ASSAULT UPON, AND RESISTANCE &
DISOBEDIENCE TO, PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND
THEIR AGENTS (ARTS. 148-152)
How the crime of direct assault is committed?
What are the elements that must concur in order that
2 modes are committed?
1st mode
Without public uprising, by employing force or
intimidation for the attainment of any of the purposes
enumerated in defining the crimes of sedition and
rebellion.
Elements:
a. That the offender employs force or intimidation;
b. That the aim of the offender is to attain any of
the purposes of the crime of rebellion or any of
the objects of the crime of sedition; and
c. . That there is no public uprising.
2nd mode
Without public uprising, by attacking, by employing force
or seriously intimidating or by seriously resisting any
person in authority (PA) or any of his agents (APA), while
engaged in the performance of official duties, or on the
occasion of such performance.
Elements:
1. That the offender (a) makes an attack
(b)employs force (c) makes serious intimidation
or (d) makes a serious resistance
2. That the person assaulted is a person in
authority or his agent
3. That at the time of the assault the person in
authority or his agent (a) is engaged in the
actual performance of official duties, or that he is
assaulted, (b) by reason of the past performance
of official duties
4. That the offender knows that the one he is
assaulting is a person in authority of his agent in
the exercise of his duties
5. That there is no public uprising
What is the reason why direct assault is being
punished?
These acts are defiance of rule of law.
Offender and offended party are both persons in
authority or their agents- there can be no assault
upon or disobedience to one authority by another
when they both contend in the exercise of their
respective duties
The last element the offender should be aware that
the person whom he attacked or seriously resisted
or seriously intimidated is a person in authority or
its agent, why it is important? what is the essence of
the presence of this requirement?
Because This crime amounts to defiance of rule of law
that is the reason why the direct assault of the second
mode is being punished and that is why also the last
requirement which is the knowledge that the person
whom he attacked or seriously resisted or seriously
intimidated is a person in authority or its agent must
always be present because without knowledge that
could not be said that there is defiance of rule of law.
Who is a person in authority?
Any person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as
an individual or as a member of some court or
governmental corporation, board or commission (RPC,
Art. 152, par. 1).
A barangay chairman shall be deemed a PA.
A barrio councilman, barrio policeman and barangay
leader shall be deemed an APA.
Who is the victim in the first mode in committing
direct assult?
Offended party need not be a person in authority or his
agent; he may be a private individual if the object is to
attain an object of sedition (RPC, Art. 139 [4]).
What is the meaning of the phrase vested with
jurisdiction?
It means the power or authority to govern and execute
the laws
Who is a agent of person in authority?
Any person who, by direct provision of law or by election
or by appointment by competent authority, is charged
with the maintenance of public order and the protection
and security of life and property (RPC, Art. 152, par. 2).
What are 3 ways that agent of person in authority is
constituted?
1. appointment by competent authority
2. by election
3. by express provision of law-
Who are these agents of person in authority? Article
152 e.g policeman or constabulary soldier, municipal
treasurer, sheriff,agents of BIR, barangay chief tanod
Article 152 is a source of many bar questions
What is first objective of sedition under article 129?
Prevent the promulgation or execution of laws or prevent
the holding of public election, it will become a crime of
direct assault when there is no public uprising present.
For instance,A B and C all armed of firedarms ,
during the brgy election , they posted themselves in
the polling place, by means of violence and
intimidation prevents all voters casting their votes,
this is the crime of direct assault of the first kind. If there
is public uprising definitely there is crime of sedition.
Are all person in authority or agents of persons in
authority considered as also as public officer?
No. all government functionaries from the president
down to the lowest government are embraced under
definition of public officer under article 203 but not all
public officer embraced in the definition can become
person in authority or agents. Those become public
officer or agents only if it will fall In the definition of the
term as a defined in article 152.
A Judge , this day celebrating his 70th bday, if in the
reception place ,unknown to him, one of the guest
was a party in a case before him whom he cited in
contempt makes such person mad at him, so when
this man was able to intrude in the reception hall
unknown the judge celebrating his bday
,surreptitiously drew fist blow hitting him that render
the judge unconscious, what is the crime
committed? Is he liable of direct assault?
