2007 bar questions and suggested answers (CRIMINAL LAW)

Thursday, April 16, 2009 Posted by Coffeeholic Writes

Labels: Bar Examination

Criminal Law
I.
(10%)
What

are

the penalties that

may

be

served

simultaneously?

a.

Perpetual

absolute

disqualification;

b.

Perpetual

special

disqualification;

c.

Temporary

absolute

disqualification;

d.

Temporary

special

disqualification;

e.

Suspension;

f.

Public

censure;

g.
h.

Destierro;
Fine

and

i.
j.

bond

to

keep

Civil
Confiscation

peace;
Interdiction;

and

payment

of

cost.

The above penalties, except destierro, may be served simultaneously with

imprisonment.

(Article

70,

Revised

Penal

Code)

Prison terms may also be served simultaneously whenever there are more than three
(3) convictions imposing imprisonment as penalties and the Three-Fold Rule under
Article 70 of the Revised Penal Code is made to apply.
II.
(10%)
Tiburcio asked Anastacio to join their group for a "session". Thinking that it was for
a mahjong session, Anastacio agreed. Upon reaching Tiburcios house, Anastacio
discovered that it was actually a shabu session. At that precise time, the place was
raided by the police, and Anastacio was among those arrested.What crime can
Anastacio

be

charged

with,

if

any?

Explain

your

answer.

Alternative Answer:
Anastacio can be charged with violation of Section 7, Article 2, RA 9165, otherwise
known as the Comprehensive Drug Act of 2002, which punishes any person who visits a
den,

dive

or

resort,

knowing

the

nature

of

the

place

as

such.

A den, dive, resort is a place where any dangerous drugs and essential chemicals is
administered, delivered, stored, sold or used in any form. (Section 3[1], Article 1, RA
9165).
However, Anastacio could interpose as a defense for his exculpation that he is now
aware

that

the

house

of

Tiburcio

is

den

or

dive.

Alternative Answer:
Anastacio can not be charged with any crime. The facts spelled out in the problem
clearly shows he was unaware that he is being led to a shabu session. It was his
thinking

it

was

mahjong

session.

The problem does not state he was in possession of any dangerous drugs. Thus, when
he was arrested, he has just arrived in the session and that was the only time he
discovered it was a pot session.
III.
(10%)
Jervis and Marlon asked their friend, Jonathan, to help them rob a bank. Jervis
and Marlon went inside the bank, but were unable to get any money from
the vault because the same was protected by a time-delay mechanism. They
contented themselves with the customers cellphones and a total of P5,000 in
cash. After they dashed out of the bank and rushed into the car,Jonathan pulled
the car out of the curb, hitting a pedestrian which resulted in the latters
death. What crime or crimes did Jervis, Marlon and Jonathancommit? Explain your
answer.
Alternative Answer:

Assuming the acts were attended by the use of force and intimidation in robbing the
bank, Jonathan, Marlon and Jervis committed the special complex crime of attempted
robbery with homicide. The subsequent running over of the pedestrian in the course
of their escape was by reason or on occasion of the robbery, thereby qualifying the
crime as attempted robbery with homicide. Having acted in conspiracy with Jervis
and Marlon, Jonathan should also be charged with attempted robbery with homicide.
On the other hand, he asking of the cellphones and P5,000.00 from the customers are
the separate acts of Jervis and Marlon, and do not involve Jonathan as it was not part
of their original agreement. Jervis and Marlon should be charged for the crime of
robbery.
Alternative Answer:
As the facts do not indicate any weapons or use of force or intimidation, Jervis and
Marlon can only be charged with theft for the taking of the cellphones and P5,000.00
from the customers. Jonathan is solely liable for reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide

for

the

killing

of

the

pedestrian.

Jervis, Marlon and Jonathan can be charged as co-principals for attempted theft in
their failed effort to take money from the vault pursuant to their conspiracy. It is
possible that the vault could have been left open during the business hours of the
bank. However, at the time of the commencement of the crime delay mechanism
prevented them from performing all the acts of execution, a cause or reason other
than their spontaneous desistance.
IV.
(10%)
Macky, a security guard, arrived home late one night after rendering overtime. He
was shocked to see Joy, his wife, and Ken, his best friend, in the act of having
sexual intercourse. Macky pulled out his service gun and shot and killed Ken.
The court found that Ken died under exceptional circumtances and exonerated
Macky of murder but sentenced him to destierro, conformably with Article 247 of

the Revised Penal Code. The court also ordered Macky to pay indemnity to the
heirs

of

the

victim

in

the

amount

of

P50,000.

a. Did the court correctly order Macky to pay indemnity even though he was
exonerated

of

murder?

