CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

TITLE TEN 3. UNLAWFUL TAKING

CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY -means appropriating a thing belonging to

another and placing it under one’s control or
possession
1. CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY

a) Robbery with violence against or

intimidation of persons (294); Unlawful Taking is COMPLETE when in:

b) Robbery in a band (295-96); (i) ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR

INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS-- offender has already the
c) Attempted and Frustrated robbery with possession of the thing even if he has no opportunity to
homicide (297); dispose of it.
d) Execution of deeds by means of violence or (ii) ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON THINGS -- The
intimidation (298); thing must be brought outside the building for
e) Robbery by the use of force upon things consummated robbery to be committed
(299-303);

f) Possession of picklocks or similar tools

4. PERSONAL PROPERTY
(304-5);
-because if real property is occupied or real right
g) Brigandage (306-7);
is usurped by means of violence against or intimidation
h) Theft (308-11); of persons, the crime is usurpation under Art 312.

i) Usurpation (312); -Classification under the Civil Code does not

apply. The TEST is whether or the the object is
j) Altering boundaries or landmarks (313);
susceptible of appropriation and transportation.
k) Culpable insolvency (314);
5. BELONGING TO ANOTHER
l) Swindling and other deceits (315-8);
-if it is the Owner who forcibly takes the
m) Chattel mortgage (319); personalty from its lawful possessor, the crime is
estafa under Art. 316(3) since the former cannot
n) Arson and other crimes involving destruction commit robbery on his own property even if he sues
(320) and
violence or intimidation.
o) Malicious mischief (327-23)

6. INTENT TO GAIN or ANIMUS LUCRANDI

CHAPTER ONE
Intent to gain is an internal state of mind. So how
ROBBERY IN GENERAL can you prove intent to gain? The law presumes there
is intent to gain the moment there is taking of the
personal property of another person. Intent to gain is
ARTICLE 293 presumed by law

WHO ARE GUILTY OF ROBBERY

Art. 293. Who are guilty of robbery. - Any person who, intent
to gain, shall take any personal property belonging to
another , by means of violence against or intimidation of any
person, or using force upon anything, shall be guilty.
1. ROBBERY
- it is the taking of personal property belonging to
another, with intent to gain, by means of violence
against, or intimidation of any person, or using force
upon anything.
2. ELEMENTS OF ROBBERY IN GENERAL [ PUTI-VF]
a) That property be PERSONAL PROPERTY
(Bienes muebles) belonging to another;
-If accused used force and violence to take the
property believing it was his property, but in reality
it was not his property, can he be liable for robbery?
No. There being no intent to gain, he cannot be
held liable for robbery, even if the accused used
violence against or intimidation of person, or force
upon things.
-if the accused used force and violence to take from
another person a property which turned out to be
his own property, can he be liable for robbery?
No. He cannot be held liable for robbery. It is an
impossible crime.

b) That there is UNLAWFUL TAKING 7. WHEN ROBBERY OR THEFT IS CONSUMMATED

(Apoderamiento or asportacion) of that
property; When the offender takes complete control of the
property, the crime is consummated.
c) That the taking must be with INTENT to gin
(Animus lucrandi); and There is complete control when the offender has
acquired and substituted his will over the property. It
d) That there is VIOLENCE against or is not necessary that the offender has taken away the
intimidation of any person or FORCE used property or used the same.
upon things.
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 1
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
8. NO FRUSTRATED ROBBERY
It does not have a frustrated stage because the
element of unlawful taking is deemed complete from
the moment the offended gains possession of the thing,
even if he has no opportunity to dispose of the same.
9. ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION OF
PERSONS vs ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON THINGS
ROBBERY WITH ROBBERY WITH FORCE
VIOLENCE OR UPON THINGS
INTIMIDATION OF
PERSONS
-deemed more serious -based on the value of the
than thing taken
-based on the gravity of
the violence or
intimidation
-When both kinds of robbery are present, the former
shall take precedence over the latter for it is more
serious, UNLESS the penalty for robbery
10. MOTOR VEHICLE
When the property taken is a motor vehicle, the
crime committed is carnapping under RA 10883.
11. CATTLE
When the property taken is large cattle, the
crime committed is cattle rustling.
Section One. -- Robbery with violence against or
intimidation of persons
ARTICLE 294
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR
INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS
Art 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons -- Penalties. -- Any person guilty of robbery with the
use of violence against or intimidation of any person shall
suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, when by
reason or on occasion of robbery, the crime of homicide shall
have been committed; or when the robbery shall have been
accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or arson.
2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period
to reclusion perpetua, when or if by reason or on occasion of
such robbery, any of the physical injuries penalized in
subdivision 1 of Article 263 shall have been inflicted.
3. The penalty of reclusion temporal, when by reason or
on occasion of the robbery, any of the physical injuries
penalized in subdivision 2 of the article mentioned in the next
preceding paragraph, shall have been inflicted.
4. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to
reclusion temporal in its medium period, if the violence or
intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery shall
have been carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the
commission of the crime, or when in the course of its
execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon any person
not responsible for its commission any of the physical injuries
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
covered by subdivisions 3 and 4 of said Article 263.
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum
period to prision mayor in its medium period of other cases.
1. PUNISHABLE ACTS
1.) When by reason or on occasion of the
robbery, the crime of homicide is committed.
2.) When robbery is accompanied by rape
or intentional mutilation or arson.
3.) When by reason or on occasion of such
robbery, any of the physical injuries resulting in
insanity, imbecility, impotency or blindness is
inflicted.
4.) When by reason or on occasion of
robbery, any of the physical injuries resulting in the
loss of the use of speech or the power to hear or to
smell, or the loss of an eye, a hand, foot, an arm, or
a leg or the loss of the use of any such member or
incapacity to go to work in which the injured person
is thereto habitually engaged is inflicted.
5.) If violence or intimidation employed in
the commission of the robbery is carried to a degree
clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime
6.) When in the course of its execution,
the offender shall have inflicted upon any person not
responsible for the commission of the robbery any of
the physical injuries in consequence of which the
person injured becomes deformed or loses any other
member of his body or loses the use thereof or
becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of
the work in which he is habitually engaged for more
than 90 days or the person injured becomes ill or
incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days
7.) If violence employed by the offender
does not cause any of the serious physical injuries
defined in Article 263, or if the offender employs
intimidation only.
2. PAR 1-5 ARE SINGLE, SPECIAL AND INDIVISIBLE
FELONIES
-Paragraph 1-5 of Article 294 are single, special
and indivisible felonies, not complex crimes as defined
under Art 48 of the RPC.
The penalties imposed do not take into account
the value of the personal property taken, but the
gravity of the effect or consequence of the violence or
intimidation.
3. THREE WAYS OF COMMITTING ROBBERY
a) Robbery with violence against any person;
b) Robbery with intimidation of any person;
c) Robbery with force upon things
4. SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIMES [FIVE CLASSES OF
ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION
OF PERSONS]
2
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
a) Robbery with Homicide or Robo con
Homicidio
-when by reason or on occasion of a robbery with
the use of violence against or intimidation of persons,
homicide is also committed.
-The original criminal design of the malefactor is
to commit robbery, with homicide perpetrated on the
occasion or by reason of the robbery.
ELEMENTS OF ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE
(a) The taking of personal property with the
use of violence or intimidation against a person;
(b) The property thus take belongs to another;
(c) The taking is characterized by intent to gain
or animus lucrandi; and
(d) On the occasion of the robbery or by
reason thereof, the crime of homicide, which is
therein used in a generic sense, was committed.
WHEN KILLING SHOULD TAKE PLACE
Killing may occur before, during or after the
commission of the robbery. What is essential is that
there was a direct link, an intimate connection
between the two felonies, which is the prospect of
monetary gain which impelled the malefactors to place
filthy lucre above the value of human life.
WHO SHOULD BE THE KILLER
-It is not necessary to identify who among the
robbers inflicted the mortal wound.
Individuals who took part as principals in the
robbery are liable as principals in the special complex
crime of robbery with homicide.
-When conspiracy is established, there is no more
need to identify the triggerman.
-When there is conspiracy, all of the conspirators
are equally liable for the special complex crime of
robbery with homicide, including those who did not
participate in the killing.
WHO SHOULD BE KILLED?
-Even an innocent bystander may be a victim of
robbery with homicide
-It is not necessary that the victim of robbery is
the victim of homicide
-When several deaths and physical injuries were
committed by reason or on occasion of robbery, the
crime is robbery with homicide.
WHAT SHOULD THE INFORMATION CONTAIN
The information should charge each element of
the complex offense with the same precision as if the
two constituent offenses were the subject of separate
prosecutions.
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
The following elements must be proved:
(1) The taking of personal property is committed
with violence or intimidation against persons;
(2) The property taken belongs to another;
(3) The taking is done with animo lucrandi; and
(4) By reason of the robbery or on the occasion
thereof, homicide is committed.
TREACHERY
“Treachery cannot likewise serve to aggravate
the crime inasmuch as it only applies to crimes against
persons.” (People vs Lobitania)
BY A BAND
The indictable offense is the special complex
crime of robbery with homicide and band is only a
generic aggravating circumstance, which may be offset
by mitigating circumstances.
DWELLING
Although dwelling is considered as inherent in
crimes which can be only committed in the abode of
the victim, such as trespass to dwelling and robbery in
an inhabited house, it is aggravating in robbery with
homicide because the author thereof could have
accomplished the heinous deed of snuffing out the
victim’s life without having to violate his domicile.
NO ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE AND RAPE (2 VIEWS)
IIf both homicide and rape are present, the crime
is robber with homicide; the rape however is NOT
aggravating because it is not an aggravating
circumstance under Art 14.
There is no law that provides that the additional
rape or homicide should be considered as aggravating
circumstances. Article 14 is an exclusive list.
NO ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE THROUGH RECKLESS
IMPRUDENCE OR SIMPLE NEGLIGENCE
NO ROBBERY WITH FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE
-if no death supervenes, the accused will be liable
for the separate crimes of robbery and frustrated
homicide
NO ROBBERY WITH MULTIPLE HOMICIDE
-additional killings should be appreciated as an
additional aggravating circumstance, the reason being
that there will obtain an anomalous situation where,
from the standpoint of the gravity of the offense,
robbery with one killing would be on the same as
robbery with multiple killing.
NO ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE AND LESS SERIOUS
PHYSICAL INJURIES
3
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
-In robbery with homicide, the physical injuries
committed during or on the occasion of the crime, are
absorbed therein and the offense is designated as such
regardless of the number of homicides and physical
injuries committed.
NO ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE AND USE OF
UNLICENSED FIREARM
-the use of an unlicensed firearm in the
commission of the crime of robbery with homicide
merely aggravates the crime. It does not constitute a
separate crime.
ARTICLE 294 vs ARTICLE 267
In kidnapping and serious illegal detention with
homicide, the victim of the kidnapping and serious
illegal detention must be the victim in the said killing
to amount to kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
But in case of robbery with homicide, regardless of
who the offended party may be, whether the offended
party in robbery is different from the offended party in
the killing it is still robbery with homicide.
JUDGE P QUESTIONS
1. If the sequence is: Rape, Homicide, then Robbery, what
crimes are committed?
ANS. (a) If they raped, then killed the girl, then robbed the
place with force upon things, the crimes are (1) RAPE WITH
HOMICIDE, and (2) ROBBERY.
(b) If they raped, then killed the girl and took jewelry or other
valuables from her person (or without force upon things), the
crimes are (1) RAPE WITH HOMICIDE, and (2) THEFT because
the dead can no longer be intimidated.
-Accused should only be convicted of theft when he took
the personal properties of the victim, as the element of
violence and intimidation was no longer present.
(c ) If they robbed, then raped, then killed her, the crime is
robbery with homicide; rape is absorbed. The same if they
raped, robbed, then killed her as she was still alivewhen they
committed the robbery. Homicide takes precedence over rape
in the order of priority under Article 294.
PG NOTES
Q. So let us say, A entered the house of B in order to
commit robbery. He took the valuables therein and after
taking the jewelries suddenly the box of jewelries fell so X
was awaken. When A saw that X was awaken, A shot X. X
died. What crime is committed?
A: Robbery with homicide because by reason or on occasion
of robbery, homicide was committed.
Q: What if in the same problem, when X was awaken, the
robber, A, shot X. The wife was also awaken and so the wife
started shouting so A also shot the wife.The wife also died.
What crime/s is committed?
A: Two persons are killed still, the crime committed is still a
single indivisible offense of robbery with homicide. All the
killings are merged into a composite intergraded whole that
is a single indivisible offense of robbery with homicide.
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
Q: What if let us say, in the same problem, so A went to the
house of X and took the jewelries. He was on his way out
when he bumped the door and so the owner of the house
was awaken. So A went down and saw the back of the
robber. And so he chased the robber. In the garden, A tried
to shoot the owner of the house and so A jumped on him
and they struggled for the possession of the gun. In the
course of struggle for the possession of the gun, the gun
fired hitting a ballot vendor passing by. The ballot vendor
died. What crime/s is committed?
A: The crime committed is still the single indivisible offense
of robber with homicide. Since it is a special complex crime,
even if the victim of the robbery is different from the victim
of the homicide, it is still robbery with homicide. Even if it is
only accidental killing it is still robbery with homicide so long
as the killing is by reason or on occasion of the said robbery.
Q. So what if, A, B, and C entered the house of X in order
to commit robbery. They have already taken the
valuables when the owner of the house was awaken. It
was only A who saw the owner of the house was awaken
and so A shot X and killed him. Are they all liable for
robbery with homicide or only A who shot X?
A: All of them are criminally liable for the crime of robbery
with homicide. Under Article 8, that in case of an express
or direct conspiracy, the conspirators are liable only for
the crime agreed upon. The crime agreed is to commit
robbery but how come all of them are liable for homicide?
Because it falls under the exception that when the
resulting felony is a special complex crime because you
cannot separate or divide a special complex crime.
Therefore, even if it was only A who killed the victim,
even if their agreement is only to commit robbery, because
homicide or the killing was committed by reason or on
occasion of the said robbery, all of them are criminally
liable for the crime of robbery with homicide.
The only exception to the exception is when B and C
performed acts in order to prevent A from committing the
homicide.
PEOPLE VS CABBAB
A and B versus X, Y and Z. A and B committed robbery
and upon leaving the said place, X and Y saw A and B and
shot them and made gun fires. Z, a police officer dove into
the canal in order to prevent himself from being killed. A
and B went directly to X and Y and killed them both. And
thereafter, A and B took the winnings.
Based on the circumstances or facts the fiscal filed
the following cases before the RTC, robbery, double
murder, and attempted murder, robbery because of the
taking of the winnings, double murder for the death of X
and Y and attempted murder as to the police officer who
dove into the canal.
SC ruled that the only crime committed is the single
indivisible crime of robbery with homicide. Because all the
acts are considered absorbed in the crime of robbery with
homicide despite the fact that two persons were killed,
despite the fact that one person was greatly injured, all
these circumstances are merged into a composite
integrated whole that is single indivisible offense of
robbery with homicide.
b) ROBBERY WITH RAPE
-The intent to rob must precede the rape. In
robbery with rape, the intention of felony is to rob and
the felony is accompanied by rape
4
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
ELEMENTS OF ROBBERY WITH RAPE
-prosecution must prove the following elements:
(1) The taking of personal property is committed
with violence or intimidation against persons;
(2) The property taken belongs to another;
(3) The taking is done with animo lucrandi; and
(4) The robbery is accompanied by rape.
ART 294(2) AND 266-A
For a conviction of the crime of robbery with rape
to stand,it must be shown that the rape was committed
by reason or on occasion of a robbery and not the other
way around.
Defendant was charged with robbery with rape
under Article 294(2). Therefore, he should be
convicted under Art 294. He cannot be convicted of a
rape. He was charged with a crime against property,
ergo he cannot be charged with crime against chastity
(Now crime against persons). (People vs Mabag)
MULTIPLE RAPE
The crime is robbery with rape although two
rapes were committed.
There is no crime of robbery with multiple
homicide or robbery with multiple counts of rape under
the RPC. Although there be more than one instance of
homicide/murder or rape, they shall be considered as
embraced under one special complex crime of either
robbery with homicide or robbery with rape.
Neither shall the additional rape/s or homicide/s
be considered aggravating.
ROBBERY WITH RAPE WITH LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURIES
Robbery with rape must be deemed to absorb the
simple robbery.
BY A BAND
The offense is only the special complex crime of
robbery with rape. Cuadrilla is merely a generic
aggravating circumstance.
SEPARATE CRIMES OF RAPE AND ROBBERY
(i) If the principal intent is to commit rape and
after consummating the rape, an opportunity to
commit robbery presented itself, the accused shall be
liable for separate crimes of rape and robbery.
PG Notes
People v. Suyu
Two persons, boyfriend and girlfriend, they were having
snack and saw the shadow of 3 men. And these 3 men were
pushing the truck trying to open the door. They took their
valuables and the boyfriend hurriedly left the girlfriend
allegedly to ask help to the police. And so the girlfriend was
alone with the three men and they dragged her into a nipa hut
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
and there she was raped by the mastermind, Suyu. Not only
she was raped by Suyu but also Cainglet while, the other two
was outside serving as lookouts. So the said woman, Clarissa,
was raped by two persons and she was raped three times.
Suyu and Cainglet raped her by carnal knowledge. Not only
that, Cainglet also inserted two fingers to her genitals
therefore, he also committed rape by sexual assault. What
crimes are committed by the 4 persons? What crime/s they
should be criminally liable of?
Supreme Court said, they are all liable for the single
indivisible offense of Robbery with Rape. Regardless of the
fact that two persons raped the victim, regardless of the
fact that the victim was raped 3 times, regardless of the fact
that there is two nature of rape committed against the victim
(rape by carnal knowledge and rape by sexual assault), still
the crime committed is the single indivisible offense of
robbery with rape.
There are four conspirators but not all of them raped
the victim. Yet they are all liable for robbery with rape
because the two lookouts did not perform acts in order to
prevent the consummation of the said rape. So since it is a
special complex crime and a single indivisible offense all the
other rapes are merged into a composite integrated whole
that is robbery with rape.
c) ROBBERY WITH ARSON
-It is essential that the robbery precedes the
arson. There must be an intent to commit robbery and
no killing, rape, or intentional mutilation should be
committed in the course of the robbery, or else, arson
will only be considered an aggravating circumstance of
the crime actually committed.
In order to have robbery with arson, there must
be violence and intimidation upon persons first and
thereafter, the premises are burned and there is no
killing, rape or mutilation.
If robbery is with force upon things and thereafter
the house was burned to cover up the crime, two
crimes are committed: ROBBERY and ARSON because
robbery with arson is under Art 294 whereas Art 299 is
robbery with force upon things and it does not include
arson.
d) ROBBERY WITH SERIOUS PHYSICAL
INJURIES
-Under the 4th paragraph clause A, the violence
need not result in Serious Physical injuries. It only
requires that the violence be unnecessary for the
commission of the crime.
- It should be serious physical injuries, otherwise
it will be absorbed in the robbery.
-If the less serious or slight physical injuries were
committed after the robbery was consummated, that
would constitute a separate offense.
e) SIMPLE ROBBERY
-When only slight physical injuries or less serious
physical injuries were inflicted in the crime of robbery,
the accused shall be liable for simple robbery.
-When robbery is characterized by intimidation,
though committed in an inhabited house, the crime is
simple robbery.
INTIMIDATION
-unlawful coercion; extortion;duress; putting in
fear
5
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