NO. The victim who is a judge who is celebrating his 70 th
bday , that means to say that he is no longer a judge at
the time of the celebration because the compulsory
retirement age of a judge, although the act is under the
motive behind the attack is due to past performance of
duty of the victim , it cannot be considered direct assault
because he is no longer a judge or person in authority at
the time the crime is committed which is the first element
of the crime of direct assault.
In a social gathering, one of the guest is a town
mayor who became tipsy because of socializing with
other guests , the mayor scolded and embarrassed A
,A could not do anything bec of the mayors
bodyguard, so A just left the place, but one week
after, A found the mayor in a mall, A attacked the
mayor, could that be considered as direct assault?
A is liable to the crime of direct assault in the first mode
in relation to sedition. In the first mode, there is no public
uprising, employ force or intimidation to attain any of the
objectives of sedition as provided under article 139. In
the case at hand, it falls under par 3 of article 139.
Suppose, A there could not attack the mayor in the
mall because he was surrounded by his bodyguards
so A went to the parking lot of the mall and look for
the mayors car. A took a balisong knife and destroy
the four tires of the car. Could this be considered as
direct assault also or the crime of sedition?
It is Direct assault under the first mode in relation of
article 139 (any purposes of sedition), without public
uprising, to inflict revenge upon the public officer through
violence upon the property of the public officer.
If direct assault is committed and as a result the PA
or APA is killed, the crime shall be the complex
crime of direct assault with homicide or murder, as
the case may be (People v. Gayrama, G.R. Nos.
39270-71, October 30, 1934).
If direct assault is committed and the PA or APA
suffers serious or less serious physical injuries, the
crime shall be a complex crime or direct assault with
serious or less serious physical injuries.
In a case of homicide being tried by the RTC judge, the
decision pronounce the accused guilty beyond
reasonable doubt and the penalty is maximum of 17yrs
of reclusion temporal. Upon hearing the decision, the
accused stood up and shouted upon the judge for
rendering wrong judgement and he told there that he will
not go to appellate court anymore and warned the judge
that upon release from the prison I will look for you and
kill you. The fiscal then make a motion that the convict
be held of contempt of court. Then the convict shouted
upon the fiscal that upon his release I will also kill you.
Through his words, he was able to escape from national
bilibid prison. He changed into new pairs of pants and
barong tagalog and then he went back to the court . he
was not even recognized by the clerk of court for he
thought that he was also a lawyer. But the judge was not
around , he was able to know through the clerk of court
where the judge could be found which lanzones
plantation in laguna. The convict then went there and
approached the judge surreptitiously and drove his
caliber pistol then blew all the bullets upon the judge
who died instantly. What is the crime committed by the
convict?
He is liable for direct assault with murder . Article 48 or
special kind of complex crime . the penalty of more
serious offense shall be enforced. Another crime is
evasion of the service of sentence or violation of article
157.
How is the crime of indirect assault is committed
according to Article 149?
 Elements:
1. That an APA is the victim of any of the forms of direct
assault defined in Art. 148;
2. That a person comes to the aid of the APA; and
3. That the offender makes use of force or intimidation
upon such person coming to the aid of the APA.
Suppose , it is the mayor who was being attack by
the attacker, then the cigarette vendor oversees the
attack and then comes to the help but he himself
was attacked by the same attacker. What is the crime
committed by the attacker?
There are two counts direct assault committed. As to the
mayor, it is direct assault. As to the vendor, it is also
direct assault. But it will depend upon the inflicted injury
if the injury is serious physical injury Article 48 will apply
so it will be direct assault with serious physical injury.
even if it is less serious physical injury it can also be falls
under complex crime.
How could there be indirect assault against the
person coming to aid in person in authority?
Any person who comes to the aid of a person in
authority may be considered as an agent of a person in
authority (RPC, Art. 152, par. 2).
However, because of the amendment of Art. 152 by
R.A. 1978, a private individual coming to the aid of a
PA is himself deemed an APA. Thus, the rules are:
1. If the victim is a PA who is the subject of a direct assault,
and the 3rd person coming to his aid (who then
becomes an APA) is likewise attacked, the crime
committed against the 3rd person will be direct assault,
resistance or disobedience depending on the degree of
force or violence used by the offender.
