DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF LAW
\

COURSE OUTLINE IN CRIMINAL LAW 1

First Semester, AY 2017-2018

Renato M. Pambid

COURSE DESCRIPTION

This three-unit course is designed to provide law students with insights into
the basic concepts, principles and elements of criminal law as provided for in Book I
(Articles 1-113) of the Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815), as amended. There will be
discussions on the basic concepts of felonies, penalties and criminal/civil liability
arising from felonies.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

1. Active Participation in Class Discussions/ Quizzes (30%)

2. Mid-Term Examination (30%)
3. Final Examination (40%)

BASIC REFERENCES

The Revised Penal Code, Book I (L. B. Reyes)

Cases on Criminal Law decided by the Supreme Court

COURSE OUTLINE

INTRODUCTION

A. Course Guidelines, Overview and Administrative Concerns

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW

A. Definitions
 Page 2 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

1. Criminal law

Criminal law is that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats
of their nature, and provides for their punishment.

It is that branch of public substantive law which defines offenses and

prescribes their penalties. It is substantive because it defines the states right to
inflict punishment and the liability of the offenders. It is public law because it
deals with the relation of the individual with the state.

2. Theories of criminal law

3. Crime

Crime is an act committed or omitted in violation of a public law forbidding or

commanding it.

4. Sources of Philippine criminal law

a. The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815) and amendments thereto
historical development
b. Special criminal laws
c. Penal provisions in other laws
d. Local ordinances

5. RPC, art. 5, 21

B. State authority to punish crimes

1. Sources
a. Const. (1987), art. II, sec. 5
b. Const. (1987), art. VI, sec. 1
c. Const. (1987), art. II, sec. 1
d. Cases:
(i) People vs. Santiago, 43 Phil. 120 (1922)
(ii) United States vs. Pablo, 35 Phil. 94 (1916)

2. Limitations

a. Const. (1987), art. III, secs. 1, 14, 18, 19, 20, 22

b. Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 115
c. Civil Code, art. 2
d. Cases:
(i) Pesigan vs. Angeles, 129 SCRA 174 (1984)
 Page 3 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

(ii) Taada vs. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27 (1985)

Ex-post facto law

Const. (1987), art. III, sec. 22
(iii) In re. Kay Villegas Kami, Inc., 35 SCRA
429 (1970)
(iv) People vs. Villaraza, 81 SCRA 95 (1978)
(v) U.S. vs. Diaz-Conde, 42 Phil. 766 (1922)

Bill of attainder
Const. (1987), art. III, sec. 22
(vii) People vs. Ferrer, 48 SCRA 382 (1972)

C. Characteristics of criminal law

1. General

a. Const. (1987), art. VI, sec. 1

b. Civil Code, art. 14
c. Agreement Between the Government of the
Republic of the Philippines and the Government
of the United States of America Regarding the
Treatment of United States Armed Forces
Visiting the Philippines, 10 February 1998
(Visiting Forces Agreement), art. V, EDCA
d. Republic Act No. 75
e. Republic Act No. 7055
Cf. Pres. Decree No. 1850; R.A. 6975
f. Cases:
(i) United States vs. Sweet, 1 Phil. 18 (1901)
(ii) Raquiza vs. Bradford, 75 Phil. 50 (1945)
(iii) Liang vs. People, 323 SCRA 692 (2000)
Read also Annotation on Various
Categories of Diplomatic Immunity from
Local Jurisdiction in 323 SCRA 699-715 (2000)
(iv) Schneckenburger vs. Moran, 63 Phil. 249
(1936)

2. Territorial

a. RPC, art. 2
b. Const. (1987), art. I
c. Visiting Forces Agreement, art. V
d. Cases:
(i) United States vs. Bull, 15 Phil. 7 (1910)
 Page 4 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

(ii) People v. Look Chaw, 18 Phil. 573 (1910)

(iii) United States vs. Ah Sing, 36 Phil. 978 (1917)
(iv) People v. Lo-lo & Saraw, 43 Phil. 19 (1922)
(v) People v. Wong Cheng, 46 Phil. 729 (1922)
(vi) Miquiabas v. Commanding General, 80
Phil. 262 (1948)

3. Prospective

a. RPC, arts. 1, 21, 22

A person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent, if within

a period of ten (10) years from the date of his release or last
conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries,
robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said
crimes a third time or oftener. [ Revised Penal Code, art. 62(5), as
amended by Rep. Act No. 7659, sec. 23]

b. Civil Code, art. 4

c. Cases:
(i) Gumabon v. Director of Prisons, 37 SCRA
420 (1971)
(ii) In Re: Kay Villegas Kami, Inc., supra
(iii) People v. Narvaez, 121 SCRA 389, (1983)
(iv) People v. Ringor, 320 SCRA 342 (1999)
(v) People v. Pimentel, 288 SCRA 542 (1998)
(vi) See also People v. Lacson, 382 SCRA 365
(2002), 400 SCRA 267 (2003), and 413
SCRA 20 (2003) for further reference