waiting shed, A and B divided the things they took from X.

So A told B, this is your share. B said, why is my share
5. THREATS TO EXTORT MONEY vs ROBBERY smaller than your share?! And so B got and he shot A. A
THROUGH INTIMIDATION died. What is the crime committed?

THREATS TO EXTORT ROBBERY THROUGH A: The crime committed is robbery with homicide because
MONEY INTIMIDATION even if it was also an offender who was killed, the killing
took place by reason of the said robbery.
As to the nature of intimidation

Intimidation is conditional Intimidation is actual and

or future immediate Q: So what if in the same problem, so A and B were already
dividing the things they took and B said, wait why is my
As to how intimidation is done share so small? B got mad shot A but A did not die. A
suffered serious physical injuries. What crime is
Intimidation may be Intimidation is personal committed?
through an intermediary
A: The crime committed is robbery with serious physical
As to the nature of intimidation injuries.

Intimidation may refer to Intimidation is directed

person, honor or property only to the person of the Q: What if in the same problem, A were dividing the things
of the offended party or victim. and B said, why is my share so small compared to your
his family. share? B got mad and what he did was took an ice pick from
his pocket and stab A in his face and placed the ice pick in
As to the culprit’s gain A’s face. A suffered serious physical injuries and deformity
in his face. It caused physical ugliness to A therefore there
The gain of the culprit is The gain of the culprit is
is deformity. What crime/s is committed?
not immediate immediate
A: This time the crime committed by B is not the single
indivisible crime of robbery with serious physical injuries but
two crimes, Robbery and Serious physical injuries under
6. ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE vs GRAVE COERCION
paragraph 3 of Article 263 because of the deformity. Why?
ROBBERY WITH GRAVE COERCION Because under paragraph 4 of Article 294, when the serious
VIOLENCE physical injury that resulted is a deformity or the loss of any
of the member of his body, the law requires that the said
In both crimes, there is violence used by the offender physical injury or deformity must be inflicted because of the
execution of a robbery and to a person not responsible to the
With intent to gain No intent to gain commission of the crime of robbery. Here, the deformity was
inflicted after the robbery, not before. Not only that. The
deformity was inflicted on A, the person responsible for the
commission of the robbery.
7. ROBBERY vs BRIBERY
If the serious physical injuries inflicted resulted to a
ROBBERY BRIBERY deformity or to a loss of any of the member of his body or loss
of the use of any such member or incapacity to go to work in
As to how committed which the injured person is thereto habitually engaged for
more than 90 days, under paragraph 3 of Article 263, it is
It is robbery when the It is bribery when the
required that in order to amount to a single indivisible offense
victim did not commit a victim has committed a
the said deformity or serious physical injury must be
crime and he is crime and gives money or inflicted in the course of the execution of the robbery and to
intimidated with arrest gift to avoid arrest or a person not responsible to the commission of the robbery.
and/or prosecution to prosecution Otherwise, it will bring about a separate and distinct crime.
deprive him of his
personal property

As to the loss of property ARTICLE 295

The victim is deprived of He parts with his money, ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES COMMITTED IN AN
his money, property by in a sense, voluntarily. UNINHABITED PLACE AND BY A BAND OR WITH THE
force or intimidation USE OF FIREARM ON A STREET, ROAD OR ALLEY

Art 295. Robbery with physical injuries, committed in an

8. SNATCHING
Robbery if the snatcher employed force force
more than necessary upon the person whose valuables
were snatched; THEFT is no added force in taking is
employed except that necessary to effect the
snatching.
PG Notes
Q: So let say A and B saw X walking. It was pay day and so A
and B announced a holdup. They were both armed with
guns and so what X did since they were both armed with
guns, he gave the bag. By reason thereof, A and B already
left the place. While A and B was waiting for a ride in a
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
uninhabited place and by a band, or with the use of firearm
on a street, road or alley. - If the offenses mentioned in
subdivisions three, four, and five of the next preceding article
shall have been in an uninhabited place or by an band or by
attacking a moving train, street car, motor vehicle or airship,
or by entering the passengers’ compartments in a train or, in
any manner, taking the passengers thereof by surprise in the
respective conveyances, or on a street, road, highways, or
alleys, and the intimidation is made with the use of a firearm,
the offender shall be punished by the maximum period of the
proper penalties.
In the same cases, the penalty next higher in degree
shall be imposed upon the leader of the band.
1. QUALIFIED ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR
INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS
6
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

a) In an uninhabited place (despoblado);

b) By a band (en cuadrilla); 2. OUTLINE

c) By attacking a moving train, street car,
motor vehicle, or airship;
d) By entering the passengers’ compartments
in a train, or in any manner taking the
passengers by surprise in their respective
conveyances; or
e) On a street, Road, highways, or alley, and
the intimidation is made with the use of
firearms, the offender shall be punished by
the maximum period or the proper penalties
prescribed in Art 294.
2. APPLIES ONLY TO PAR 3,4 AND 5 OF ARTICLE 294
If robbery with homicide is committed by a band,
the indictable offense would still be denominated as
“robbery with homicide” but the element of band
would be appreciated as an ordinary aggravating
circumstance.
a) When at least four armed malefactors take
part in the commission of a robbery, it is
deemed committed by a band.
b) When any of the arms used in the
commission of robbery is not licensed, the
penalty upon all malefactors shall be the
maximum of the corresponding penalty
provided by law without prejudice to the
criminal liability for illegal possession of
firearms.
c) Any member of a band who was present at
the commission of a robbery by the band,
shall be punished as principal of any assaults
committed by the band, unless it be shown
that he attempted to prevent the same.
3. WHEN BAND IS GENERIC AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE AND WHEN IT IS A SPECIAL
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE

Band is a generic aggravating circumstance in

robbery with homicide or robbery with rape,
3. PROOF OF CONSPIRACY UNDER ART 294 AND 296
intentional mutilation or with physical injuries,
ROBBERY WITH ROBBERY BY A BAND resulting in insanity, impotency and blindness.
VIOLENCE AGAINST OR
(Art 296) If band is present in the par 3, 4 and 5, it is a
INTIMIDATION OF
qualifying or inherent circumstance which raises the
PERSONS
penalty to the maximum period and cannot be offset
(Art 296) by any generic mitigating circumstance.

Proof is necessary Proof of conspiracy

where several accused, is not required so as to
4. USE OF UNLICENSED FIREARM
not constituting a band, hold all members of the
are charged with the band liable for any of the -the special aggravating circumstance of “use of
offense of robbery with assaults committed on the unlicensed firearm” is applicable only to cases of
homicide. occasion of the robbery robbery committed by a band, which fall within the
scope of and are punishable under Art 295.
Under Art 294, Under Art 296, the
robbery is committed by conspiracy is already
several persons not presumed from the
constituting a band. existence of a band LEGAL BASIS ON WHY IT IS NOT A SEPARATE CRIME