2. If the victim is an APA, it depends:
a. If direct assault is being committed against the APA,
the attack against the 3rd person will constitute indirect
assault;
b. If only resistance or disobedience is being committed
against the agent, the attack against the 3rd person is
either physical injuries or coercion as the case may be
(REGALADO, supra at 416-417).
If those persons in authority attacked by offender, a
private individual came to the help . SPO2 santos when
arresting a offender . the offender attacked the arresting
officer. A cigarette vendor came to help but attacked
also. There is only one count of direct assault. Indirect
assault will apply only when a person comes to the aid in
the person in authority. In the case at hand, the
policeman is not a person in authority but only an agent
of a person in authority.
Explanation of direct assault and indirect assault in
relation to the definition of person in authority
Teachers, professors, and persons in charge with
the supervision of public or duly recognized private
schools, colleges and universities, and lawyers in
the actual performance of their professional duties
or on the occasion of such performance shall be
deemed persons in authority, applying Arts. 148 and
151 (RPC, Art. 152, par. 3).
The last par of article 152 shall be considered as person
in authority only in the application of article 148 and 151.
Outside of these two provisions teachers and professors
could not become a persons in authority. For instance, a
professor x labor law grabbed the examination booklet
and ordered the student to go out the room. After the
class, that lawstudent at the parking area armed with a
piece of wood hits the professor in the head at several
times rendering the professor unconscious. There was
frustrated murder in this case. There could be direct
assault bec the professor in the case is a person in
authority bec the motive of the attack is based in the
past official discharge of the victim professional function.
Complete elements of the crime of
desistance/resistance on person in authority Article
151
Where the force employed on the agent of a person in
authority is of a serious character, including
determination to defy the law and its representative, the
crime committed is direct assault.
However, it is important to determine whether the victim
is a PA or APA. If the victim is a PA, the degree of force
employed against him is immaterial as the mere laying of
hands on him is sufficient (U.S. v. Gumban, G.R. No. L-
13658, November 9, 1918)
In a incident in a barangay in the 8pm in the evening, x
who appears to be tipsy shouting at the top of his voice
and challenging every person passing by, the people
became afraid so one of the residence called the nearest
police station, policeman came, SPO1 santos who come
over to the accused to bring him to the police station, x
instead hits the policeman on the breast, afterwards
SPO1 santos was able to bring x to police station. Could
this be direct assault?
No. the case involves only simple desistance . SC ruled
that Single fistic blow could not be considered as
defiance of rule of law.
But supposed the person attacked is the chief of
police, and it is only mild fistic blow in the breast.
This is direct assault bec the victim is a person in
authority. The mere defiance upon a person in authority
already constitute defiance of rule of law.
What will qualify the crimes of direct assault?
Direct assault is qualified when:
1. Committed with a weapon;
2. Offender is a public officer or employee; or
3. Offender lays hands upon a person in authority.
DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, ITS COMMITTEES OR
SUBCOMMITTEES, BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL
COMMISSION, ITS COMMITTEES, SUBCOMMITTEE
OR DIVISIONS
Punishable Acts:
1. Refusing, without legal excuse, to obey summons of
Congress, or any commission or committee chairman or
member authorized to summon witnesses;
2. Refusing to be sworn or placed under affirmation
while before such legislative or constitutional body or
official;
3. Refusing to answer any legal inquiry or to produce
any books, papers, documents, or records in his
possession, when required by them to do so in the
exercise of their functions;
4. Restraining another from attending as a witness in
such legislative or constitutional body; and
5. Inducing disobedience to summons or refusal to be
sworn by any such body or official.
May a person not named in the summons become liable
of disobedience?
Person who is liable under disobedience may also be
liable of contempt of congress which is the inherent
power of legislative body to discipline .
Article 153
TUMULTS & OTHER DISTURBANCES
OF PUBLIC ORDER
Punishable Acts:
1. Causing any serious disturbance in a public place,
office or establishment;
Note: If disturbance is not serious in nature, alarms and
scandals under Art. 155 is committed. Serious
disturbance must be planned or intended.