D. Construction/Interpretation of Penal Laws

1. Strict construction against the State and liberally in favor of the

accused
Const. (1987), art. III, sec. 14(2)
2. Spanish text of the Revised Penal Code prevails over its English
transaction
3. Retroactive application if favorable to the accused
RPC, art. 22
4. Prescribed, but undeserved, penalties,
RPC, art. 5, 2nd par.
5. Effects of repeal/amendment of penal law
a. Tuates v. Bersamin, G.R. No. 138962, 4 October
2002
 Page 5 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

b. Benedicto v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 125359, 4

September 2001
c. People v. Garcia, 85 Phil. 651 (1950)

II. CRIMES AND FELONIES

A. Crimes in general

1. Elements

a. Aristotel Valenzuela vs. People of the Philippines G.R.

No. 160188, June 21, 2007
b. People of the Philippines vs. Cora Abella Ojeda, G.R. 104238
to 58, June 3, 2004

2. Crimes Mala in se and Mala prohibita

a. Lozano v. Martinez, 146 SCRA 323 (1986)

b. Magno v. Court of Appeals, 210 SCRA 475 (1992)
Read also Annotation, A Theory of Crime and
Punishment David Nitafan, 210 SCRA 483 (1992)
c. United States v. Go Chico, 14 Phil. 128 (1909)
d. Joseph Ejercito Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
148560, November 10, 2001
e. People vs. Daniel Quijada, G.R. No. 115008-09, July 24,
1996

3. Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude

a. Edgar Teves vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 180363, April 28, 2009
(Separate concurring opinion of Justice Brion)

4. Relation of RPC to special laws

a. RPC, art. 10
f. Ladonga v. People, 451 SCRA 673 (2005)

B. Felonies

1. Definition/Elements, RPC, art. 3

a. Act
i. People v. Gonzales, 183 SCRA 309 (1990)
 Page 6 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

b. Omission
(i) RPC, art. 116, 137, 208, 213(2)(b), 223, 234, 275(1)
(ii) Pres. Decree Nos. 953, 1153
(iii) People v. Sylvestre and Atienza, 56 Phil. 353 (1931)

c. Punishable by the Revised Penal Code

(i). Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege

A familiar maxim in criminal law is Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege
which means There is no crime where there is no law punishing it.
[Potenciano Evangelista v. People, G.R. Nos. 108135-36, 14 August 2000]

The maxim Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege has its roots in history. It
is in accordance with both centuries of civil law and common law tradition.
Moreover, it is an indispensable corollary to a regime of liberty enshrined in our
Constitution. It is of the essence then that while anti-social acts should be
penalized, there must be a clear definition of the punishable offense as well as
the penalty that may be imposed - a penalty, to repeat, that can be fixed by the
legislative body, and the legislative body alone. So constitutionalism mandates,
with its stress on jurisdictio rather than guvernaculum. The judiciary as the
dispenser of justice through law must be aware of the limitation on its own
power. [Concurring Opinion, Justice Fernando, People v. Cabural, G.R. No.
34105, 4 February 1983]

(ii) RPC, art. 3, 5, 1st par., sec. 21

(i) Juanito Rimando vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 176364, September

18, 2009
(ii) Artemio Villareal vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 151258,
February 1, 2012

2. How committed
RPC, art. 3, 365

a. Dolo
(i) Elements
Melchor Maderazo vs. People of the
Philippines, G.R. No. 165065, September 26, 2006
(ii) Presumption of intent
United States v. Apostol, 14 Phil. 92 (1909)
United States v. Catolico, 18 Phil. 504
(1911)
 Page 7 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

The people of the Philippines vs. Eutiquia

Carmen, G.R. No. 137268, March 26, 2001
Lehner Martires vs. Ricardo Cokieng,
G.r. No. 150192, February 17, 2005
(iii) General and specific intent
People v. Puno, 219 SCRA 85 (1993)
People v. Delim, 396 SCRA 386 (2003)
(iv) Intent and Motive
People v. Temblor, 161 SCRA 623 (1988)
People v. Hassan, 157 SCRA 261 (1988)
People v. Delim, supra
(v) Mistake of fact
United States v. Ah Chong, 15 Phil. 488
(1910)
People v. Oanis, 74 Phil. 257 (1943)

b. Culpa
(i) Elements
People v. Carmen, 355 SCRA 267 (2001)
Jason Ivler vs. Hon. Maria Rowena Modesto
San Pedro, G.R. No. 172716, November 17, 2010
Artemio Villareal vs. People, G.R. No. 151256,
February 1, 2012 (supra)