(1) PD 1866 penalizes illegal possession of firearm

ARTICLE 296
DEFINITION OF A BAND AND PENALTY INCURRED BY
THE MEMBERS THEREOF
Art 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred by the
members thereof. -- When more than three armed
malefactors take part in the commission of robbery, it shall be
deemed to have been committed by a band. When any of the
arms used in the commission of the offense be an unlicensed
firearm, the penalty to be imposed upon all the malefactors
shall be the maximum of the corresponding penalty provided
by law, without prejudice tot he criminal liability for illegal
possession of such unlicensed firearm.
Any member of a band who is present at the commission
of robbery by the band, shall be punished as principal of any
of the assaults committed by the band, unless it be shown
that he attempted to prevent the same.
1. BAND
When more than three armed malefactors take
part in the commission of robbery, it shall be deemed
to have been committed by a band.
-there should be at least 4 armed persons who
took part in the commission of robbery.
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
in addition to criminal liability for robbery by a band.
(2) Under RA No. 8294, the use of unlawful
firearms in murder and homicide is considered not as a
separate crime but merely a special aggravating
circumstance.
(3) However, under Sec 29 of RA No. 10591,
(approved on May 29, 2013), the use of loose firearm,
when inherent in the commission of a crime punishable
under the RPC or other special laws, shall now be
considered as an aggravating circumstance.
Use of unlicensed firearm by a band in the
commission of robbery with physical injuries cannot be
offset by a generic mitigating circumstance.
5. REQUISITES FOR LIABILITY FOR THE ACTS OF
OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BAND
a) That he was a member of the band;
b) That he was present at the commission of a
robbery by that band
c) That the other members of that band
committed an assault; and
7
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
d) That he did not attempt to prevent the
assault.
6. BASIS OF PENALTY IS THE VALUE OF THE
PROPERTY TAKEN
PG NOTES
Q: A, in order to rob the house made an opening in the
roof, sufficient for him to enter. So he used a rope in going
down and thereafter he took the valuables and then left.
What crime is committed?
A: Robbery by use of force upon things. A made an opening
and he was able to enter fully.
Q: What if he made an entry, let down a rope with a hook
and used it in taking the valuable?
A: The crime committed only is theft with aggravating
circumstance of the breaking of the roof. His body did not
enter the premises.
Q: A and B are brothers, living in the same house and in the
same room but have different cabinets where each of the
cabinets have locks. One time brother A was in need of money
and wanted to borrow money from brother B, but brother B
was out of the house. So what brother A did was that he
forcibly opened the cabinet of brother B and took the
expensive jewelries of brother B and appropriated the
jewelry? What are the crimes committed? Is Brother A only
liable civilly?
A: A is guilty of robbery with use of force upon things. He is an
insider, and he used force to break open the cabinet of B. He
did not commit theft. Since the crime committed is robbery,
brother A is criminally liable and civilly liable. Because under
Article 332, it is only on cases of theft, swindling, estafa, and
malicious mischief, wherein there’s no criminal liability but
only civil liability in case of relatives living together.
Q: In the same problem, what if A was in need of money, he
saw the expensive watch of B on top of the table and sold the
watch. What crime was committed?
A: A committed the crime of theft since there is no breaking
or forcibly opening the receptacle. Under Art 332, he is only
liable for civil liability. They are free from criminal liability.
ARTICLE 297
ATTEMPTED AND FRUSTRATED ROBBERY COMMITTED
UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES
Art 297. Attempted and frustrated robbery committed under
certain circumstances. -- When by reason or on occasion of an
attempted or frustrated robbery a homicide is committed,
the person guilty of such offenses shall be punished by
reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion
perpetua, unless the homicide committed shall deserve a
higher penalty under the provisions of this Code.
1. IF HOMICIDE IS NOT CONSUMMATED, the crime of
robbery and attempted or frustrated homicide
a) May be complexed (Art 48)
b) Considered as separate crimes; or
c) Considered as one crime, one absorbing the
other
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
2. ATTEMPTED OR FRUSTRATED ROBBERY WITH
SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES
-When the offense committed is attempted or
frustrated robbery with serious physical injuries, Art 48
is applicable, since the felony would fall neither under
Art 294 which covers consummated robbery with
homicide nor under Art 297 which covers attempted or
frustrated robbery with homicide.
3. IF IN THE COURSE OF THE ATTEMPTED ROBBERY,
PARRICIDE, MURDER, OR INFANTICIDE WAS
COMMITTED, WHAT WILL BE THE PROPER CHARGE?
If the robber is attempted and the killing is in
the character of parricide, murder or infanticide, there
will be two separate crimes. The killing must not be
one punished with a higher penalty in order to fall
under Article 297.
ARTICLE 298
EXECUTION OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF VIOLENCE OR
INTIMIDATION
Art 298. Execution of deeds by means of violence or
intimidation. -- Any person who, with intent to defraud
another, by means of violence or intimidation, shall compel
him to sign, execute, or deliver any public instrument or
document, shall be held guilty of robbery and punished by the
penalties respectively prescribed in this Chapter.
1. ELEMENTS OF EXECUTION OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF
VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION
a) That the offender has intent to defraud
another;
b) That the offender compels him to sign,
execute, or deliver any public instrument or
document;
c) That the compulsion is by means of violence
or intimidation.
2. NOT APPLICABLE WHEN DOCUMENT IS VOID
Section Two: Robbery With the Use of Force Upon
Things
ARTICLE 299
ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE/PUBLIC
BUILDING OR EDIFICE DEVOTED TO WORSHIP
Art. 299. Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or
edifice devoted to worship.— Any armed person who shall
commit robbery in an inhabited house or public building or
edifice devoted to religious worship, shall be punished
by reclusion temporal, if the value of the property taken shall
exceed Fifty thousand pesos (₱50,000), and if—
(a) The malefactors shall enter the house or building in
which the robbery was committed, by any of the following
means:
1. Through an opening not intended for entrance or
egress.
8
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
2. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or breaking any
door or window.
3. By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools.
4. By using any fictitious name or pretending the
exercise of public authority.
Or if—
(b) The robbery be committed under any of the
following circumstances:
1. By the breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any
other kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle.
2. By taking such furniture or objects away to be broken
or forced upon outside the place of the robbery.
When the offenders do not carry arms, and the value of
the property taken exceeds Fifty thousand pesos (₱50,000),
the penalty next lower in degree shall be imposed.
The same rule shall be applied when the offenders are
armed, but the value of the property taken does not exceed
Fifty thousand pesos (₱50,000).
When said offenders do not carry arms and the value of
the property taken does not exceed Fifty thousand pesos
(₱50,000), they shall suffer the penalty prescribed in the two
(2) next preceding paragraphs, in its minimum period.
If the robbery be committed in one of the dependencies
of an inhabited house, public building, or building dedicated
to religious worship, the penalties next lower in degree than
those prescribed in this article shall be imposed.
1. ELEMENTS (SUBDIVISION A)
a) The offender entered:
i. An inhabited house;
ii. A public building; or
iii. An edifice devoted to religious worship;
b) The entrance was effected by any of the
following means:
i. Through an opening not intended for
entrance or egress;
ii. By breaking any wall, roof, floor, door,
or window;
iii. By using false keys, picklocks or similar
tools;
iv. By using any fictitious name or
pretending the exercise of public
authority; and
c) That once inside the building, the offender
took personal property belonging to another
with intent to gain.
2. ACCUSED SHOULD ENTER THE BUILDING (casa
habitada o lugar no habitado o edificio)
If the culprit did not enter the building, there
would be no robbery with force upon things, only theft.
The wall broken must be an outside wall, not a
wall between rooms in a house or building, because the
breaking of a wall must be for the purpose of entering.
The whole body of the culprit must be inside
the house or building to constitute entering.
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
3. FALSE KEYS
It includes genuine keys stolen from the owner or
any keys other than those intended by the owner for
use in the lock forcibly opened by the offender.
4. ELEMENTS (SUBDIVISION B)
a) The offender is inside a dwelling house,
public building or edifice devoted to
religious worship, regardless of the
circumstances under which he entered it;
and
b) The offender takes personal property
belonging to another with intent to gain
under any of the following circumstances:
i. By the breaking of internal doors,
wardrobes, chests, or any other kind of
sealed furniture of receptacle; or
ii. By taking such furniture or objects
away to be broken open outside the
place of the robbery.
5. THREE PLACES COVERED
Outside of the three situations, there will only be
THEFT.
If committed in places other than those
mentioned in Art 299, the circumstances under Art 302
govern.
6. WHEN THE OFFENDER IS A FAMILY MEMBER OR
SERVANT WHO BROKE A RECEPTACLE INSIDE TO TAKE
PROPERTY OF HIS HOUSEMATE, WHAT CRIME IS
COMMITTED?
The crime is ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON THINGS,
not qualified theft because what qualifies the taking is
the force upon things. Robbery is committed not only
by strangers but also by household members. If he did
not break anything, then the crime is QUALIFIED THEFT,
since the abuse of confidence is the essential element.
Both robbery and qualified theft can be
committed by family members or servant.
7. UNLAWFUL ENTRY AND DWELLING
The aggravating circumstances of unlawful entry
through the window and dwelling are absorbed in the
crime of robbery under Art 299.
ARTICLE 300
ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE AND BY A BAND
Article 300. Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a band. --
The robbery mentioned in the next preceding article, if
committed in an uninhabited place and by a band, shall be
punished by the maximum period of the penalty provided
therefor.
1. UNINHABITED PLACE
One where there are no houses at all, a place at a
considerable distance from the town, or where the
9
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

houses are scattered at a great distance from each correccional in its medium and maximum periods provided
other. that any of the following circumstances is present:

1. If the entrance has been effected through any

opening not intended for entrance or egress.

2. If any wall, roof, floor or outside door or window has

ARTICLE 301 been broken.

3. If the entrance has been effected through the use of

WHAT IS AN INHABITED HOUSE, PUBLIC BUILDING OR
false keys, picklocks or other similar tools.
BUILDING DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS WORSHIP AND
THEIR DEPENDENCIES 4. If any door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or closed
furniture or receptacle has been broken.
Art 301. What is an inhabited house, public building, or
building dedicated to religious worship and their 5. If any closed or sealed receptacle, as mentioned in
dependencies. -- Inhabited house means any shelter, ship, or the preceding paragraph, has been removed, even if the same
vessel constituting the dwelling of one or more persons, even be broken open elsewhere.
though the inhabitants thereof shall temporarily be absent
therefrom when the robbery is committed.

All interior courts, corrals, warehouses, granaries,
barns, coach-houses, stables, or other departments, or
inclosed places contiguous to the building or edifice, having
an interior entrance connected therewith and which form part
of the while, shall be deemed dependencies of an inhabited
house, public building, or building dedicated to religious
worship.
Orchards and other lands used for cultivation or
production are not included in the terms of the next
preceding paragraph, even if closed, contiguous to the
building, and having direct connection therewith.
The term “public building” includes every building
owned by the Government or belonging to a private person
but used or rented by the Government, although temporarily
unoccupied by the same.
1. INHABITED HOUSE
It means any shelter, ship, or vessel constituting
the dwelling of one or more persons, even though the
inhabitants thereof shall temporarily be absent
therefrom when the robbery is committed.
When the value of the property taken does not exceed
Fifty thousand pesos (₱50,000), the penalty next lower in
degree shall be imposed.
In the cases specified in Articles 294, 295, 297, 299, 300,
and 302 of this Code, when the property taken is mail matter
or large cattle, the offender shall suffer the penalties next
higher in degree than those provided in said articles.”
1. ELEMENTS (E-ORUB-RT)
a) That the offender ENTERED an uninhabited
place, or a building which was not a dwelling
house, not a public building, or not an
edifice devoted to religious worship;
b) That any of the following circumstances was
present:
i. The entrance was effected through an
OPENING not intended for entrance or
egress;
ii. A wall, roof, floor, or outside door or
window was BROKEN;

iii. The entrance was effected through the

2. DEPENDENCIES OF AN INHABITED HOUSE, PUBLIC
USE of false keys, picklocks, or other
BUILDING OR BUILDING DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS
similar tools;
WORSHIP
iv. A door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed
All interior courts, corrals, warehouses, granaries,
or closed furniture or receptacle was
barns, coachhouses, stables or other departments or
BROKEN; or
enclosed places:
v. A closed or sealed receptacle was
(1) CONTIGUOUS to the building or edifice;
REMOVED, even if the same be broken
(2) Having an INTERIOR ENTRANCE connected open elsewhere; and
therewith; and
c) That with intent to gain, the offender TOOK
(3) Which FORM PART of the whole therefrom personal property belonging to
another.

3. PUBLIC BUILDING
2. ART 299 vs 302
-includes every building owned by the
Government or belonging to a private person, used or ART 299 ART 302
rented by the Government, although temporarily
The use of fictitious name Use of fictitious name or
unoccupied.
or simulation of public simulation of public
authority can be used only authority cannot be used
in Art 299 which refers to in Art 302 which involves
ARTICLE 302 inhabited buildings uninhabited or other
places
ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR
The receptacle must be The receptacle must be
IN A PRIVATE BUILDING
locked or sealed closed.
Art. 302. Robbery in an uninhabited place or in a private
building.— Any robbery committed in an uninhabited place or
in a building other than those mentioned in the first paragraph
***If the receptacle was merely closed but was opened
of Article 299, if the value of the property taken exceeds Fifty
thousand pesos (₱50,000), shall be punished by prisión
without breaking the same, the crime is theft.

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 10

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
3. BUILDING
Any kind of structure used for storage or
safekeeping of personal property.
ARTICLE 303
ROBBERY OF CEREALS, FRUITS, OR FIREWOOD IN AN
UNINHABITED PLACE OR PRIVATE BUILDING
Article 303. Robbery of cereals, fruits, or firewood in an
uninhabited place or private building. -- In the cases
enumerated in Articles 299 and 302, when the robbery
consists in the taking of cereals, fruits, or firewood, the
culprit shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed in said articles.
1. CEREALS
Seedling which are the immediate product of the
soil.
The palay must be kept by the owner as
“seedling” or taken for that purpose by the robbers.
ARTICLE 304
POSSESSION OF PICKLOCKS OR SIMILAR TOOLS
Art 304. Possession of picklocks or similar tools-- Any person
who shall, without lawful cause, have in his possession
picklocks or similar tools specially adopted to the commission
of the crime of robbery, shall be punished by arresto mayor in
its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum
period.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any person who
shall make such tools. If the offender be a locksmith he shall
suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods.
1. ELEMENTS (PAL)
a) That the offender has in his possession
PICKLOCKS or similar tools;
b) That such picklocks or similar tools are
specially ADOPTED to the commission of
robbery; and
c) That the offender does not have LAWFUL
cause for such possession
2. NATURE OF THE ACT OF POSSESSION PICKLOCKS
Possession of picklocks is a crime by itself. When
used in robbery, possession is absorbed.
ARTICLE 305
FALSE KEYS
Art 305. False keys. -- The term “false keys” shall be deemed
to include:
1. The tools mentioned in the next preceding article;
2. Genuine keys stolen from the owner;
3. Any keys other than those intended by the owner for
use in the lock forcibly opened by the offender.
1. INCLUSIONS (GOT)
a) GENUINE keys stolen from the owner; and
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
b) Any key OTHER those intended by the owner
for use in the lock forcibly opened by the
offender; and
c) TOOLS mentioned in the next preceding
article.
2. MASTER KEY
A master key is a picklock and its possesion is
punishable
3. LOST OR MISPLACED KEY
A lost or misplaced key found by another and
not returned to its rightful owner is considered as a
genuine key stolen from the owner.
BAR QUESTIONS
1. Five robbers robbed one after the other five
houses occupied by different families located
inside a compound enclosed by a six-foot high
hollow block fence. How many robberies did the
five commit? Explain. (1996 Bar)
A: The offenders committed only one robbery in the
eyes of the law because when they entered the
compound, they were impelled only by a single
indivisible criminal resolution to commit a robbery as
they were not aware that there were five families
inside said compound, considering that the same was
enclosed by a six-foot high hollow block fence. The
series of robbery committed in the same compound
at about the same time constitutes one continued
crime, motivated by one criminal impulse.
2. A, brother of B, with the intention of having a
night out with his friends, took the coconut shell
which is being used by B as a bank for his coins from
inside their locked cabinet using their common
key. Forthwith, A broke the coconut shell outside
of their home in the presence of his friends.
(A) What is the criminal liability of A, if any?
Explain.
(B) Is A exempted from criminal liability under
Article 332 of the Revised Penal Code for
being a brother of B? Explain. (2000 Bar)
A:
(a) A is criminally liable for Robbery with force
upon things, because the coconut shell with
the coins inside, was taken with intent to gain
and broken outside of their home (Art. 299
[b], [2], RPC).
(b) No. A is not exempt from criminal liability
under Art.
332 because said Article applies only to theft,
swindling, or malicious mischief. Here, the
crime committed is robbery.
3. A entered the house of another without
employing force or violence upon things. He was
seen by a maid who wanted to scream but was
11
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

prevented from doing so because A threatened her

with a gun. A then took money and other valuables
and left. Is A guilty of theft or robbery? Explain.
(2002 Bar)

A: A is liable for robbery because the intimidation he

employed on the maid before the taking of the money
and other valuables. It is the intimidation of the
person relative to the taking that qualifies the crime
as robbery, instead of simply theft. ‘

The non-employment of force upon things is of

no moment because robbery is committed not only by
employing force upon things but also by employing
violence against or intimidation of persons.

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 12

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

CHAPTER TWO intended or perceived victims, but against any and

all prospective victims; and
BRIGANDAGE
(3) The act of robbery must be INDISCRIMINATE.
It should be an isolated case.
ARTICLE 306

WHO ARE BRIGANDS OBJECT OF PD 532

Art 306. Who are brigands-- Penalty-- When more than
three armed persons form a band of robbers for the
purpose of committing robbery in the highway, or
kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or to
obtain ransom or for any other purpose to be attained
by means of force and violence, they shall be deemed
highway robbers or brigands.
Persons found guilty of this offense shall be
punished by prision mayor in its medium period to
reclusion temporal in its minimum period, if the act or
acts committed by them are not punishable by the
higher penalties, in which case, they shall suffer such
high penalties.
If any of the arms, carried by any of said persons
be an unlicensed firearm, it shall be presumed that
said persons are highway robbers or brigands, and in
case of conviction, the penalty shall be imposed in its
maximum period.
1. MODIFIED BY PD NO. 532
PD NO. 532
To deter and punish lawless elements who commit
acts of depredation upon lawless elements who commit
acts of depredation upon persons and properties of
innocent and defenseless inhabitants who travel from
one place to another thereby disturbing the peace and
tranquility of the nation and stunting the economic and
social progress of the people.
PROOF REQUIRED IN HIGHWAY ROBBERY
A conviction for highway robbery requires proof
that the accused were organized for the purpose of
committing robbery indiscriminately, otherwise, the
crime is robbery only.
ACCOMPLICE (SEC 4)
Any person who AIDS or PROTECTS highway
robbers or ABETS the commission of highway robbery or
brigandage.