2. Interrupting or disturbing public performances,
functions or gatherings, or peaceful meetings, if the act
is not included in Arts. 131-132;
3. Making an outcry tending to incite rebellion or sedition
in any meeting, association or public place;
Note: If outcry was premeditated to incite, the crime
committed is inciting to rebellion or sedition.
4. Displaying placards or emblems which provoke a
disturbance of public order in such place; and
5. Burying with pomp the body of a person who has
been legally executed.
Outcry
It means to shout spontaneously subversive or
provocative words tending to stir up the people so as to
obtain by means of force or violence any of the objects
of rebellion or sedition. The outcry must be spontaneous;
otherwise it would be the same as inciting to rebellion or
sedition (Id. at 164).
Inciting to Sedition Public Disorder
or Rebellion
The outcry or The outcry is more or less
displaying of emblems unconscious outburst which,
or placards should although rebellious or
have been done with seditious in nature, is not
the idea aforethought intentionally calculated to
of inducing his hearers induce others to commit
or readers to commit rebellion or sedition.
the crime of rebellion
or sedition.
At the outset, the At the outset, the meeting is
meeting is unlawful. lawful but becomes unlawful
after the outburst described
above.
Burying with pomp the body of a person
It is the ostentatious display of a burial. For instance,
during burial, there are person where asked to render
speeches during the ceremony wherein render phrases
which states that the executed person are martyrs while
in truth it is legally executed. The purpose of which is to
prevent public disorder.
When is there tumultuous under Article 153?
The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon
persons causing any disturbance or interruption of a
tumultuous character.
It is tumultuous if caused by more than three persons
who are armed or provided with the means of violence
(RPC, Art. 153, par. 3). However, this is only a
presumption juris tantum, hence if the disturbance is in
fact tumultuous it is immaterial that there are no such
armed persons. Conversely if the gathering is not in fact
tumultuous, it does not matter if there are such armed
persons present on that occasion (REGALADO, supra at
423).
UNLAWFUL USE OF MEANS OF PUBLICATION AND
UNLAWFUL UTTERANCES
Punishable Acts:
1. Publishing or causing to be published, by means of
printing, lithography or any other means of publication,
as news any false news which may endanger the public
order, or cause damage to the interest or credit of the
State;
Note: Offender must know that the news is false.
2. Encouraging disobedience to the law or to the
constituted authorities or by praising, justifying or
extolling any act punished by law, by the same means or
by words, utterances or speeches;
The act of the offender of encouraging disobedience to
the law or the authorities punishable under this
paragraph is different from inciting to sedition which
requires that the people rise publicly.
3. Maliciously publishing or causing to be published any
official resolution or document without authority, or
before they have been published officially; and
4. Printing, publishing or distributing (or causing the
same) books, pamphlets, periodicals, or leaflets which
do not bear the real printers name, or which are
classified as anonymous.
If the printer/owner of the printing establishment took
part in the preparation and publication of the libelous
writings he shall be liable under Art. 360.
Note: Actual public disorder or actual damage to the
credit of the State is not necessary. The mere possibility
of causing such damage is sufficient (REYES, Book
Two, supra at 166).
R.A. 248 prohibits the reprinting, reproduction or
republication of government publications and official
documents without previous authority.
If the publication is both obscene and anonymous, the
offenses cannot be complexed as they involve different
acts separately punished under this Article and Art. 201
on obscene publications.
Article 155
ALARMS & SCANDALS
Punishable Acts:
1. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker, or other
explosive within any town or public place, which
produces alarm or danger;
Note: The discharge of the firearm should not be
directed at a person. Otherwise, the offense committed
would be Discharge of Firearms under Art. 254.
It is the result, not the intent that counts. The act must
produce alarm or danger as a consequence.
The discharge may take place within ones own home
since the law does not distinguish as to where in town.
According to Viada, the discharge of firecrackers and
rockets during fiestas and festivals are not covered by
the law.
