Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
4LM3
Art. 283: Light Threats A threat to commit a wrong not constituting a crime,
made in the manner expressed in subdivision 1 of the next preceding article (Art. 284),
shall be punished by arresto mayor.
1
Art. 283 was taken from art. 495 of the old Penal Code. Blackmail or chantage
not falling under art.356 would be punishable under art. 283. 3In order to convict a
person who threatens another with a wrong, the commission of which does not amount
to a crime which of light threats, it must be proved that the offender has made the
threats demanding money or imposing any other condition, even though not unlawful.
Blackmail is punished under this article of money is demanded under threats of
exposure.
2
Elements:
1. Any person who, without being included in the provisions of the next
preceding article, shall threaten another with a weapon, or draw such weapon
in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful self-defense.
2. Any person who, in the heat of anger, shall orally threaten with some harm
not constituting a crime, and who by subsequent acts shows that he did not
persist in the idea involved in his threat, provided that the circumstances of
the offense shall not bring it within the provisions of Artivle 282 of this code.
3. Any person who shall orally threaten to do another any harm not constituting
felony.
7
Art, 285 was taken from parts 2, 3 and 4 of art. 589 of the old Penal Code.
People vs. Hao Chao The two accused threatened to report Salustiana Dee to
the Bureau of Internal Revenue for tax evasion if she did not give them P1,000.
Salustiana gave them P1,000 in the presence of two Manila detectives, who
arrested the accused as soon as they received the said amount and who
recovered it from the,. The accused were charged with light threats.
2. 9People vs. Cervera - In the case at bar, the court of first instance seemed to
believe that defendant's acquittal in criminal case No. 682 of the municipal court,
for slight defamation, necessarily implied his acquittal for the threatening remarks
alleged in the complaint in that case, for, apart from setting forth the insults
heaped upon the complainant, it was averred therein that the accused had
added: "You will fight? (Will you fight?) Answer. I will shoot you and throw your
body into the river," and "words of similar import." The conclusion thus reached
by the court of first instance is untenable.
3. 10Pena vs. Aparicio - In this administrative complaint, the respondent lawyer is
charged with violation of Rule 19.01 of Canon 19 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility for writing a demand letter the contents of which threatened
complainant with the filing of criminal cases for tax evasion and falsification of
documents.
4. 11USA vs. Eguia & Lozano - In order to prevent further occurrences of this kind,
as far as may be done by judicial action, we are all strongly of the opinion that
the judgment of the lower court must be reversed, and that the defendant and
8
EXCEPT where the new law will be advantageous to the accused, as in this
case, sparing him of two separate convictions.
8. 16People vs. Navarra - The accused-appellants were charged and found guilty by
the RTC of illegal recruitment committed in a large scale resulting to economic
sabotage and sentenced to life imprisonment.
16 https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminal-law-digests-february2001/