ANTI-PIRACY AND ANTI-HIGHWAY

ACQUIRING OR RECEIVING PROPERTY
ROBBERY LAW OF 1974
Acquiring or receiving property taken by the
Sec 2. Definition of terms. -- The following terms shall mean accused charged with piracy or brigandage under the
and be understood as follows: RPC or deriving benefits therefrom shall be considered
an act of an accessory under Article 19.
Xxx

C. PHILIPPINE HIGHWAY . - It shall refer to any road, street,

passage, highway and bridges or other parts thereof, or
ROBBERY VS PD 532
railway or railroad within the Philippines used by persons, or
vehicles, or locomotives or trains for the movement or HIGHWAY ROBBERY ROBBERY IN A HIGHWAY
circulation of persons or transportation of goods, articles, or
BRIGANDAGE (ART 306)
property or both. ( PD NO. 532)
xxx
As to conspiracy among the members
E.HIGHWAY ROBBERY/BRIGANDAGE. - The seizure of any
person for ransom, extortion or other unlawful purposes, or Mere conspiracy to Mere formation of a band
the taking away of the property of another by means of constitute the offense of for any purpose indicated
violence against or intimidation of person or force upon things brigandage is not in the law is punishable.
of other unlawful means, committed by any person on any punishable since it
Philippine Highway. presupposes that acts
defined are actually
Sec 3. Penalties -- Any person who commits piracy or highway
robbery/brigandage as herein defined, shall, upon conviction committed.
by competent court be punished by:
As to formation of a band
Xxx
Offenders need not Offenders must be
B. HIGHWAY ROBBERY/BRIGANDAGE.--The penalty of constitute a band. One robbers
reclusion temporal in its minimum period shall be imposed. If person can commit the
Physical injuries or other crimes are committed during or on crime.
the occasion of the commission of robbery or brigandage, the
penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium and maximum As to the victim
periods shall be imposed. If kidnapping for ransom or
extortion, or murder or homicide, or rape is committed as a Anybody could be the There is a preconceived
result or on the occasion thereof, the penalty of death shall
victim victim
be imposed.
As to the commission of robbery
ELEMENTS (ANI)
It must not be an isolated It is immaterial that the
(1) The robbery should take place ALONG the
case of robbery robbery was committed
Philippine Highway;
for the first time
(2) The victim was NOT predetermined. The
robbery must be directed not only against specific, As to accomplices

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 13

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

Those who abet Those who profit from the 7. WHAT IS THE LIABILITY OF ABETTORS OF
brigandage are loot are liable under Art BRIGANDAGE?
accomplices under Sec 4. 307 or fencing.
In Highway Robbery under PD 532, those who
2. BRIGANDAGE participate in the loot commit the crime of abetting
brigandage, and considered as Accomplices under Sec 4
It is a crime committed by more than three armed of PD 532.
persons who form a band of robbers for the purpose of
committing robbery in the highway, or kidnapping In Robbery in a Highway under Art 294, they are
persons for the purpose of extortion, or to obtain principals liable as fence under Anti-fencing law or
ransom, or for any other purpose to be attained by under Art 307 -- aiding and abetting brigandage.
means of force and violence.

3. ELEMENTS
8. DOES THE SITUS DETERMINE WHETHER THE CRIME
a) There must be at least FOUR armed persons; IS HIGHWAY ROBBERY?

b) They formed a BAND of robbers; and
c) The PURPOSE is any of the following:
i. To commit robbery in a highway;
ii. To kidnap persons for the purpose of
extortion or to obtain ransom; or
iii. To attain by means of force and
violence any other purpose.
It is not because the taking or robbery was
perpetrated on a national highway that PD 532 would
be the statute violated. It takes more than the SITUS of
the robbery to bring it within the ambit of PD 532.
A finding of brigandage or highway robbery
involves not just the locus of the crime or the fact that
more than three persons perpetrated it. It is essential
to prove that the outlaws were purposely organized not
just for one act of robbery but for several
indiscriminate commissions thereof.

4. PRESUMPTION OF LAW
ARTICLE 307
-Those who carry an unlicensed firearm are
presumed to be highway robbers and brigands. AIDING AND ABETTING A BAND OF BRIGANDS

5. BRIGANDAGE VS ROBBERY IN BAND Art 307. Aiding and abetting a band of brigands. --Any person
knowingly and in any manner aiding, abetting, or protecting a
BRIGANDAGE ROBBERY IN BAND band of brigands as described in the next preceding article, or
giving them information of the movements of the police or
As to purpose other peace officers of the Government or of the forces of the
United States Army, when the latter are acting in aid of the
The purpose is to: The purpose is to commit Government, or acquiring or receiving the property taken by
robbery, but not such brigands, shall be punished by prision correccional in its
(1) Commit robbery in medium period to prision mayor in its minimum period.
necessarily in highways
highways;
It shall be presumed that the person performing any of
(2) To kidnap persons for the acts provided in this article has performed them
knowingly, unless the contrary is proven.
ransom; or
1. ELEMENTS
(3) Any other purpose
attained by force and a) That there is a BAND of brigands;
violence
b) That the OFFENDER does any of the
As to agreement following acts:
Agreement is to commit Agreement is to commit a i. That he aids, abets, or protects such
several robberies particular robbery band of brigands;
As to act punished ii. That he gives them information on the
movements of the police or other
Mere formation for any of Actual commission of peace officers of the government; or
the above purposes is robbery is necessary, as
punished mere conspiracy to iii. That he acquires or receives property
commit robbery is not taken by such brigands; and
punishable
c) That the offender KNOWS the band to be of
brigands.

6. IS HIGHWAY ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE A HEINOUS

CRIME?
BAR QUESTIONS
No. Under RA 7659, while having specifically
imposed the death penalty or restored it for certain
crimes, failed to do so for highway robbery with
1. A postal van containing mail matter, including
homicide -- in fact, RA 7659 does not mention PD 532
checks and treasury warrants, was hijacked along a
at all. Clearly, by failing to squarely deal with this
national highway by ten (10) men, two of whom,
crime, Congress is deemed not to have considered
were armed. They used force, violence and
highway robbery with homicide a “heinous crime”.
intimidation against the three postal employees who
were occupants of the van, resulting in the unlawful

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 14

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

taking and aspiration of the entire van and its ANS. Highway Robbery under PPD 532 differs from
contents. ordinary Robbery committed on a highway in these
respects:

(A) If you were the public prosecutor, would you

charge the ten (10) men who hijacked the (1) In Highway Robbery under PD 532, the robbery
postal van with violation of Presidential is committed indiscriminately against persons
Decree No. 532, otherwise known as the who commute in such highways, regardless of
Anti-Piracy and Anti- Highway Robbery Law the potentiality they offer; while in ordinary
of 1974? Explain your answer. Robbery committed on a highway, the robbery
(B) If you were the defense counsel, what are the is committed only against predetermined
elements of the crime of highway robbery victims;
that the prosecution should prove to sustain (2) It is Highway Robbery under PD 532, when the
a conviction? (2012 Bar) offender is a brigand or one who roams in
ANS. public highways and carries out his robbery in
public highways as venue, whenever the
opportunity to do so arises. It is ordinary
Robbery under the RPC when the commission
(A) No. I would not charge the 10 men with the thereof in a public highway is only incidental
crime of highway robbery. The mere fact that and the offender is not a brigand; and
the offense charged was committed on a (3) In Highway Robbery under PD 532, there is
highway would not be the determinant for the frequency in the commission of the robbery in
application of PD No. 532. If a motor vehicle, public highways and against persons traveling
either stationary or moving on a highway is thereat; whereas ordinary robbery in public
forcibly taken at a gunpoint by the accused highways is only occasional against a
who happened to take a fancy thereto, the predetermined victim, without frequency in
location of the vehicle at the time of the public highways.
unlawful taking would not necessarily put the
offense within the ambit of PD 532.
In this case, the crime committed is violation of
the Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972 (People v. Punk, GR
No. 97471, February 17, 1993). Moreover, there is no
showing that the 10 men were a band of outlaws
organized for the purpose of depredation upon the
persons and properties of innocent and defenseless
inhabitants who travel from one place to another.
What was shown is one isolated hijacking of a postal
van. It was not stated in the facts given that the 10
men previously attempted at similar robberies by
them to establish the “indiscriminate” commission
thereof (Filoteo, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, GR No. 79543,
October 16, 1996).

(B) Under Section 2 of PD 532, highway robbery is

defined as “the seizure of any person for
ransom, extortion, or other unlawful purposes,
or the taking away of the property of another
by means of violence against or intimidation of
person or force upon things or other unlawful
means, committed by any person on any
Philippines highway.” Hence, the elements of
highway robbery are:

(a) Intent to gain;

(b) Unlawful taking of property of another;
(c) Violence against or intimidation of any
person;
(d) Committed on a Philippine highway.
To obtain a conviction for highway robbery, the
prosecution must prove that the accused were
organized for the purpose of committing robbery
indiscriminately. If the purpose is only a particular
robbery, the crime is only robbery, or robbery in band
if there are at least four armed participants (See
People v. Mendoza, GR No. 104461, February 23,
1996).

2. Distinguish Highway Robbery under PD No. 532

from Robbery committed on a highway. (2000 Bar)

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 15

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

CHAPTER THREE When it cannot be said with moral certainty that

the intention of the accused was to steal valuables,
THEFT and that the killing of the victim was a mere incident
to the robbery. He cannot be convicted of the crime of
robber with homicide, but of two specific crimes of
ARTICLE 308 homicide and theft.

WHO ARE LIABLE FOR THEFT

Art 308. Who are liable for theft. -- Theft is committed by any
person who, with intent to gain but without violence,against,
or intimidation of persons nor force upon things, shall take
personal property of another without the latter’ consent.
Theft is likewise committed by:
1. Any person whom having found lost property, shall
fail to deliver the same to the local authorities or to its
owner;
5. TAKING WAS FOR “TEMPORARY” OR “JOYRIDE”
He is guilty of theft because by taking possession
of the personal property belonging to another and
using it, his intent to gain is evident since he derives
therefrom utility, satisfaction, enjoyment and
pleasures.

2. Any person who, after having maliciously damaged
the property of another, shall remove or make use of the
fruits or objects of the damage caused by him; and
3. Any person who shall enter an eclosed estate or a
field where trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another
and without the consent of its owner, shall hunt or fish upon
the same or shall gather fruits, cereals, or other forest or
farm products.
6. CAN THEFT BE COMMITTED BY A CO-OWNER OF
THE PROPERTY?
No. Theft cannot be committed between
co-owners when no division yet is made because they
are co-owners as to each part of the property, and
theft cannot be committed by the owner over his own
property.

1. THEFT
-Committed by any person who, with intent to
gain but without violence or intimidation of persons
nor force upon thing, shall take the personal property
of another without the latter’s consent.
7. FINDER OF HIDDEN TREASURE
In case of hidden treasure, the government or the
property owner has 1/2 share. If the finder keeps the
whole thing, he is guilty of theft as to the 1/2.

2. ELEMENTS OF THEFT(TPIWW) 8. THEFT IS LIKEWISE COMMITTED BY:

a) That there be TAKING of a PERSONAL a) Any person who, having found lost property,
PROPERTY belonging to another; shall fail to deliver the same to the local
authorities or to its owner;
b) That the taking be done with INTENT to gain;
b) Any person who, after having maliciously
c) That the taking be done WITHOUT the
damaged the property of another, shall
consent of the owner; and
remove or make use of the fruits or object of
d) That the taking be accomplished WITHOUT the damage caused by him; and
the use of violence against or intimidation of
c) Any person who shall enter an enclosed
persons or force upon things.
estate or a field where trespass is forbidden
or which belongs to another and without the
consent of its owner; shall hunt or fish upon
3. THEFT vs ROBBERY the same or shall gather fruits, cereals, or
other forest or farm products.
THEFT ROBBERY

As to the presence of vioence

9. NO FRUSTRATED THEFT
The offender does not use There is violence or
violence or intimidation intimidation or force upon There is consummated theft the moment there is
or does not enter a things. asportacion or unlawful taking or possession of
house or building through personal property, no matter how momentary it may
any of the means be.
specified in Art 299 of Art
302 in taking personal
property of another with
10. THEFT OF GAS AND ELECTRICITY
intent to gain
Theft of electricity is also punishable under RA
As to the consent of the owner No.7832 or the Anti-electricity and Electric
It suffices that consent on It is necessary that the Transmission Lines/ Materials Pilferage Act of 1994.
the part of the owner is taking is against the will
lacking of the owner
11. THEFT OF WATER

Theft of water and other similar offenses are

4. WHAT WILL MAKE THE CRIME THEFT AND penalized under RA No. 8041 or the National Water
HOMICIDE, NOT ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE? Crisis Act of 1995.