2. Instigating or taking an active part in any charivari or
other disorderly meeting offensive to another or
prejudicial to public tranquility;
Charivari
It includes a medley of discordant voices, a mock
serenade of discordant noises made on kettles, tins,
horns, etc. designed to annoy or insult.
The reason for punishing instigating or taking active part
in charivari and other disorderly meeting is to prevent
more serious disorders (REYES, Book Two, supra at
169).
3. Disturbing the public peace while wandering about at
night or while engaged in any other nocturnal
amusements; and
4. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public places
while intoxicated or otherwise, provided Art. 153 is not
applicable.
If the disturbance is of a serious nature, the case will fall
under Art. 153.
There is a birthday celebration within a compound of
high fence, at the hype of the celebration the
celebrant fires his gun on the gate, the act of firing is
done within his private property . could this be
considered as public scandal?
Yes. It is still within the town as based on the wordings of
the law.
What other crimes can be committed in discharge of
firearms?
Article 254 illegal discharge of firearms towards to a
person but without the intent to kill ,directed the firearm
towards to a person even the bullet did not hit the person
that it is still the crime of attempted homicide/murder as
the case maybe but remember discharge of firearm
may constitute attempted murder/homicide if it is
directed to a person with intent to kill but if it is without
intent to kill it is illegal discharge of firearm even if the
victim is hit by the bullet and sustain serious physical
injuries that it is still covered by illegal discharge of
firearm provided there is no intent to kill so it will be
complex crime of illegal discharge of firearm with
physical serious injuries but if the victim was hit by the
bullet when fired towards his direction without intent to
kill even if the victim almost died bec of timely medical
attention that could not be crime of illegal detention of
firearm with frustrated homicide bec these two crimes
are incompatible to eachother. In attempted or frustrated
homicide or murder there is intent to kill while in illegal
discharge of firearm there is no intent to kill.
If there is particular victim wherein the discordant
noises is address, then the crime will be unjust
vexation , if there is no particular victim then the
correct charge will be alarm and scandal.
During a bday party, one of the guest became tipsy,
bec of the small space of the house they usually put
table in the middle of the street where the brgy
captain allowed to close the road of that small street
to give way to that celebration. He removes his
clothes . could this constitute alarm and scandal?
Yes bec it is mere nudity in public places.
Suppose that nude man performs an act such he
plays with his private part in front of other people, or
if he masturbates in front of other people could this
constitute alarm and scandal ?
No. it is grave scandal bec it is contrary to morals.
ARTICLE 156
DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAIL
Elements:
1. That there is a person confined in a jail or penal
establishment; and
2. That the offender removes therefrom such person, or
helps the escape of such person.
Ways of Committing:
1. By removing a prisoner confined in jail or penal
institution to take away a person from confinement with
or without the active participation of the person released;
or
2. By helping said person to escape furnish material
means to facilitate escape.
If the offender is a public officer for instance the warden ,
he could not be liable under Art 156 bec it pertains only
to private individual who has no custody on the prisoner
or to a public officer who has no custody upon the
prisoner at the time the assist or delivery of the prisoner
were committed.
A public officer who is a jail warden or public warden
who assist in the escape of the prisoner from jail he will
be held liable not under article 156 but under provision of
article 253 infidelity in custody of prisoner.
Who is the offender under article 156? A private
individual who has no custody of the prisoner. Art 223
210 212 will also apply
The offender who assist in the escape of the prisoner is
usually a private individual bec a private individual has
no custody of the prisoner but even a public officer can
be held liable for delivery of prisoner form jail for
instance such jail guard was not on duty at the time
when he assisted the prisoner to escape bec he has no
custody of the prisoner at that time thus he is considered
as private individual.
But if the jail guard is on duty at that time, he will be held
liable under Article 223 conniving or consenting to
evasion, .
If the jail officer in duty was offered bribed by the
excaping prisoner then the prisoner was able to
escape.,what are the crimes committed?
Both are liable for two crimes. In the case of the
prisoner, he shall be held liable of corruption of public
official(art 210) and evasion of sentence , and the public
officer shall be guilty of direct bribery and article 223.