Explain

your

answer.

Alternative Answer:
The court correctly ordered Macky to pay indemnity. Death under exceptional
circumstances as defined under Article 247 is an absolutory cause that exempts the
offender from criminal liability. In exempting circumstances, there is a crime but
there is no offender because the latter is exempt. There being a crime
committed, civil liability may be properly awarded. (People v. Coricor, G.R. No.
48768,

December

4,

1947).

Alternative Answer:
The court committed an error when it also ordered Macky to pay indemnity to the
heirs of the victim. In People v. Abarca, G.R. No. L-74433, September 14, 1987,
the Supreme Court did not impose civil liability to be paid to the accused appellant to
the heirs of the person whom he killed pursuant to the provision of Article 247 of the
Revised Penal Code since xxx inflicting death under exceptional circumstances is not
murder

xxx

Moreover, as held in People v. Coricor, G.R. No. 48768, December 4, 1947 reiterated in
People v. Araquel, G.R. No. L-12629, December 9, 1959, this penalty (referring to
Destierro) is mere banishment and is intended more for the protection of the
accused than a punishment. We therefore can not apply the provision of Article 100
of the Revised Penal Code that a person criminally liable is also civilly liable.
b. While serving his sentenced, Macky entered the prohibited area and had a pot
session with Ivy (Joys sister). Is Macky entitled to an indeterminate sentence in
case he is found guilty of the use of prohibited substances? Explain your answer.
The Indeterminate Sentence Law provides that its provisions shall not apply to persons
who have evaded sentence, among others (Section 2, Indeterminate Sentence Law).

Macky is not entitled to an indeterminate sentence because he had evaded his

sentence by entering the prohibited area. Evasion of service is not only committed
when the penalty of confinement or imprisonment is imposed but also when the
penalty is destierro because it involves deprivation of liberty.
V.
(10%)
a.

Distinguish

Distinction

between

between

an

an

accomplice

and

accomplice

and

conspirator.
conspirator:

1. As to the criminal intent, conspirators know the criminal intention because they
themselves have decided upon such course of action. Accomplices come to know
about it after the principals have reached the decision, and only then do they agree
to

cooperate

in

its

execution.

2. As to the decision to commit the crime, conspirators decide that a crime should be
committed; accomplices do not decide whether the crime should be committed, they
merely

assent

to

the

plan

and

cooperate

in

its

accomplishment.

3. As to their participation, conspirators are the authors of a crime, accomplices are

merely their instruments who perform acts not essential to the perpetration of the
offense.

(People

v.

Garcia,

G.R.

No.

133489,

January

15,

2002).

b. What are the three (3) classes of offender in the crime of qualified seduction?
Give

an

Classes

of

1.

2.

Guardian,

Those

Example:
3.

offenders

Those

Example:

example

who
Priest,

Those

in

the

who

house
who

of

abuse

teacher
abused

crime

of

the

and

qualified

abuse

seduction:

their

authority,

persons

confidence
servant

each.

in

reposed
or
their

authority
in

them,
domestic

relationship.

Example: Brother or ascendant, whether legitimate or illegitimate (Article 337,

Revised Penal Code)
VI.
(10%)
What

are

the

The

different

different
acts

acts
of

of

inciting

inciting

to

to

sedition?

sedition

are:

1. Inciting others to be accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition

by

means

of

speeches,

proclamations,

writings,

emblems,

etc.

2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb the public peace.
3. Writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous libels against the Government or any of
the duly constituted authorities thereof, which tend to disturb public peace or who
knowingly concealing such evil practices. (Article 142, Revised Penal Code)
VII.
(10%)
Eddie brought his son Randy to a local faithhealer known as "Mother Himala." He
was diagnosed by the faithhealer as being possessed by an evil spirit. Eddie
thereupon authorized the conduct of a "treatment" calculated to drive the spirit
from the boys body. Unfortunately, the procedure conducted resulted in the boys
death.
The faithhealer and tree others who were part of the healing ritual were charged
with murder and convicted by the lower court. If you are appellate court Justice,
would

you

sustain

the

conviction

upon

appeal?

Explain

your

answer.

No, the conviction of murder will not sustained. The faith-healer and the three others
must only be convicted of homicide through reckless imprudence because they did not
have any intent to kill when they treated the victim. There was reckless imprudence
because the faith-healer and the three others treated the victim knowing that they do
not have the necessary knowledge and skill to do so and they failed to exercise the

necessary precaution in healing the victim. (People v. Carmen, G.R. No. 137268,
March 26, 2001)
VIII
(10%)
Fe is the manager of a rice mill in Bulacan. In order to support a gambling debt, Fe
made it appear that the rice mill was earning less than it actually was by writing in
a "talaan" or ledger a figure lower than what was collected and paid by their
customers. Fe then pocketed the difference. What crime/s did Fe commit, If any?
Explain

your

answer.