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 16

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
ARTICLE 309
PENALTIES
Art. 309. Penalties.— Any person guilty of theft shall be
punished by:
1. The penalty of prisión mayor in its minimum and
medium periods, if the value of the thing stolen is more than
One million two hundred thousand pesos (₱1,200,000) but
does not exceed Two million two hundred thousand pesos
(₱2,200,000); but if the value of the thing stolen exceeds the
latter amount, the penalty shall be the maximum period of
the one prescribed in this paragraph, and one (1) year for
each additional One million pesos (₱1,000,000), but the total
of the penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty
(20) years. In such cases, and in connection with the accessory
penalties which may be imposed and for the purpose of the
other provisions of this Code, the penalty shall be
termed prisión mayoror reclusion temporal, as the case may
be.
2. The penalty of prisión correccional in its medium and
maximum periods, if the value of the thing stolen is more than
Six hundred thousand pesos (₱600,000) but does not exceed
One million two hundred thousand pesos (₱1,200,000).
3. The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum and
medium periods, if the value of the property stolen is more
than Twenty thousand pesos (₱20,000) but does not exceed
Six hundred thousand pesos (₱600,000).
4. Arresto mayor in its medium period to prisión
correccional in its minimum period, if the value of the
property stolen is over Five thousand pesos (₱5,000) but does
not exceed Twenty thousand pesos (₱20,000).
5. Arresto mayor to its full extent, if such value is over
Five hundred pesos (₱500) but does not exceed Five thousand
pesos (₱5,000).
6. Arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if
such value does not exceed Five hundred pesos (₱500).
7. Arresto menor or a fine not exceeding Twenty
thousand pesos (₱20,000), if the theft is committed under the
circumstances enumerated in paragraph 3 of the next
preceding article and the value of the thing stolen does not
exceed Five hundred pesos (₱500). If such value exceeds said
amount, the provisions of any of the five preceding
subdivisions shall be made applicable.
8. Arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine of not
exceeding Five thousand pesos (₱5,000), when the value of
the thing stolen is not over Five hundred pesos (₱500), and the
offender shall have acted under the impulse of hunger,
poverty, or the difficulty of earning a livelihood for the
support of himself or his family.”
1. BASIS OF PENALTY IN THEFT IS:
a) The value of the thing stolen, and in some
cases;
b) The value and the nature of the property
taken; or
c) The circumstances or causes that impelled
the culprit to commit the crime.
BAR QUESTIONS
1. Sunshine, a “beauteous” colegiala but a
shoplifter, went to the Ever Department Store and
proceeded to the women’s wear section. The
saleslady was of the impression that she brought to
the fitting room three (3) pieces of swimsuits of
different colors. When she came out of the fitting
room, she returned only two (2) pieces to the
clothes rack. The saleslady became suspicious and
alerted the store detective. Sunshine was stopped
by the detective before she could leave the store
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
and brought to the office of the store manager. The
detective and the manager searched her and found
her wearing the third swimsuit under her blouse and
pants. Was the theft consummated, frustrated, or
attempted? Explain. (2000 Bar)
A: The theft was consummated because the taking or
asportation was complete. The asportation is
complete when the offender acquired the exclusive
control of the personal property being taken. In this
case, when Sunshine wore the swimsuit under her
blouse and pants and was on her way out of the store,
with evident intent to gain, the taking constitutes
theft and being complete, it is consummated. It is not
necessary that the offender is in a position to dispose
of the property.
2. Francis Garcia, a Jollibee waiter, found a gold
bracelet in front of his working place in Makati and,
upon inspecting it, saw the name and address of the
owner engraved on the inside. Remembering his
parents’ admonition that he should not take
anything which does not belong to him, he delivered
the bracelet to PO1 Jesus Reyes of the Makati quad
precinct with the instruction to locate the owner
and return it to him. PO1 Reyes, instead, sold the
bracelet and misappropriated the proceeds.
Subsequent events brought out the fact that the
bracelet was dropped by a snatcher who had
grabbed it from the owner a block away from where
Francis had found it and further investigation traced
the last possessor as PO1 Reyes.
Charged with theft, PO1 Reyes reasoned out
that he had not committed any crime because it was
not he who had found the bracelet, and moreover, it
turned out to have been stolen.
Resolve the case with reasons. (2001 Bar)
A: PO1 Reyes is criminally liable. His contention that
he has not committed any crime because he was not
the one who found the bracelet and it turned out to be
stolen also, is devoid of merit. It is enough that the
bracelet belonged to another and the failure to
restore the same to its owner is characterized by
intent to gain.
The act of PO1 Reyes of selling the bracelet
which does not belong to him and which he only held
to be delivered to its owner, is furtive
misappropriation with intent to gain.
Where a finder of lost or mislaid property
entrusts it to another for delivery to the owner, the
person to whom such property is entrusted and who
accepts the same, assumes the relation of the finder to
the owner as if he was the actual finder; if he would
misappropriate it, he is guilty of theft (People v. Avila,
44 Phil 720).
ARTICLE 310
QUALIFIED THEFT
Art 310. The crime of theft shall be punished by the penalties
next higher by two degrees than those respectively specified
in the next preceding articles, if committed
17
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
by a domestic servant, or
with grave abuse of confidence,or
If the property stolen is
a motor vehicle,
Mail matter or
Large cattle or
Consists of coconuts taken from the premises of a
plantation or
Fish taken from a fishpond or fishery, or
If property is taken on the occasion of fire, earthquake,
typhoon, volcanic eruption or any other calamity, vehicular
accident or civil disturbance.
1. THERE SI QUALIFIED THEFT IN THE FOLLOWNG
INSTANCES (DoG-CoFi- CaMML)
a) Committed by a DOMESTIC servant;
b) Committed with GRAVE abuse of confidence;
c) Stolen COCONUTS taken from a plantation;
d) Stolen FISH from a fishpond or fishery;
e) If property is taken on the occasion of fire,
earthquake, typhoon, volcanic eruption, or
any othe CALAMITY, vehicular accident or
civil disturbance; or
f) Stolen property is (i) Motor vehicle, (ii) Mail
Matter, or (iii) large cattle.
2. ELEMENTS (TI-WAG)
a) That there is TAKING OF PERSONAL
PROPERTY BELONGING TO ANOTHER;
b) Taking is with INTENT to gain;
c) That it be done WITHOUT the consent of the
owner;
d) That it be ACCOMPLISED without the use of
violence or intimidation against persons, or
force upon things; and
e) That it be done with GRAVE ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE
ARTICLE 311
THEFT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE NATIONAL LIBRARY
AND NATIONAL MUSEUM
Art. 311. Theft of the property of the National Library and
National Museum.— If the property stolen be any property of
the National Museum, the penalty shall be arresto mayor or a
fine ranging from Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000) to One
hundred thousand pesos (₱100,000), or both, unless a higher
penalty should be provided under other provisions of this
Code, in which case, the offender shall be punished by such
higher penalty.
-The value of the property is immaterial because the
law prescribed the penalty of arresto mayor or fine
or both.
BAR QUESTIONS
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
1. A fire broke out in a department store. A, taking
advantage of the confusion, entered the store and
carried away goods which he later sold. What crime,
if any, did he commit? Why? (2002 Bar)
ANS. A committed the crime of qualified theft because
he took the goods on the occasion of and taking
advantage of the fire which broke out in the
department store. The occasion of a calamity such as
fire, when the theft was committed, qualifies the
crime under Article 310 of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended.
2. Forest Ranger Jay Velasco was patrolling the
Balara Watershed and Reservoir when he noticed a
big pile of cut logs outside the gate of the
watershed. Curious, he scouted around and after a
few minutes, he saw Rene and Dante coming out of
the gate with some more newly-cut logs. He
apprehended and charged them with the proper
offense.
What is that offense? Explain. (2006 Bar)
ANS. The offense committed is qualified theft
pursuant to Sec. 1 of P.D. No. 330 and Sec. 68 of P.D.
No. 705 defining the offense committed by any
person who directly or indirectly cuts, gathers,
removes or smuggles timber or other forest products
in violation of existing laws, rules and regulation,
from any public forest reserves, and other kinds of
public forest or even privately owned forest lands.
3. A is the driver of B’s Mercedez Benz car. When B
was on a trip to Paris, A used the car for a joy ride
with C whom he is courting. Unfortunately, A met
an accident. Upon his return, B came to know
about the unauthorized use of the car and sued A
for qualified theft. B alleged that A took and used
the car with intent to gain as he derived some
benefit or satisfaction from its use. On the other
hand, A argued that he has no intent of making
himself the owner of the car as he in fact returned
it to the garage after the joy ride. What crime/s, if
any, were committed? Explain. (2016 Bar)
ANS. The crime committed by A is carnapping. The
unlawful taking of motor vehicles is now covered by
the Anti- Carnapping Law (RA 6539 as amended) and
not by the provisions on qualified theft or robbery.
(People v. Bustinera, G.R. No. 148233, June 8, 2004)
The concept of carnapping is the same as that of
robbery and theft. Hence, rules applicable to theft or
robbery are also applicable to carnapping. (People v.
Asamuddin, G.R. No. 213913, September 2, 2015) In
theft, unlawful taking should be understood within
the Spanish concept of apoderamiento. In order to
constitute apoderamiento, the physical taking must
be coupled with the intent oto appropriate the
object, which means intent to deprive the lawful
owner of the thing, whether permanently or
temporarily. (People v. Valenzuela, G.R. No. 160188,
June 21, 2007) In this case, A took the car without the
consent of B with intent to temporarily deprive him of
the car. Although the taking was “temporary” and for
a “joy ride”, the Supreme Court in People v.
Bustinera (supra), sustains as the better view which
18
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

holds that when a person, either with the object of

going to a certain place, or learning how to drive, or
enjoying a free ride, takes possession of a vehicle
belonging to another, without the consent of its
owner, he is guilty of theft because by taking
possession of the personal property belonging to
another and using it, his intent to gain is evident
since he derives therefrom utility, satisfaction,
enjoyment and pleasure.

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 19

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
NEW ANTI CARNAPPING ACT OF 2016
RA NO. 10883
Approved: July 17, 2016
1. CARNAPPING
It is the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor
vehicle belonging to another without the latter’s
consent, or by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things.
(Sec 3)
2. ELEMENTS OF CARNAPPING (WIT)
a) The TAKING of a motor vehicle which
belongs to another;
b) That the taking is WITHOUT the consent of
the owner or by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons or by using force
upon things; and
c) It is done with INTENT to gain.
3. MOTOR VEHICLE (Sec 2)
It is any vehicle propelled by any vehicle
propelled by any power using the public highways,
EXCEPT road rollers, trolley cars, street
sweepers, sprinklers, lawn mowers, bulldozers,
graders, forklifts, amphibian trucks, and cranes if
not used on public highways;
vehicles which run only on rails or tracks;
and tractors, trailers and traction engines of
all kinds used exclusively for agricultural
purposes.
4. PENALTY FOR CARNAPPING (Sec 3)
-Irrespective of the value of the motor vehicle
taken:
a) Imprisonment for not less than 20 years
and 1 day but not more than 30 years --
When the carnapping is committed without
violence against or intimidation of persons,
or force upon things;
b) Imprisonment for not less than 30 years
and 1 day but not more than 40 years--
When the carnapping is committed by means
of violence against or intimidation of
persons, or force upon things;
c) Life Imprisonment -- when the owner,
driver, or occupant of the carnapped motor
vehicle is killed or raped in the commission
of the carnapping.
5. OTHER PUNISHABLE ACTS AND ITS PENALTY
a) Concealment of Carnapping;
b) Failure to register the vehicle engine, engine
block and chassis with the LTO -- motor
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis
not registered with the LTO shall be
considered as a carnapped vehicle, an
untaxed importation or coming from illegal
source and shall be confiscated in favor of
the government. (Sec 6);
c) Failure to register the sale, transfer,
conveyance of a motor vehicle or the
substitution or replacement of a motor
vehicle engine, engine block or chassis- shall
be presumed as a carnapped vehicle
proceeding from illegal sources unless
proven otherwise and shall be confiscated in
favor of the government.
d) To deface or otherwise tamper the original
or registered serial number of motor vehicle
engines, engine blocks or chassis (Sec 14);
e) Identity transferring (Sec 15);
f) Transfer of Vehicle Plate (Sec 16);
g) Sale of Second hand Spare parts taken from
a carnapped vehicle (Sec 17).
6. QUALIFIED THEFT ONLY
If material or physical possession was given to the
offender.
7. ESTAFA ONLY
If material and juridical possession were given to
the offender
8. CARNAPPING CAN BE COMPLEXED UNDER SEC 14.
It may be called Qualified Carnapping,
Aggravated Carnapping or the crime of Carnapping
with Rape and Homicide
9. QUALIFIED CARNAPPING or CARNAPPING WITH
HOMICIDE
When the owner, driver or occupant of the
carnapped motor vehicle is killed or raped in the
course of the commission of the carnapping or on the
occasion thereof.
(a) That the accused took the motor vehicle;
(b) His original criminal design was carnapping;
(c) He killed the driver, owner or occupant of the
motor vehicle; and
(d) The killing was perpetrated in the course of
the commission of the carnapping or on the occasion
thereof.
10. PUV UNDER THE “BOUNDARY SYSTEM” IS
APPROPRIATED BY THE DRIVER
CARNAPPING, if the facts show that what was
yielded was only physical possession of the vehicle, and
the description of the motor vehicle was alleged in the
information.
THEFT, if the facts show that only the physical
possession of the vehicle was yielded, but the
20
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

description of the motor vehicle was not alleged in the
information.
ESTAFA may be committed if there is juridical
possession of the public utility is legally transferred to
the offender, however there is a prohibition against
such practice by the Public Service Commission.
A: The fact that the owner is killed or raped as a
consequence, the penalty is reclusion perpetua to death. It
will bring about a higher penalty, but not as a special complex
crime because it is a Special Penal Law. Though it is akin to a
special complex crime, the killing is absorbed. The crime is
carnapping. It is also not a bailable offense.

If the offender was entrusted only with the

material or physical or de facto possession of the thing,
his misappropriation of the same constitutes THEFT,
but if he has the juridical possession of the thing, his
conversion of the same constitutes embezzlement or
ESTAFA.

11. TRICYLE

The enumeration of excepted vehicles show that

any vehicle which is motorized using streets which are
public, not exclusively for private use, comes within
the concept of motor vehicle.

A tricycle is not included in the exception, thus, it

is among the motor vehicles wherein the stealing of
which comes within its penal sanction.

12. NATURE OF THE CRIME OF CARNAPPING

Carnapping is a malum prohibitum. If homicide is

committed, a special complex crime of carnapping
with homicide, not falling within Art 48 is committed y
virtue of the amendment made by RA 7659.

13. ALIENS (Sec 15)

Aliens convicted under the provisions of the

Anti-Carnapping law shall be DEPORTED IMMEDIATELY
after service of sentence without further proceedings
by the Deportation Board.

PG NOTES

Q: A was driving his car and suddenly felt the need to

answer the call of nature so he parked his vehicle.
Suddenly, there was X and saw A was out of the car, and
the door of the car was open and the key was left inside the
car. X drove away with the car. What is the crime
committed?

A: The crime committed is carnapping. Even if there is no

violence or intimidation against person or force upon things,
so long as said taking is without the consent of the owner, it
will amount to carnapping.

Under Sec. 14, the penalty if there no violence or

intimidation against persons or use of force on things, the
penalty is 14 years and 8 months to 17 years and 4 months.

Q: In the given situation, what if A saw X and there was a

fight that ensued between them. X shot A, and X was able
to take the vehicle. A however survived due to immediate
medical treatment. What is/are the crimes committed by X?

A: The crime committed by X is only carnapping. The fact that

X shot A, where there is frustrated homicide, it falls under
violence or intimidation which was used by the offender in
committing the crime. Since there is violence, the penalty is
17 years and 4 months to 30 years.

Q: If again, in the same problem, A tried to stop X and X

shot A. A died. What is the crime committed?