ARTICLE 157
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE
Elements:
1. That the offender is a convict by final judgment;
2. That he is serving his sentence, which consists in
deprivation of liberty; and
3. That he evades the service of his sentence by
escaping during the term of his sentence.
Qualifying circumstances:
If such evasion or escape takes place:
1. By means of unlawful entry (this should be by
scaling);
2. By breaking doors, windows, gates, walls, roofs or
floors;
3. By using picklocks, false keys, disguise, deceit,
violence, or intimidation; or
4. Through connivance with other convicts or employees
of the penal institution.
The following cannot commit evasion of service of
sentence:
1. Accused who escapes during appeal or a detention
prisoner;
2. Minor delinquents; and
3. Deportees.
A and B are prisoners , A is serving sentence of final
judgement while B has just been convicted of
robbery and he went on appeal. Both of them are
detained in the same city jail. One evening these two
were able to excape, assisted by X the brother of A
and the assistance of a jail officer who was then off
duty when he assisted the escape of prisoner.
Explain the criminal liability of those two prisoner
who has escape and the brother of A and the jail
officer.
As to the A, he is liable under Article 157.
As to B , he cannot be liable under Article 157 nor for
any crimes bec he is not yet convicted in final judgment
for he is only under preventive imprisonment and
conviction by pending appeal is not yet considered as
final judgment.
Suppose the convict is impose to suffer the penalty
of distierro, (article 247, 284 in cases of grave
threats , 334 crime of concubinage,) but the convict
violates the destierro could this also considered
liable evasion of sentence,?
Yes. based in the case of people vs hamilo, that
provision of That he is serving his sentence of
imprisonment when he escapes is improper translation
of its Spanish text . in the Spanish texts, it should be
deprivation of liberty.
There are three kinds of Evasion of sentence
1. Article 157
2. ARTICLE 158 EVASION OF SERVICE OF
SENTENCE ON THE OCCASION OF
DISORDERS, CONFLAGRATIONS,
EARTHQUAKES, OR OTHER CALAMITIES
3. ARTICLE 159 OTHER CASES OF EVASION
OF SENTENCE (CONDITIONAL PARDON)
ARTICLE 158
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE ON THE
OCCASION OF DISORDERS, CONFLAGRATIONS,
EARTHQUAKES, OR OTHER CALAMITIES
This only applies to prisoners already serving sentence ,
it will not apply to sentence to suffer destierro.
You have to understand article 158 in rel to article 98.
Elements:
1. That the offender is a convict by final judgment, and is
confined in a penal institution;
2. That there is disorder, resulting from:
a. Conflagration;
b. Earthquake;
c. Explosion;
d. Similar catastrophe; or
e. Mutiny in which he has not participated;
3. That the offender leaves the penal institution where he
is confined, on the occasion of such disorder or during
the mutiny; and
4. That the offender fails to give himself up to the
authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a
proclamation by the Chief Executive announcing the
passing away of such calamity.
What is punished is not the leaving of the penal
institution, but the failure of the convict to give himself up
to the authorities within forty-eight (48) hours after the
proclamation announcing the passing away of the
calamity.
If the offender fails to give himself up, he shall suffer an
increase of 1/5 of the time still remaining to be served
under the original sentence, which shall not exceed 6
months. If the offender gives himself up, he is entitled to
a deduction of 1/5 of his original sentence (RPC, Art.
98).
According to article 98, if the prisoner will return he will
entitled to 1/5 reduction to his sentence,
Under the new law amending the article 98, Those who
did not actually escape during calamities shall be entitled
to 2/5 deduction upon their remaining penalty.
Those who did not return, the increase of 1/5 to their
penalty shall be imposed but in no case that it shall
increase of 6mos.
ARTICLE 159
OTHER CASES OF EVASION OF SENTENCE
(CONDITIONAL PARDON)
Elements:
1. That the offender was a convict;
2. That he was granted a conditional pardon by the Chief
Executive; and
3. That he violated any of the conditions of such pardon.
Two sets of penalty provided under article 159
1. There is no new penalty to be imposed , when
he is convicted to sentence which exceed 6yrs
imprisonment once convicted under article 159
then he shall be compelled to serve the
remaining portion of his unserved penalty
2. There is new penalty to be imposed. When he is
convicted of sentence is less than 6yrs, then he
was convicted of article 159, then there will be
new penalty of prision correccional in its min
period
Is the violation of article 159 is substantive offense
or crime?