(ii) Distinguished from dolo

People v. Pugay, 167 SCRA 439 (1988)

B. Criminal Liability

1. How incurred
a. Wrongful act done be different from what was
intended
(i) RPC, art. 14(1), 13(3), 48, 49, 14(3)
(ii) United States v. Brobst, 14 Phil. 310 (1909)
(iii) People v. Mananquil, 132 SCRA 196 (1984)
(iv) People v. Iligan, 191 SCRA 643 (1990)
(v) People v. Sabalones, 294 SCRA 751 (1998)
(vi) People v. Guillen, 85 Phil. 307 (1950)
(vii) People v. Albuquerque, 59 Phil. 150 (1933)
(viii) Bataclan v. Medina, 102 Phil. 181 (1957)

b. Impossible crimes
(i) RPC, art. 4(2), 59
(ii) People v. Balmores, 85 Phil. 493 (1950)
(iii) Intod v. Court of Appeals, 215 SCRA 52 (1992)
 Page 8 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

2. Stages of commission

a. Definitions
(i) RPC, art. 6 and 7
(ii) United States v. Eduave, 36 Phil. 209
(1917)
(iii) People v. Enriquez, 281 SCRA 103 (1997)
(iv) People v. Listerio, 335 SCRA 40 (2000)

b. Specific felonies
(i) Rape
People v. Erinia, 50 Phil. 998 (1927)
People v. Hernandez, 49 Phil. 980 (1925)
People v. Orita, 184 SCRA 105 (1990)
People v. Campuhan, 329 SCRA 270 (2000)
(ii) Theft
United States v. Adiao, 38 Phil. 754 (1918)
People v. Dino, 45 O.G. 3446
Aristotel Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No.
160188, 21 June 2007
(iii) Robbery
People v. Lamahang, 61 Phil. 703 (1935)
People v. Salvilla, 184 SCRA 671 (1990)
(iv) Murder
People v. Borinaga, 55 Phil. 433 (1930)
People v. Sy, 94 Phil. 885 (1954)
People v. Trinidad, 169 SCRA 51 (1989)
People v. Ravelo, 202 SCRA 655 (1991)
(v) Homicide
People v. Kalalo, 59 Phil. 715 (1934)

c. Penalties to be imposed in relation to stages of

commission
RPC, art. 6, 7, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56 and 57

3. Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony

a. RPC, art. 8, 115, 136, 141, 186, 306
b. People v. Peralta, 25 SCRA 759 (1968)
c. United States v. Bautista, 6 Phil. 581 (1906)

4. Multiple offenders
a. Recidivism, RPC, art. 14(9)
b. Habituality (Reiteracion), RPC, art. 14(10)
c. Quasi-Recidivism, RPC, art. 160
 Page 9 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

d. Habitual Delinquency, RPC, art. 62(5)

5. Classification of felonies, RPC, art. 7, 9

III. CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY

A. Justifying Circumstances RPC, art. 11

1. Self-defense
People v. Boholst-Caballero, 61 SCRA 180 (1974)
People v. Alconga, 78 Phil. 366 (1947)
United States v. Mack, 8 Phil. 701 (1907)
People v. Sumicad, 56 Phil. 643 (1932)
People v. Genosa, 419 SCRA 537 (2004)
Republic Act No. 9262, sec. 3 & 26

2. Defense of honor
People v. Luague, 62 Phil. 504 (1935)
People v. De la Cruz, 61 Phil. 344 (1935)
People v. Jaurigue, 76 Phil. 174 (1946)

3. Defense of property
People v. Apolinar, 38 OG 2870
United States v. Bumanglag, 14 Phil. 644 (1909)
People v. Narvaez, 121 SCRA 389 (1983)

4. Defense of relative
United States v. Esmedia, 17 Phil. 260 (1910)

5. Avoidance of a greater evil

People v. Norma Hernandez, 55 OG 8465
Ty v. People, 439 SCRA 220 (2004)

6. Fulfillment of duty
People v. Delima, 46 Phil. 738 (1922)
People v. Belbes, 334 SCRA 161 (2000)

7. Lawful order of superior

People v. Beronilla, 96 Phil. 566 (1955)

B. Exempting Circumstances RPC, art. 12

1. Insanity
 Page 10 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

People v. Bonoan, 64 Phil. 87 (1937)