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 21

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
ANTI-FENCING LAW OF 1979
PD NO. 1612
Approved: June 15, 1979
1. REASONS FOR THE LAW
a) Rampant robbery and thievery of
government and private properties;
b) Such robbery and thievery have become
profitable on the part of the lawless
elements because of the existence of ready
buyers, commonly known as fence, of stolen
properties;
c) A fence can be prosecuted only as an
accessory to the crime of robbery or theft;
d) It is imperative to impose heavy penalties on
persons who profit by the effects of the
crimes of robbery and theft.
2. FENCING (Sec 2 [a])
-is the act of any person who, with intent to gain
for himself or for another, shall buy, receive, possess,
keep, acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of or shall buy
and sell, or in any other manner deal in any article,
item, object or anything of value which he knows, or
should be known to him, to have been derived from the
proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft.
- Does not apply to proceeds in the crime of
Estafa.
3. FENCE (Sec 2[b])
-includes any person, firm, association,
corporation or partnership or other organization who/
which commits the act of fencing.
The Fence should be an accessory, not a principal
or accomplice in robbery or theft. But the fence is
principal in the prosecution for the violation of PD No.
1612.
4. ELEMENTS( R [BuRP-KACS-DiBS]KI)
a) The crime of ROBBERY or theft has been
committed;
b) The accused, who is not a principal or
accomplice in the commission of the crime
of theft or robbery BUY, RECEIVE, POSSESS,
KEEP, ACQUIRE, CONCEAL, SELL, OR DISPOSE
OF, OR shall BUY, AND SELL, or in any other
manner DEAL any article, item object or
anything of value which he knows or should
be known to him, to have been derived from
the proceeds of said crime;
c) That accused knows or should have known
that said article, item, object or anything of
value has been derived from the proceeds of
theft or robbery and
d) The accused has intent to gain for himself or
another.
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
5. PD 1612 COVERS THE PROCEEDS OF WHAT CRIMES?
Theft and Robbery only.
It does not apply to crimes of gain such as Estafa.
The act of the party who took a share of the proceeds
of a crime other than robbery or theft would make him
an accessory.
Because cattle rustling is a mere amendment of
Art 310 on theft of large cattle, the accessory to cattle
rustling through profiting from the use of larhe cattle
can be liable for fencing provided he is charged for the
latter crime.
6. PRESUMPTION OF FENCING (Sec 5)
-mere possession of any goods, article, item,
object, or anything of value which has been the subject
of robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of
fencing.
EXCEPTION: Possession of Clearance/ Permit to sell/
Used second hand articles (Sec 6)
7. SECOND-HAND ARTICLES
- shall refer to any goods, article, item, object or
anything of value obtained from an unlicensed dealer
or supplier, regardless of whether the same has
actually or in fact been used. (IRR of PD No. 1612)
8. CLEARANCE/ PERMIT TO SELL USED/ SECOND HAND
ARTICLES
Sec 6. Clearance/ permit to sell/ used second-hand Articles -
For purposes of this Act, all stores, establishments or entities
dealing in the buy and sell of any good, article, item, object
or anything of value obtained from an unlicensed dealer or
supplier thereof, shall before offering the same for sale to the
public secure the necessary clearance or permit from the
station commander of the Philippine National Police in the
town or city where such store, establishment or entity is
located. The Philippine Constabulary with the PNP/ Director
General, PNP shall promulgate such rules and regulations to
carry out the provisions of this section. Any person who fails
to secure the clearance or permit required by this section or
who violates any of the provisions of the rules and regulations
promulgated thereunder shall upon conviction be punished as
fence.
9. FENCE AND AN ACCESSORY TO THEFT OR ROBBERY
FENCE ACCESSORY TO THEFT
OR ROBBERY
As to liability
A fence is punished As a general rule, an
as a principal under PD No accessory to robbery or
1612 and the penalty is theft under the RPC is
higher punished two degrees
lower than the principal.
As to nature
Fencing is malum In accessory to the
prohibitum and therefore, crime of robbery or theft
there is no need to prove under the RPC, intent is
criminal intent of the an element of the crime
accused. and therefore, good faith
is a proper defense
Good faith is not a
22
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
defense
As to acts prosecuted
All the acts of one who is The accessory in the
an accessory to the crimes crimes of robbery and
of robbery and theft are theft could be prosecuted
included in the acts as such under the RPC or
defined as fencing. as a fence under PD No.
1612.
Being an accessory under the RPC and being a
fence under the Anti-Fencing Law are two separate and
distinct offenses.
10. FENCING IS NOT A CONTINUING OFFENSE
Fencing is not a continuing crime but separate
and distinct from the predicate crimes of theft and
robbery.
The offender may be prosecuted at the place
where he took hold of the property and not at the
place of the commission of the theft or robbery.
BAR QUESTIONS
1. Pedro, a municipal treasurer, received form the
Provincial Treasurer of the Province five (5) brand
new typewriters for use in the municipal
treasurer’s office. Each typewriter is valued at
P10, 000.00. Since Pedro needed money for the
hospitalization of his sick son, he sold four (4) of
the typewriters to his friend, Rodolfo, a general
merchant in San Isidro for P2, 000.00 each.
Rodolfo, as a general merchant knew that one
typewriter could easily be between P6, 000.00 to
P10,000.00. For this reason, he readily agreed to
buy the typewriters. Rodolfo then resold the
typewriters at P6,000.00 thus making a profit of
P16, 000.00. Two months after the transaction,
Pedro was audited and the investigation as to his
accountabilities led to the discovery that Rodolfo
bought the four (4) typewriters from Pedro. Is
Rodolfo liable for violation of the Anti- Fencing
Law? (1987 Bar)
A: Rodolfo is not liable for violation of the Anti-Fencing
Law as this law refers only to the buy and sell of
articles of value which are the proceeds of robbery and
theft. Rodolfo is liable as an accessory to the crime of
malversation as he purchased the typewriters for P2,
000 each only although he knew it could easily be sold
for P6, 000 to P10, 000. Therefore, he profited or
assisted the principal to profit from the effects or
proceeds of the commission of the crime.
2.
(a) What are the elements of fencing?
(b) What is the difference between a fence and an
accessory to theft or robbery? Explain.
(c) Is there any similarity between them? (1995 Bar)
ANS.
(a) The elements of fencing are:
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
(i) A crime of robbery or theft has been committed;
(ii) Accused, who is not a principal or accomplice in
the crime, buys, receives, possesses, keeps,
acquires, conceals or disposes or buys and sells
or in any manner deals in any article, item,
object or anything of value , which has been
derived from the proceeds of said crime;
(iii) The accused knows or should have known that
said article, item, object or anything of value
has been derived from the proceeds of the
crime of robbery or theft; and
(iv) There is, on the part of the accused, intent to
gain for himself or for another.
(b) One difference between a fence and accessory to
theft or robbery is the penalty involved – a fence is
punished as a principal under PD No. 1612 and the
penalty is higher, whereas an accessory to robbery
or theft under the RPC is punished two degrees
lower than the principal, unless he bought or
profited from the proceeds of theft or robbery
arising from robbery in Philippine highways under
PD 532 where he is punished as an accomplice,
hence the penalty is one degree lower.
Also, fencing is a malum prohibitum and
therefore there is no need to prove criminal intent of
the accused; this is not so in violations of the RPC.
(c) There is similarity in the sense that all the acts of
one
who is an accessory to the crimes of robbery or
theft are included in the acts defined as fencing. In
fact, the accessory in the crimes of robbery or theft
could be prosecuted as such under the RPC or as a
fence under PD 1612 (Dizon-Pamintuan v. People,
234 SCRA 63)
3. Ofelia engaged in the purchase and sale of
jewelry, was charged with violation of PD 1612,
otherwise known as the Anti-Fencing Law, for
having been found in possession of recently stolen
jewelry valued at P100,000.00 at her jewelry shop.
Her defense is that she merely bought the same
from Antonia and produced a receipt covering the
sale. She presented other receipts given to her by
Antonia representing previous transactions.
Convicted of the charge, Ofelia appealed, arguing
that her acquisition of the jewelries resulted from a
legal transaction and that the prosecution failed to
prove that she knew or should have known that the
pieces of jewelry which she bought from Antonia
were proceeds of the crime of theft.
(a) What is a “fence” under PD 1612?
(b) Is Ofelia liable under the Anti-Fencing Law?
Explain. (2016 Bar)
ANS.
(a) Fencing is the act of any person who, with
intent to gain for himself or for another, shall
buy, receive, possess, keep, acquire, conceal,
sell or dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in
any other manner deal in any article, item,
object or anything of value which he knows,
or should be known to him, to have been
derived from the proceeds of the crime of
robbery or theft. (Section 2, PD 1612)
(b) No. Ofelia is not liable under the Anti-Fencing
Law. While under the said law mere
possession of any good, article, item, object,
or anything of value which has been the
subject of robbery or thievery shall be prima
facie evidence of fencing, such evidence when
sufficiently overturned constitutes a defense.
23
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

In this case, Ofelia’s defense that she

merely acquired the jewelries through a
legitimate transaction is sufficient. Further,
there is no other circumstance as regards the
jewelries which would indicate to Ofelia, an
innocent purchaser, that the jewelries were
the subject of theft. There was even a receipt
produced by Ofelia for the transaction.

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 24

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

OTHER SPECIAL LAWS 7. RETURNING THE COW DOES NOT EXCULPATE ONE
FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY FOR CATTLE RUSTLING

(1) THEFT OF CATTLE

8. ANTI-CATTLE RUSTLING IS NOT A SPECIAL PENAL
LAW
THE ANTI-CATTLE RUSTLING LAW OF 1974 Violation of PD No. 533 is a felony because it is
only an amendment of the Code.
PD NO. 533
PD No. 533 did not change the definition of
qualified theft of large cattle under Art 310 of RPC, it
1. CATTLE RUSTING merely modified the penalties prescribed by the RPC.

Taking away by any means, method or scheme,
without the consent of the owner/raiser, of any large
cattle whether or not for profit or gain, or whether
committed with or without violence against ot
intimidation of persons or force upon things. It includes
the killing of large cattle or taking it as meat or hide
without the consent of the owner or raiser. (Sec 2[c])
Art 64 of RPC governing the rules for the
application of penalties which consist of three period
or three different penalties, each one of which forms a
period, shall likewise be applicable to cattle rustling.
Art 13, 14 and 15 shall likewise be applicable in
the imposition of penalty upon the accused.

9. WHEN HOMICIDE IS COMMITTED DURING CATTLE

2. LARGE CATTLE
RUSTLING, ARE THE OFFENDERS LIABLE FOR CATTLE
-shall include the cow, carabao, horse, mule, ass, RUSTLING AND FOR HOMICIDE?
or other domesticated member of the bovine family.
No. Killing is absorbed in cattle rustling because it
is still malum in se being an amendment of Art 310. The
crime is still cattled rustling albeit qualified cattle
3. PRESUMPTION OF CATTLE RUSTLING rustling.
Sec 7. Presumption of cattle rustling. -- Every person having in
his possession, control or custody of large cattle shall, upon
demand by competent authorities, exhibit the documents
prescribed in the preceding sections. Failure to exhibit the
required documents shall be prima facie evidence that the
large cattle in his possession, control or custody are the fruits
of the crime of cattle rustling.

4. GOATS ARE NOT LARGE CATTLE 10. CARNAPPING VS CATTLE RUSTLING

To include goats in the term “large cattle” would CARNAPPING CATTLE-RUSTLING

render meaningless the adjective “large”.
Malum prohibitum Malum in se
Larceny of goats is simple theft.
Penalties are not from Penalties are from the
RPC except for carnaping RPC
with homicide
5. ELEMENTS OF CATTLE RUSTLING
RPC has no suppletory It is suppletory on Cattle
The crime is committed if the following elements
application to carnapping Rustling
concur:
EXCEPT for qualified
(a) A large cattle is taken; carnapping

(b) It belongs to another; Both involves Moral Turpitude

(c) The taking is done without the consent of the

owner or raiser;
(2) THEFT OF FISHERY
(d) The taking is with or without intent to gain;
and
DEFINING ILLEGAL FISHING AND PRESCRIBING
(e) The taking is accomplished with or without
STIFFER PENALTIES THEREFORE
violence or intimidation against person or force upon
things. PD NO. 534

6. CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP OF THE STOLEN 1. ILLEGAL FISHING

CARABAO IS NOT NECESSARY
The “owner” includes the herdsman, caretaker,
employee or tenant of any firm or entity engaged in
the raising of large cattle or other persons in lawful
possession of such large cattle. (Sec 2[b])
The act of any person of catching, taking or
gathering pr causing to be caught, taken or gathered
fish or fishery/aquatic products in Philippine waters
with the use of explosives, obnoxious or poisonous
substances or by the use of electricity. (Sec 2)

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 25

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

2. DEALING IN ILLEGALLY CAUGHT FISH OR

FISHERY/AQUATIC PRODUCTS
3. ELEMENTS OF QUALIFIED THEFT OF LOGS
-any person who possesses or deals in, sells or in
any manner disposes of, for profit, any fish, a) That the accused cut, gathered, collected or
fishery/aquatic products which have been illegally removed timber or other forest products;
caught, taken or gathered shall upon conviction, be
b) That the timber of other forest products cut,
punished by imprisonment from 2 years to 6 years. (Sec
gathered, collected or removed belogs to
4)
the government or to any private individual;
and

(3) THEFT OF LUMBER c) That the cutting, gathering, collecting or

removing was without authority under a
license agreement, lease, license, or permit
granted by the State
REVISED FORESTRY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES

PD NO 705
4. OWNERSHIP IS NOT AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF
THE OFFENSE UNDER SEC 68
1. PUNISHABLE ACTS The failure of the information to allege the true
owner of the forest products is not material. It was
a) Cutting, gathering and/or collecting timber
sufficient that it alleged that the taking was without
or other products without license from any
any authority or license from the government.
forest land or timber from alienable and
disposable public lands or from private lands
shall be guilty of qualified theft under Art
309 and 310 of the RPC. (Sec 68); 5. DENR IS AUTHORIZED TO SEIZE ILLEGALY CUT
LOGS, TIMBER OR OTHER FOREST PRODUCTS AND
b) Entering and occupying or possessing, or ALL CONVEYANCES USED IN THE COMMISSION OF AN
making kaingin for his own private use or for OFFENSE IN VIOLATION OF SEC 68
others any forest land without authority or
destroying in any manner such forest land or
part thereof, or causing any damage to the
timber stand and other products and forest 6. VIOLATION OF EC 68 IS PUNISHED AS QUALIFIED
growths found therein. (Sec 69) THEFT, PENALTIES UNDER ART 309 AND 310 SHALL
APPLY
c) Grazing or causing to graze without
authority livestock in forest lands, grazing
lands and alienable and disposable lands
PENALIZING TIMBER SMUGGLING OR ILLEGAL
which have not as yet been disposed of in
CUTTING OF LOGS FROM PUBLIC FORESTS AND
accordance with Public and Act; (Sec 70)
FOREST RESERVES AS QUALIFIED THEFT
d) Occupying for any length of time without
PD NO. 330
permit any portion of the national parks
system or cutting, destroying, damaging, or
removing timber or any species of
vegetation or forest cover and other 1. PUNISHABLE ACT (SEC 1)
natural resources found therein or
Any person, whether natural or juridical who
mutilating, defacing, or destroying objects
directly or indirectly cuts, gathers, removes, or
of natural beauty or scenic value within
smuggles timber, or other forest products, either from
areas of the natural park system (Sec 71);
any of the public forest, forest reserves and other kinds
and
of public forest, whether under license or lease, or
e) Selling or offering for sale any log, lumber, from any privately owned forest land in violation of
plywood or other manufactured wood existing laws, rules and regulations shall be guilty of
products in the international or domestic the crime of QUALIFIED THEFT.
market, UNLESS he complies with the
grading rules established or to be
established by the Government (Sec 79) (3) THEFT OF MINERALS

2. DISTINCT AND SEPARATE OFFENSES UNDER SEC 69, THE MINERAL RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
PD 705
DECREE OF 1974
There are two distinct and separate offenses
punished under Sec 68 of the Forestry Code, to wit: PD NO. 463

(1) Cutting, gathering, collecting and removing

timber or other forest products from any forest land, or
timber from alienable or disposable public land, or
from private land without any authority; and
(2) Possession of timber or other forest products
without the legal documents required under existing
forest laws and regulations
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
Sec 78. Theft of minerals. -- Any person who, without a
mining lease or a temporary permit or any other permit
granted by the Secretary or the Director under existing mining
decrees, laws and regulations to mine, shall extract remove
and/ or dispose of minerals belonging to the Government or
from a mining claim or claims leased, held or owned by other
persons, shall be deemed to have stolen the ores or the
products thereof from the mines or mills. He shall, upon
26
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

conviction, be imprisoned from six(6) months to six (6) years THE USE OF TAMPERED WATER OR ELECTRICAL
or pay a fine from one hundred pesos (P100.00) to ten METERS AND OTHER ACTS
thousand pesos (P10,000.00) or both, in the discretion of the
court, besides paying compensation for the minerals removed, PD NO. 401
extracted and disposed of, the royalty and the damaged
caused thereby.