SC held that when there is no new penalty to be
imposed upon the offender then it is not a substantive
crime, but if there is a new penalty imposed according to
the law then it is a substantive crime.
ARTICLE 160
COMMISSION OF ANOTHER CRIME DURING THE
SERVICE OF PENALTY IMPOSED FOR ANOTHER
PREVIOUS OFFENSE (QUASI-RECIDIVISM)
Elements:
1. That the offender was already convicted by final
judgment of one offense; and
2. That he committed a new felony before beginning to
serve such sentence or while serving the same.
The offender is considered as quasi-recidivist when
convicted of any crimes punished under the RPC or by
special laws and before or while serving sentence he
commits a new felony , take note that the new felony
committed should be acts punished by the RPC only not
under the special laws. It is a special aggravating
circumstance that could not be offset by any ordinary
mitigating circumstance.
Suppose the accused is convicted of robbery and
while serving sentence he commits a crime of theft
where he is convicted. What circumstance would be
properly applicable to that convict?
Although the two crimes are covered in the same title of
the code, quasi recidivism shall be applied bec the
purpose of the law is to make the accused suffer a stiffer
penalty for committing a crime another crime while
serving sentence.
Quasi-recidivism does not require that the offense
for which the convict is serving and the new felony
committed be embraced in the same title of the RPC.
While in recidivism, both the first and the second
offenses must be embraced in the same title of the
RPC.
SECTION ONE: FORGING THE SEAL OF THE
GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, THE
SIGNATURE OR STAMP OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
ARTICLE 161
COUNTERFEITING SEAL OF GOVERNMENT,
SIGNATURE AND STAMP OF PRESIDENT
Punishable Acts:
1. Forging the Great Seal of the Government of the
Philippines;
2. Forging the signature of the President; and
3. Forging the stamp of the President.
If the signature of the President is forged, it is not
falsification of public document, but forging the signature
of the Chief Executive (REYES, Book Two, supra at 192
ARTICLE 162
USE OF FORGED SIGNATURE, COUNTERFEIT SEAL
OR STAMP
Elements:
1. That the seal of the Republic was counterfeited, or the
signature or stamp of the Chief Executive was forged by
another person;
2. That the offender knew of the counterfeiting or forgery;
and
3. That he used the counterfeit seal or forged signature
or stamp.
The offender must not be the forger otherwise the crime
committed is forgery under Art. 161.
Article 161 is a special kind of falsification thats why to
emphasize of perverse of the acts of the offender the
penalty is made reclusion temporal whereas in an
ordinary falsification of signature of any person
committed in a public instrument is prision mayor only.
The document under Article 161 is not an ordinary
doc if for instance the pres of the phils owns piece
of land it was entrused to a person who post the
execution of deed of absoluite belonging to the pres
wherein he forged the signature of the president.
Would this fall under the violation of article 161?
NO. it is not a state paper which requires under article
161. For instance, the appointment of ambassador etc.
all of them must be signed by president himself. The
document of sale as in the case at hand ,although he is
the president of the phils he is in his private capacity
owning a piece of land , the forging of that signature in
the deed of sale will not fall under article 161 but rather
it will fall under article 171 falsification of public official
doc notarized by notary public.
Under article 161, it should be a official paper that
requires affixing the signature of the president in his
official capacity.
X forged the signature of the president ,then he used
such document in transaction, what crime/crimes
committed by the offender . there is only one crime
committed. There shall only be one crime prosecuted
against the offender and that is for forging the signature
of the president
What about the crime of use of that forged signature
which is punished under article 162 ? it will be
considered as absorbed in article 162
Who could be guilty of art 162?
He should the person who is not a forger of the signature subsequently the forged signature the crime remains to
of the pres. be forging the signature of the president.
If he is the forger of the signature of the pres then he
shall be liable uinder art 161 even if he use that