Alternative

Answer:

Fe is liable for the crime of qualified theft. Fe did not acquire juridical possession of
the money. Fes possession is still possession of her employer. The falsification of the
talaan or ledger was but a means to facilitate or conceal the crime. The falsification
of the talaan or ledger to a figure lower than what was paid by their customers is
merely intended to conceal the misappropriation of the money derived from the rice
mill

operation.

Considering that a special confidential or fiduciary relationship exists between her

and her employer, the crime committed by Fe is qualified theft under Article 310 of
the

Revised

Alternative

Penal

Code

by

taking

the

employers

money.
Answer:

Fe committed the crime of estafa by misappropriating or converting money, goods or

any other personal properties received in trust, to the prejudice of another. As
general manager, Fe performs acts of administration, including the receipt and
custody of money paid by customers. (Article 315, par. 1[b], Revised Penal Code). The
falsification of the talaan or ledger to a figure lower than what was paid by their
customers is merely intended to conceal the misappropriation of the money derived
from the rice mill operation, and does not constitute a separate crime of falsification.

IX.
(10%)
During a concert of Gary V. and in order to prevent the crowd from rushing to the
stage, Rafael Padilla {a security guard} pointed his gun at the onrush of people.
When the crowd still pushed forward, Rafael fired his gun into air to scare them
off. However, the bullet hit one of the metal roof supports, ricocheted and then
hit one of the stage crew members, causing injuries which resulted in the latters
confinement in a hospital for twelve days. What crime/s did Rafael commit?
Explain

your

answer.

Alternative

Answer:

Rafael Padilla committed the complex crime of Illegal Discharge of Firearm with Less
Serious

Physical

Injuries.

Before he fired his gun, it was pointed at the onrushing people. When the crowd
pushed forward, he fired his gun upward to scare them off. At this point, the crime is
illegal discharge of firearm, even if the gun was not pointed at the offended party, as
long as it was initially aimed at or against the offended party. (Reyes, Revised Penal
Code,

Book

II,

2006

ed.,

p.

490.)

However, Rafael Padilla is also liable for the injury of the crew member since it is the
natural and logical consequence of firing the gun. (Article 4, par. 1, RPC) Since a
single act resulted in two crimes, one illegal discharge of firearm and the other, less
serious physical injuries, he is liable for the complex crime of illegal discharge of
firearm with less serious physical injuries. (Article 48, Revised Penal Code; People v.
Arquiza,
Alternative

G.R.

Nos.

42128-29,

December

19,

1935).
Answer:

Rafael Padilla has not committed any crime. His purpose in firing his gun into the air
is to prevent the onrush of people which could result in death or injuries. He was
therefore in the performance of a lawful act with due care because he did not fire
indiscriminately. He has no fault or intention of causing the resultant damage to
property and the injury to the stage crew member. What happened was an accident.

(Article

12,

par.

4,

Revised

Penal

Code).

The rule that a person can be held liable for illegal discharge of firearm when he
initially aimed at the offended party even if the firearm was fired or discharged
when no longer pointed at the offended party is anchored on the fact that he was
about to shoot the offended party. (People v. Ramirez, G.R. No. 240084, November
3, 1925). Here, the security guard (Rafael Padilla) did not point the firearm to the
people who continued the onrushing; he did not fire at them; he pointed the gun into
the air and fired to prevent graver consequences.
X.
(10%)
Pinky was a lessee of a market stall owned by Giovanni. When Pinky refused to
pay her rental, Giovanni nailed some wooden barricades on one of the sides of the
market stall and posted this warning: "We have closed this portion of the door. Do
not open it or else something may happen to you." What crime/s did Giovanni
commit,

if

any?

Explain

your

answer.

Giovanni committed the crime of Unjust Vexation. Unjust vexation includes any
human conduct which, although not productive of physical or material harm would,
however, unjustly annoy or vex an innocent person. The act of the accused in nailing
the barricades with a warning not to open the door or else something will happen to
you does not constitute such a serious threat or intimidation amounting to grave
coercion but merely the crime of unjust vexation penalized under paragraph 2, Article
287 of the Revised Penal Code. (People v. Banzon, et.al., G.R. No. 05388, October 21,
1969, cited in Reyes Book II, 2006 Ed., p. 605).
NOTHING FOLLOWS.