People v. Ambal, 100 SCRA 325 (1980)
People v. Puno, 105 SCRA 151 (1981)
People v. Dungo, 199 SCRA 860 (1991)
People v. Yam-id, 308 SCRA 651 (1999)
People v. Valledor, 383 SCRA 653 (2002)
People v. Belonio, 429 SCRA 579 (2004)

2. Somnabulism
People v. Taneo, 58 Phil. 255 (1933)

3. Minority
Republic Act No. 9344, as amended
RPC, art. 80
Pres. Decree No. 603, as amended
Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law (A.M. No. 02-
1-18-SC)
People v. Doquena, 68 Phil. 580 (1939)
People v. Navarro, 51 OG 4062
Jose v. People, 448 SCRA 116 (2005)
People v. Jacinto, G.R. No. 182239, 16 March 2011
People v. Arpon, G.R. No. 183563, 14 December 2011

4. Accident
People v. Bindoy, 56 Phil. 15 (1931)
U.S. v. Tanedo, 15 Phil. 196 (1910)
Pomoy v. People, 439 SCRA 439 (2004)

5. Irresistible force/uncontrollable fear

United States v. Caballeros, 4 Phil. 350 (1905)
United States v. Exaltacion, 3 Phil. 339 (1904)

6. Insuperable cause
U.S. v. Vicentillo, 19 Phil. 118 (1911)
People v. Bandian, 63 Phil. 530 (1936)

C. Mitigating Circumstances, RPC, art. 13

1. Lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong

People v. Ural, 56 SCRA 138 (1974)

2. Sufficient provocation
People v. Leonor, 305 SCRA 285

3. Immediate vindication of a grave offense

 Page 11 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

United States v. Ampar, 37 Phil. 201 (1917)

People v. Pajares, 210 SCRA 237 (1992)

3. Passion or obfuscation
United States v. Hicks, 14 Phil. 217 (1909)
United States v. De la Cruz, 22 Phil. 429 (1912)

4. Illness
People v. Javier, 311 SCRA 576 (1999)

5. Analogous circumstances
Canta v. People, 353 SCRA 250 (2001)

D. Aggravating Circumstances, RPC, art. 14

1. Insult to public authorities

People v. Rodil, 109 SCRA 308 (1981)

2. Dwelling
People v. Daniel, 86 SCRA 511 (1978)

3. Nighttime/Disguise
People v. Bermas, 309 SCRA 741 (1999)

4. Evident premeditation
United States v. Manalinde, 14 Phil. 77 (1909)

5. Treachery
People v. Sangalang, 58 SCRA 737 (1974)

6. Ignominy
People v. Torrefiel, 45 OG 803
People v. Alfanta, 320 SCRA 357 (1999)

E. Alternative Circumstances, RPC, art. 15

1. Intoxication
People v. Camano, 115 SCRA 688 (1982)

F. Absolutory Causes and Similar Situations

1. Instigation and entrapment

People v. Lua Chu, 56 Phil. 44 (1931)
United States v. Phelps, 16 Phil. 440 (1910)
 Page 12 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

2. Absolutory causes
RPC, art. 6(3), 7, 16, 20, 247, 280, 332, 344

IV. PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE

A. In Grave and Less Grave Felonies, RPC, art. 16

1. Principals, RPC, art. 17

a. Principals by direct participation
United States v. Diris, 26 Phil. 133 (1918)
b. Principals by inducement
People v. Ong Chiat Lay, 60 Phil. 788 (1934)
United States v. Indanan, 24 Phil. 203 (1913)
People v. Kichi Omine, 61 Phil. 609 (1935)
c. Principals by indispensable cooperation
People v. Montealegre, 161 SCRA 700 (1988)
People v. Simbra, 117 SCRA 242 (1982)

2. Accomplices
a. RPC, art. 18
b. People v. Nierra, 96 Phil. 1 (1980)
People v. Doble, 114 SCRA 131 (1982)
People v. Doctolero, 193 SCRA 632 (1991)

3. Accessories
a. RPC, art. 19 and 20
b. People v. Talingdan, 84 SCRA 19 (1978)
Vino v. People, 178 SCRA 626 (1989)
c. Pres. Decree Nos. 1612 and 1829

B. In Light Felonies, RPC, art. 16

V. PENALTIES
RPC, art. 21-88

A. General Principles

1. Constitutional limitations
Const., art. III, sec. 1, 2, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19,
20, 21, & 22
a. No ex post facto law and bill of attainder
b. Due process
c. No cruel and inhuman punishment
 Page 13 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