1. PUNISHABLE ACTS (USP)

1. ELEMENTS OF THEFT OF MINERALS a) The USE of tampered water or electric

meters to steal water or electricity;
(a) The accused extracted , removed and/ or
disposed of minerals; b) The STEALING or pilfering of water and/or
electrical meters, electric and/or telephone
(b) These minerals belong to the Government or wires; and
have been taken from a mining claim or claims leased,
held or owned by other persons; and c) Knowingly POSSESSING stolen or pilfered
water and/or electrical meters and stolen or
(c) The accused did not possess a mining lease or pilfered electric and/or telephone wires.
a temporary permit or any other permit to mine
granted by the Secretary or the Director under existing
mining decrees, laws and regulations.
2. THEFT OF ELECTRICITY CAN ALSO BE COMMITTED
BY ANY OF THE FOLLOWING MEANS:

2. PAYMENT OF TAX a) Turning back the dials of an electric meter;

Payment of tax receipts do not show authority to b)
extract, remove, and/or dispose of minerals.
It is only to show payment of such taxes, and not
the authority to extract, remove, and/or dispose of c)
minerals as required by the PD 463. Those receipts are
insufficient evidence to prove that the proper d)
Government office had, in effect, granted the required
permit to extract minerals from said quarry.
Fixing the electric meter in such a manner
that it will not register the actual electric
consumption;
Under-reading of electric consumption; and
Tightening screws or rotary blades to slow
down the rotation of the same.

(4) THEFT OF GOLD

“HIGHGRADING” OR THEFT OF GOLD

PD NO. 581

1. “HIGHGRADING” OR THEFT OF GOLD

The act of any person who, without the consent

of the operator of the mining claim:

(a) Shall take gold-bearing ores or rocks from a

mining claim or mining camp;

(b) Shall remove, collect or gather gold-bearing

ores or rocks in place;

(c) Shall extract or remove the gold from such

ores or rocks; or

(d) Shall prepare and treat such ores or rocks to

recover or extract the gold content thereof. (Sec 1)

2. PRESUMPTION

Unauthorized possession by any person within a

mining claim or mining camp of gold-bearing ores or
rocks or of gold extracted or removed from such ores or
rocks shall be prima facie evidence that they have
been stolen from the operator of a mining claim. (Sec
2)

(5) THEFT OF UTILITIES

PENALIZING THE UNAUTHORIZED INSTALLATION OF

WATER, ELECTICAL OR TELEPHONE CONNECTIONS,
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 27
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

CHAPTER FOUR ROBBERY WITH USURPATION OF REAL

VIOLENCE OR PROPERTY OR REAL
USURPATION INTIMIDATION AGAINST RIGHTS
PERSONS

ARTICLE 312 Refers to personal Involves real property and

property
OCCUPATION OF REAL PROPERTY OR USURPATION
OF REAL RIGHTS IN PROPERTY Art 294 (1)- (5) are single,
special and indivisible
Art. 312. Occupation of real property or usurpation of real felonies, not complex
rights in property.— Any person who, by means of violence crimes under Art 48)
against or intimidation of persons, shall take possession of any
real property or shall usurp any real rights in property Penalty imposed is based
belonging to another, in addition to the penalty incurred for on the gravity of the
the acts of violence executed by him, shall be punished by a effect or consequence of
fine from fifty (50) to one hundred (100) per centum of the
the violence or
gain which he shall have obtained, but not less than Fifteen
thousand pesos (₱15,000). intimidation.
real rights to property.
It is also a single, special
and indivisible crime, and
likewise not a complex
crime
Principal penalty is a fine
based on the value of the
gain obtained by the
accused

“If the value of the gain cannot be ascertained, a fine

from Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000) to One hundred thousand
pesos (₱100,000) shall be imposed. 6. HOW MANY INFORMATIONS SHOULD BE FILED
AGAINST THE USURPER?

Only one. What Article 312 means then is that

1. ELEMENTS (RAVI)
(a) That the offender takes possession of any
REAL property or usurps any REAL rights in property;
(b) That the real property or real rights belong to
ANOTHER;
(c) That VIOLENCE against or intimidation of
persons is used by the offender in occupying real
property or usurping real right in property; and
(d) That there is INTENT to gain.
when the usurpation is committed by means of
violence against or intimidation of persons, the
accused may be prosecuted under an information for
the violation thereof, and not for a separate crime
involving violence or intimidation.
But whenever appropriate, he may be sentenced
to suffer the penalty for the acts of violence and to pay
a fine based on the value of the gain obtained.
7. WHAT POSSIBLE CRIMES MAY ACCOMPANY THE ACT
OF USURPATION?

If by reason or on the occasion of such occupation

2. PUNISHABLE ACTS
a) Taking possession of any real property
belonging to another by means of violence
against or intimidation of persons; and
b) Usurping any real rights in property
belonging to another by means of violence
against or intimidation of persons.
or usurpation:
(a) The crime of homicide, or any of the physical
injuries penalized in Art 263(1) or (2) is committed; or
(b) When the same shall have been accompanied
by rape or intentional mutilation; or
(c) When, in the course of its execution, the
offender shall have inflicted upon any person not
responsible for its commission any of the physical
injuries covered by Article 263(3) and (4); or

3. TWO LAYERED PENALTY (d) When it is committed through intimidation or

through the infliction of physical injuries not covered
a) The penalty for the acts of violence; and by Art 263 (1) to (4), I.e., physical injuries covered by
Art 265 and 266,
b) The penalty of fine for the usurpation.

The accused may be convicted for the violation of

- If usurpation was committed with killing or physical
injuries, the penalty for robbery with homicide or
robbery with serious physical injuries will be imposed.
4. IF NO VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION
- There is ONLY CIVIL LIABILITY if there was no
violence or intimidation in taking possession.
(a) COERCION, if there is no intent to gain; and
(b) MALICIOUS MISCHIED, if there is no violence or
intimidation used and intent to gain.
5. ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE vs USURPATION (Art
312)
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
Article 312. However he shall be sentenced to:
(a) Suffer the penalty for homicide, rape,
intentional mutilation and physical injuries provided
under Article 263(1) to (4), other physical injuries or
for the intimidation, which may fall under Article 282
(grave threats) or Art 286 (grave coercion); and
(b) To pay a fine based on the value of the gain
obtained by him, which shall be an amount equivalent
to 50%, to 100% of such gain, but in no case less than
P75, provided, however, that if such value cannot be
ascertained, the fine shall be from P200 to P500.
8. REFUSAL TO OBEY THE WRIT OF POSSESSION IS
NOT COVERED BY ART 312
28
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
Refusal to vacate and deliver the land to the
plaintiff, in open defiance of a writ of execution in a
forcible entry case between the same parties, does not
constitute the crime of usurpation but the distinct
offense of contempt of court.
URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING ACT OF 1992
RA NO. 7279
1. SQUATTERS
(a) Those who have the capacity or means to pay
rent or for legitimate housing but are squatting
anyway;
(b) Those who were awarded lots but sold or lease
them out; and
(c) Those who are intruders of lands reserved for
socialized housing, pre-empting possession by
occupying the same.
ARTICLE 313
ALTERING BOUNDARIES OR LANDMARKS
Art. 313. Altering boundaries or landmarks.— Any person who
shall alter the boundary marks or monuments of towns,
provinces, or estates, or any other marks intended to
designate the boundaries of the same, shall be punished
by arresto menor or a fine not exceeding Twenty thousand
pesos (₱20,000), or both.
1. ELEMENTS
a) That there be BOUNDARY MARKS or
monuments, towns, provinces, or estates, or
any other marks intended to designate the
boundaries of the same, and
b) That the offender ALTERS said boundary
marks.
2. ALTERING
-it is understood in its general and indefinite
meaning. Any alteration is enough to constitute the
material element of the crime.
3. INTENT TO GAIN OR INTENT TO DEFRAUD IS NOT
NECESSARY
BAR QUESTIONS
1. Jorge is the owner of 10 hectares of land in the
foothills which he planted with lanzones. On his last
visit there, he was shocked to discover that his land
had been taken over by a group of 15 families whose
members had forcibly driven away his caretaker,
had appropriated the fruits for themselves, and
were not threatening to kill him should he try to
eject them.
What crime should Jorge charge these 15
families? Explain. (1988 Bar)
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
A: Jorge can charge the 15 families of 2 separate
crimes namely:
(a) Violation of Article 282, Grave threats xxx
(b) Violation of Article 312 which provides that:
“Occupation of real property or usurpation of real
rights in property. – Any person who, by means of
violence against or intimidation of persons, shall
take possession of any real property or shall usurp
any real rights in property belonging to another, in
addition to the penalty incurred for the acts of
violence executed by him, shall be punished by a
fine...”.
2. A and B, both farmers, entered the land owned by
X and planted palay thereon. When X came to know
about it, he confronted A and B and inquired why
the latter occupied his land and planted palay
thereon.
A, with a bolo in hand, replied that the land
belongs to the family of S, and not to X and at the
same time said, “If you touch this land and my palay,
blood will flow on this ground.” Because of the said
remark, X went to the Chief of Police and
complained. The Chief of Police filed a complex
crime of Usurpation of Real Property with Grave
Threats.
What crime/s were committed? (1989 Bar)
A: The crime committed by A and B is squatting under
PD 772 and not Usurpation of Real Property because in
the latter crime, there must be violence against or
intimidation of persons employed in taking possession
of any real property or in usurping any real rights in
property belonging to another (Art. 312, RPC). In this
case, it appears that A and B entered X’s land without
the owner’s consent or against his will but without any
violence against or intimidation of persons.
The crime of squatting is committed by any
person, who, with the use of force, intimidation or
threat, or taking advantage of the absence or
tolerance of the landowner, succeeds in occupying or
possessing the property of the latter against his will
for residential, commercial or any other purposes.
The threat uttered by A, not having been used in
the taking of possession of the land, it is not absorbed
in the crime of squatting. When A threatened X that
blood will flow if X touches the land and his palay, he
committed the crime of grave threats by threatening
another with the infliction of a wrong amounting to a
crime. Only A is criminally liable for the crime of grave
threats.
Arson (1994, 2000 Bar)
1. One early evening, there was a fight between
Eddie Gutierrez and Mario Cortez. Later that
evening, at about 11 o’clock, Eddie passed by the
house of Mario carrying a plastic bag containing
gasoline, threw the bag at the house of Mario who
was inside the house watching television, and then
lit it. The front wall of the house started blazing
and some neighbors yelled and shouted. Forthwith,
Mario poured water on the burning portion of the
house. Neighbors also rushed in to help put the fire
under control before any great damage could be
inflicted and before the flames have extensively
spread. Only a portion of the house was burned.
Discuss Eddie’s liability. (2000 Bar)
29
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

A: Eddie is liable for destructive arson in the

consummated stage. It is destructive arson because
fire was resorted to in destroying the house of Mario
which is an inhabited house or dwelling. The arson is
consummated because the house was in fact already
burned although not totally. In arson, it is not
required that the premises be totally burned for the
crime to be consummated. It is enough that the
premises suffer destruction by burning.

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 30

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

CHAPTER FIVE

CULPABLE INSOLVENCY

ARTICLE 314

FRAUDELENT INSOLENCY

Article 314. Fraudulent insolvency. -- Any person who shall

abscond with his property to the prejudice of his creditors,
shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor, if he be a merchant,
and the penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period
to prision mayor in its medium period, if he be not a
merchant.

1. ELEMENTS (DAP)

a) That the offender is a DEBTOR, that is, he

has obligations due and demandable;

b) That he ABSCONDS with his property; and

c) That there be PREJUDICE to his creditors.

2. HOW COMMITTED

Fraudulent insolvency is committed by any person

who shall abscond with his property to the prejudice of
his creditors.

3. WHO IS LIABLE FOR CULPABLE INSOLVENCY?

Culpable insolvency is committed by debtors who

conceal property to avoid payment of legal debt. The
penalty higher if committed by merchants.

4. ACTUAL PREJUDICE IS REQUIRED

5. COMPARED TO INSOLVENCY LAW

Unlike in the Insolvency Law, Article 314 does not

require for its application that the criminal act should
have been committed after the institution of
insolvency proceedings.

It is not necessary that the defendant should have

been adjudged bankrupt or insolvent.

