.
vengeance).
Establish the
nature and
extent of
culpability in
intentional
felonies.
Integral to the
element of
intelligence,
NOT intent.
Generally, it is
not an essential
element of a
crime, hence, it
need not be
proved for
purposes of
conviction
(except in
certain cases
enumerated
below)
When Motive Becomes Material in Determining
Criminal Liability (ASKED ONCE IN BAR EXAMS)
i. When the act brings about variant crimes (e.g.
kidnapping v. robbery13
)
ii. When there is doubt as to the identity of the
assailant.
iii. When there is the need to ascertain the truth
between two antagonistic versions of the crime.
iv. When the identification of the accused proceeds
from an unreliable source and the testimony is
inconclusive and not free from doubt.
v. When there are no eyewitnesses to the crime,
and when suspicion is likely to fall upon a
number of persons.
vi. When the evidence on the commission of the
crime is purely circumstantial.
 Lack of motive can aid in achieving
acquittal of the accused, especially where
there is doubt as to the identity of the
accused.14
Illustration:
Ernie came home and found his wife in a pleasant
conversation with Bert, former suitor. Thereupon, he
went to the kitchen, opened a drawer and pulled out
a knife. He then stabbed Bert.
The moving force is jealousy.
13
People v. Puno (1993)
14
People vs Hassan, 1988

29
The intent is presumed from the resort to the knife,
so that means he desires to kill Bert, the former
suitor.
Ernie‘s deliberate choice of something as lethal as
the knife shows the presence of intelligence because
it is his very awareness of the danger which
prompted his choice. This only means that he knew
what is right from wrong and deliberately chose to
do what is wrong.
Note: Discernment does not indicate the presence of
intent, merely intelligence.15
Thus, discernment is
necessary whether the crime is dolo or culpa.
People v. Delos Santos (2003):
Delos Santos stabs Flores with a kitchen knife hitting
him on the different parts of his body, inflicting
upon him mortal wounds which directly caused his
death.
He then argues that since the prosecution witnesses
testified that there was no altercation between him
and Flores, it follows that no motive to kill can be
attributed to him.
Held:
The court held that the argument of Delos Santos is
inconsequential.
Proof of motive is not indispensable for a conviction,
particularly where the accused is positively
identified by an eyewitness and his participation is
adequately established.
In People vs. Galano, the court ruled that in the
crime of murder, motive is not an element of the
offense, it becomes material only when the evidence
is circumstantial or inconclusive and there is some
doubt on whether the accused had committed it.
In this case, the court finds that no such doubt
exists, as witnesses De Leon and Tablate positively
identified Delos Santos.
(1) Mistake of Fact (ignorantia facti excusat)
(ASKED ONCE IN BAR EXAMS)
It is a reasonable misapprehension of fact on the
part of the person causing injury to another. Such
person is NOT criminally liable as he acted without
criminal intent.
Under this principle, what is involved is the lack of
intent on the part of the accused. Therefore, the
defense of mistake of fact is an untenable defense
in culpable felonies, where there is no intent to
consider.
An honest mistake of fact destroys the presumption
of criminal intent which arises upon the commission
of a felonious act.
15
People v. Cordova 1993
Requisites:
(a) That the act done would have been lawful had
the facts been as the accused believed them to
be;
(b) That the intention of the accused in performing
the act should be lawful;
(c) That the mistake must be without fault or
carelessness on the part of the accused. When
the accused is negligent, mistake of fact is not a
defense.16
US v. Ah Chong (1910):
A cook who stabs his roommate in the dark, honestly
mistaking the latter to be a robber responsible for a
series of break-ins in the area, and after crying out
sufficient warnings and believing himself to be under
attack, cannot be held criminally liable for
homicide.
1) Would the stabbing be lawful if the facts were
really what the houseboy believed? Yes. If it was
really the robber and not the roommate then
the houseboy was justified.
2) Was the houseboy‘s intention lawful? Yes. He
was acting out of self-preservation.
3) Was the houseboy without fault or negligence?
Yes. His deliberate intent to defend himself
with the knife can be determined by the fact
that he cried out sufficient warnings prior to the
act.
Stabbing the victim whom the accused believed to
be an intruder showed a mistake of fact on his part
which led him to take the facts as they appear to
him and was pressed to take immediate action.
However, mistake of fact is NOT availing in People
v. Oanis (74 Phil. 257), because the police officers
were at fault when they shot the escaped convict
who was sleeping, without first ascertaining his
identity. (It is only when the fugitive is determined
to fight the officers of law trying to catch him that
killing the former would be justified)
(2) Culpa (CONSTRUCTIVE INTENT)
Although there is no intentional felony, there could
be culpable felony.
The act or omission is not malicious; the injury
caused being simply the incident of another act
performed without malice.
The element of criminal intent is replaced by
negligence, imprudence, lack of foresight or lack of
skill.
Is culpa merely a mode of committing a crime or a
crime in itself?
(a) AS A MODE
16
People v. Oanis, 1988

UP Law Criminal Law Reviewer Summary

UP Law Criminal Law Reviewer Summary

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (6)

Similar to UP Law Criminal Law Reviewer Summary

Similar to UP Law Criminal Law Reviewer Summary (20)

UP Law Criminal Law Reviewer Summary