2. Prospectivity
RPC, art. 1, 21, 22, Civil Code, art. 4

B. Purposes

C. Penalties that may be imposed

RPC, art. 21, 24, 25

1. Death penalty
a. Const., art. III, sec. 19(1)
b. Republic Act No. 9346
c. Republic Act No. 7659
d. People v. Echegaray, 267 SCRA 682

D. Classification RPC, art. 25, 26

E. Duration and Effect RPC, art. 27 to 45

1. Reclusion perpetua v. Life imprisonment

2. Destierro
3. Preventive imprisonment RPC, art. 29
4. Civil interdiction RPC, art. 34
5. Bond to keep the peace RPC, art. 35
6. Subsidiary penalty RPC, art. 39

F. Application

1. Rules for the application of penalties on principals,

accomplices and accessories
RPC, art. 46, 50 to 57

2. Rules for graduating penalties

RPC, art. 61 to 65, 71

3. Complex crimes and Special complex crimes

a. RPC, art. 48
b. Enrile v. Salazar, 186 SCRA 217
c. Napolis v. Court of Appeals, 43 SCRA 301
d. People v. Toling, 62 SCRA 17
e. People v. Salvilla, 184 SCRA 671
f. People v. Valdez, 304 SCRA 611

4. Continued crime and Continuing crime

a. People v. De Leon, 49 Phil 437
 Page 14 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

5. Penalties in special cases

RPC, art. 48, 49, 58, 59, 60, 67, 68, 69

6. Three-fold rule
RPC, art. 70

7. Indeterminate Sentence Law

a. Act 4103, as amended
b. People v. Simon, G.R. No. 930280, 29 July 1994,
234 SCRA 555 (1994)
c. Rosa Lim v. People, G.R. No. 130038, 18
September 2000
d. People v. Gabres, 267 SCRA 581, 595-596 (1997)
e. People v. Lampaza, 319 SCRA 112 (1999)
f. People v. Oyanib, G.R. No. 130634-35, 12 March
2001
g. People v. Ducosin, 59 Phil. 109 (1933)
h. People v. Formigones, 87 Phil. 658 (1950)

G. Execution and Service

1. Probation
a. Pres. Decree No. 968, as amended
b. Francisco v. Court of Appeals, 243 SCRA 384
(1995)
c. Yusi v. Morales, 121 SCRA 854 (1983)
d. Cal v. Court of Appeals, 251 SCRA 523 (1995)
e. Llamado v. Court of Appeals, 174 SCRA 566 (1989)
f. Baclayon v. Mutia, 129 SCRA 148, 154 (1984)
g. Bala v. Martinez, 181 SCRA 459 (1990)
h. Salgado v. Court of Appeals, 189 SCRA 304 (1990)

2. Children in conflict with the law

VI. EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY

RPC, art. 89-99

A. Total Extinction
RPC, art. 89

1. Death of the convict

a. People v. Bayotas, 236 SCRA 239 (1994)
b. People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 190610, 25 April
2012
 Page 15 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

2. Service of the sentence

3. Amnesty
Const., art. VII, sec. 19
People v. Patriarca, G.R. No. 135547, 29 September
2000
People v. Casido, G.R. No. 116512, 7 March 1997
Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, 82 Phil. 642 (1949)

4. Absolute pardon
Const., art. VII, sec. 19
Flora v. Oximana, G.R. No. 19745, 31 January 1964
Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, supra
Pelobello v. Palatino, G.R. No. 48100, 20 June 1941
RPC, art. 23, 344

5. Prescription of the crime

RPC, art. 90 and 91
Act No. 3326

6. Prescription of the penalty

RPC, art. 92 and 93

7. Marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article

344 of the RPC

B. Partial Extinction
RPC, art. 94

1. Conditional pardon
RPC, art. 95
In re. Antonio Infante, G.R. No. 4164, 12 December
1952

2. Commutation of the sentence

RPC, art. 96

3. Good conduct allowances

RPC, art. 97, 98 and 99

VII. CIVIL LIABILITY

RPC, art. 100-113
Chua v. Court of Appeals, 443 SCRA 142 (2004)

A. Persons civilly liable

 Page 16 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

1. Carpio v. Doroja, 180 SCRA 1(1989)

2. Basilio v. Court of Appeals, 328 SCRA 341 (2000)
3. Philippine Rabbit v. Court of Appeals, 427 SCRA 526 (2004)
4. Quinto v. Andres, 453 SCRA 511 (2005)

B. What civil liability includes

1. Heirs of Raymundo Castro v. Bustos, 27 SCRA 327

(1969)

C. Extinction of civil liability

1. People v. Bayotas, 236 SCRA 239 (1994)