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 31

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)
CHAPTER SIX
SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS
ARTICLE 315
SWINDLING (ESTAFA)
Art. 315. Swindling (estafa).— Any person who shall defraud
another by any of the means mentioned hereinbelow shall be
punished by:
1st. The penalty of prisión correccional in its maximum
period to prisión mayor in its minimum period, if the amount
of the fraud is over Two million four hundred thousand pesos
(₱2,400,000) but does not exceed Four million four hundred
thousand pesos (₱4,400,000), and if such amount exceeds the
latter sum, the penalty provided in this paragraph shall be
imposed in its maximum period, adding one year for each
additional Two million pesos (₱2,000,000); but the total
penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years.
In such cases, and in connection with the accessory penalties
which may be imposed and for the purpose of the other
provisions of this Code, the penalty shall be termed prisión
mayor or reclusion temporal, as the case may be.
2nd. The penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum
and medium periods, if the amount of the fraud is over One
million two hundred thousand pesos (₱1,200,000) but does not
exceed Two million four hundred thousand pesos
(₱2,400,000).
3rd. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period
to prisión correccional in its minimum period, if such amount
is over Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000) but does not exceed
One million two hundred thousand pesos (₱1,200,000).
4th. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum
periods, if such amount does not exceed Forty thousand pesos
(₱40,000): Provided, That in the four cases mentioned, the
fraud be committed by any of the following means:
1. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence, namely:
(a) altering the substance, quantity, or quality of
anything of value which the offender shall deliver by virtue of
an obligation to do so, even though such obligation be based
on an immoral or illegal consideration.
(b) By misappropriating or converting, to the
prejudice of another, money, goods, or any other personal
property received by the offender in trust or on commission,
or for administration, or under any other obligation involving
the duty to make delivery of or to return the same, even
though such obligation be totally or partially guaranteed by a
bond; or by denying having received such money, goods, or
other property.
(c) By taking undue advantage of the signature of
the offended party in blank, and by writing any document
above such signature in blank, to the prejudice of the
offended party or any third person.
2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or
fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneously with the
commission of the fraud:
(a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending
to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit,
agency, business or imaginary transactions, or by means of
other similar deceits.
(b) By altering the quality, fineness or weight of
anything pertaining to his art or business.
(c) By pretending to have bribed any Government
employee, without prejudice to the action for calumny which
the offended party may deem proper to bring against the
offender. In this case, the offender shall be punished by the
maximum period of the penalty.
(d) By postdating a check, or issuing a check in
payment of an obligation when the offender had no funds in
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin
the bank, or his funds deposited therein were not sufficient to
cover the amount of the check. The failure of the drawer of
the check to deposit the amount necessary to cover his check
within three (3) clays from receipt of notice from the bank
and/or the payee or holder that said check has been
dishonored for lack or insufficiency of funds shall be prime
facie evidence of deceit constituting false pretense or
fraudulent act.
Any person who shall defraud another by means of false
pretenses or fraudulent acts as defined in paragraph 2(d)
hereof shall be punished by:
1st The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum
period, if the amount of fraud is over Four million four
hundred thousand pesos (₱4,400,000) but does not exceed
Eight million eight hundred thousand pesos (₱8,800,000). If
the amount exceeds the latter, the penalty shall be reclusion
perpetua.
2nd. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its minimum
and medium periods, if the amount of the fraud is over Two
million four hundred thousand pesos (₱2,400,000) but does
not exceed Four million four hundred thousand pesos
(₱4,400,000).
3rd. The penalty of prisión mayor in its maximum
period, if the amount of the fraud is over One million two
hundred thousand pesos (₱1,200,000) but does not exceed
Two million four hundred thousand pesos (₱2,400,000).
4th. The penalty of prisión mayor in its medium period,
if such amount is over Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000) but
does not exceed One million two hundred thousand pesos
(₱1,200,000).
5th. By prisión mayor in its minimum period, if such
amount does not exceed Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000).
3. Through any of the following fraudulent means:
(a) By inducing another, by means of deceit, to sign any
document.
(b) By resorting to some fraudulent practice to insure
success in a gambling game.
(c) By removing, concealing or destroying, in whole or in
part, any court record, office files, document or any other
papers.
1. ELEMENTS IN GENERAL [DD]
a) That the accused DEFRAUDED another by
abuse of confidence, or by means of deceit;
and
b) That DAMAGE or prejudice capable of
pecuniary estimation is caused to the
offended party or third persons.
*** Damage may consist of :
(i) Offended party being deprived of his
money or property as a result of the defraudation;
(ii) Disturbance in property rights; or
(iii) Temporary prejudice.
2. WAYS OF COMMITTING ESTAFA [UAB-FABPF-
a) With UNFAITHFULNESS or Abuse of
Confidence:
i. With unfaithfulness;
ii. With Abuse of Confidence;
iii. By taking undue advantage of the
signature in blank;
32
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

b) By means of FALSE pretenses or fraudulent -The act of using or disposing of another’s property as
acts: if it was one’s own; Thing has been devoted to a
purpose or use other than that agreed upon.
i. Using FICTITIOUS name or false
pretenses and other similar deceit; c) Material Possession

ii. By ALTERING the quality, fineness or -The actual physical possession of personal property,
weight of anything pertaining to his art where the possessor cannot claim a better right to such
or business; property than that of its owner.

iii. By pretending to have BRIBED any d) Juridical Possession

Government employee;
-The possession of the personal property which arises
iv. By POSTDATING a check or issuing a from a lawful causation, contract or agreement,
check in payment of an obligation; express or implied, written or unwritten or by virtue of
a provision of law.
v. By obtaining FOOD or accommodation
at a hotel; (i) In such a case, the possessor of the property
has a better right to it than the owner and may set up
c) Through Fraudulent means: his possession thereof against the latter due to the
lawful transaction between them.
i. By inducing another to sign any
document; e) Ownership
ii. By resorting to some fraudulent - there is ownership of the personal property when
practice to insure success in gambling; there is no obligation to return exactly the same
or property given or lent to the possessor.
iii. By removing, concealing or destroying THEFT = Material Possession + Misappropriation
documents

ESTAFA = Juridical Possession + Material Possession +

NO. 1 A-B. ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS OR ABUSE Misappropriation
OF CONFIDENCE

NO CRIME = Ownership + Juridical Possession + Material

1. ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS; ELEMENTS Possession + Misappropriation
a) That the offender has an ONEROUS
obligation to deliver something of value;
4. OBLIGATION INVOLVING DUTY TO RETURN
b) That he ALTERS its substance, quantity or
quality; and a) Contracts of Deposit

c) That DAMAGE or prejudice capable of b) Commodatum

pecuniary estimation is caused to the
offended party or third persons. c) Lease

d) Quasi-contract of Solutio Indebiti

2. ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE; ELEMENTS e) Trust Receipt transactions

[TSA- MisCoDe-PD]

a) That money, goods, or other personal

property be received by the offender in
TRUST, or on COMMISSION, or for
ADMINISTRATION, or under any other
obligation involving the duty to make
delivery of, or to return the same;
b) That there be MISAPPROPRIATION or
CONVERSION of such money or property by
the offender, or DENIAL on his part of such
receipt;
5. DEMAND
Demand is not an element of the felony or a
condition precedent to the filing of a criminal
complaint for estafa.
In a prosecution for estafa, demand is not
necessary where there is evidence of misappropriation
or conversion.(Cosme Jr. Vs People, Nov 27, 2006)

c) That such misappropriation or conversion or
denial is to the PREJUDICE of another; and
d) That there be DEMAND made by the
offended party to the offender.
GR. DEMAND NEED NOT BE FORMAL OR WRITTEN
EX:
(i) When the offender’s obligation to comply is
subject to a period (People v. Librea); and

(ii) When the accused cannot be located despite

3. DEFINITION OF TERMS due diligence (People v Villegas)

a) Misappropriation

-The act if taking something for one’s own benefit. 6. IS NOVATION A GROUND TO EXTINGUISH CRIMINAL
LIABILITY UNDER ESTAFA?
b) Conversion

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 33

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

No. Novation is not one of the grounds for the of a bank teller. Her possession is the possession of the
extinguishment of criminal liability under Art 89 of the bank. Thus, she only received physical and not juridical
RPC. possession of the missing cash.

However, where such novation occurs before the Bank only receives the material possession of
criminal liability for estafa has been incurred, that is money deposited with them and not the juridical
when not all the elements therefore are present, then possession.
no criminal liability attaches.

Criminal liability for estafa already committed is

not affected by Novation or Compromise, for it is a 10. WILL DELIVERY TO A 3RD PERSON OF THE THING
public offense which must be prosecuted and punished HELD IN TRUST CONSTITUTE A DEFENSE IN ESTAFA
by the State at its own volition.
In cases of Estafa, the profit or gain must be
obtained by the accused personally, through his own
acts, and his mere negligence in permitting another to
7. THEFT vs ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE take advantage or benefit from the entrusted chattel
cannot constitute estafa under Art 315 (1) (b) ;
THEFT ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE UNLESS the evidence should disclose that the
agent acted in conspiracy or connivance with the one
As to the acquisition of property who carried out the actual misappropriation, when the
accused would be answerable for the acts of his
The offender takes the The offender receives the
co-conspirators. If there is no such evidence, direct or
thing without the owner’s thing from the offended
circumstantial, and if the proof is clear that the
consent. party
accused herself was the innocent victim of her
As to possession sub-agent’s faithfulness, her acquittal is in order.

Offender acquires only Offender acquires the

Material possession or juridical possession of the NO. 1 C. ESTAFA BY TAKING UNDUE ADVANTAGE OF
physical possession of the thing and the material THE SIGNATURE IN BLANK
thing possession

1. ELEMENTS
8. ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE vs
MALVERSATION a) That the paper with the signature of the
offended party be in BLANK;
ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF MALVERSATION
CONFIDENCE b) That the offended party should have
DELIVERED it to the offender;
Offenders are entrusted with funds or property.
c) That above the signature of the offended
Both are continuing offenses. party a document is WRITTEN by the
offender without authority to do so; and
As to the funds /property involved
d) That the document so written creates a
Private Usually public LIABILITY of, or causes damage to the
As to the offender offended party or any third person.

Private individual or even Usually a public officer is

a public officer who is not accountable for public 2. IF PAPER IN BLANK WAS STOLEN
accountable for public funds or property
funds or propertyic If the paper with the signature in blank was stolen,
the crime is falsification of documents by making it
As to the commission by negligence appear that he participated in a transaction when in
fact he did not.
There is no estafa through Malversation can be
negligence committed through
Abandonment or
negligence

As to how committed NO. 2 ESTAFA BY MEANS OF DECEIT

Crime is committed by Crime is committed by 1. ELEMENTS

misappropriating, appropriating, taking or
a) That there must be FALSE pretense,
converting or denying misappropriating or
fraudulent act or fraudulent means;
having received money, consenting, or through
goods, or other personal abandonment or b) That such false pretense, fraudulent act or
property negligence fraudulent means must be made or executed
prior to or simultaneously with the
commission of the FRAUD;
9. BANK TELLER MISAPPROPRIATES MONEY
c) That the offended party must have relied on
When a bank’s cash custodian is found short of the false pretense, fraudulent act, or
cash under her primary responsibility her crime is NOT fraudulent means, that is, he was INDUCED
ESTAFA but QUALIFIED THEFT. Her possession of the to part with his money or property because
cash belonging to the bank is similar to the possession
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 34
 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

of the false pretense, fraudulent act, or Art 316.

fraudulent means; and

d) That as a result thereof, the offended party

suffered DAMAGE.
Art. 318. Other deceits.— The penalty of arresto
mayor and a fine of not less than the amount of the
2. WAYS OF COMMITTING ESTAFA BY MEANS OF damage caused and not more than twice such amount
DECEIT shall be imposed upon any person who shall defraud or
damage another by any other deceit not mentioned in
a) PAR 2-A
the preceding articles of this Chapter.
(a) By using a fictitious name;
Any person who, for profit or gain, shall interpret
(b) By Falsely pretending to possess: dreams, make forecasts, tell fortunes, or take
advantage of the credulity of the public in any other
i. Power; similar manner, shall suffer the penalty of arresto
mayor or a fine not exceeding Forty thousand pesos
ii. Influence; (₱40,000).
iii. Qualifications;

iv. Property;

v. Credit;

vi. Agency; or

vii. Business or imaginary transactions; and

(c) By means of other Similar deceits.

-A person convicted for illegal recruitment under

the Labor Code, as mended, can be convicted of estafa,
under Art 315 Par 2, if the elements of the crime are
present. (People vs Calonzo, Sept 27, 1996)

b) PAR 2-B

-committed by altering the quality, fineness,

weight of anything pertaining to his art or business.

c) PAR 2-C

-committed by pretending to have bribed any

Government employee

-The accused, by pretending to have bribed a

government employee, can be held further liable for
such calumny in a criminal action for either slander or
libel depending on how he recounted the supposed
bribery. However, the crime committed is CORRIPTION
OF PUBLIC OFFICERS.

d) PAR 2-D

ELEMENTS

(1) That the offender POSTDATED a check, or

ISSUED a check in payment of an obligation; and

(2) That such postdating or issuing a check was

done when the offender had NO funds in the bank, or
his funds deposited therein were not sufficient to cover
the amount of the check.

e) PAR 2-E

3. PAR 2-C

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 35

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT UNDER THE MIGRANT

WORKERS ACT (RA NO. 8042)

Illegal Recruitment

-Any act of canvassing, enlisting, hiring, or

procuring workers, including referring contract
services, promising, or advertising for employment
abroad whether for profit or not, when undertaken
by a non-licensee or non-holder of authority. (RA
10022,Sec 6)

Economic Sabotage:

(a) Illegal Recruitment by Syndicate- committed

by a group of 3 or more persons conspiring or
confederating with one another;

(b) Large Scale Illegal Recruitment- committed

against 3 or more persons individually or a group.

-A person convicted for illegal recruitment under

the Labor Code, as mended, can be convicted of estafa,
under Art 315 Par 2, if the elements of the crime are
present. (People vs Calonzo, Sept 27, 1996)

Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 36

 CRIMINAL LAW( BOOK TWO)

intent to cause such child to lose its civil status.

“Any physician or surgeon or public officer who, in

violation of the duties of his profession or office. shall
cooperate in the execution of any of the crimes
mentioned in the two (2) next preceding paragraphs,
shall suffer the penalties therein prescribed and also
the penalty of temporary special disqualification.”

“Art. 328. Special cases of malicious mischief.— Any person

who shall cause damage to obstruct the performance of public
functions, or using any poisonous or corrosive substance; or
spreading any infection or contagion among cattle; or who
causes damage to the property of the National Museum or
National Library, or to any archive or registry, waterworks,
road, promenade, or any other thing used in common by the
public, shall be punished:

“1. By prisión correccional in its minimum and medium

periods, if the value of the damage caused exceeds Two
hundred thousand pesos (₱200,000);

“2. Bv arresto mayor if such value does not exceed the

abovementioned amount but is over Forty thousand pesos
(₱40,000); and

“3. By arresto menor, if such value does not exceed Forty

thousand pesos (₱40,000).”

“Art. 329. Other mischiefs.— The mischiefs not included in

the next preceding article shall be punished:

“1. By arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods, if

the value of the damage caused exceeds Two hundred
thousand pesos (₱200,000);

“2. By arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if

such value is over Forty thousand pesos (₱40,000) but does not
exceed Two hundred thousand pesos (₱200,000); and

“3. By arresto menor or a fine of not less than the value of the
damage caused and not more than Forty thousand pesos
(₱40,000), if the amount involved does not exceed Forty
thousand pesos (₱40,000) or cannot be estimated.”

“Art. 331. Destroying or damaging statues, public

monuments or paintings.— Any person who shall
destroy or damage statues or any other useful or
ornamental public monument, shall suffer the penalty
of arresto mayor in its medium period to prisión
correccional in its minimum period.

“Any person who shall destroy or damage any useful or

ornamental painting of a public nature shall suffer the
penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding Forty
thousand pesos (₱40,000), or both such fine and
imprisonment, in the discretion of the court.”

Art. 347. Simulation of births, substitution of one child

for another and concealment or abandonment of a
legitimate child.— The simulation of births and the
substitution of one child for another shall be punished
by prisión mayor and a fine of not exceeding Two
hundred thousand pesos (₱200,000).

“The same penalties shall be imposed upon any person

who shall conceal or abandon any legitimate child with
Engr. Ariel Mark Pilotin 37