Sie sind auf Seite 1von 16



1. XXX, an employee of AAA Company, had free access inside the establishment of his
employer. While in there, he took, steal, and intended to deposit to his own bank account a
check amounting to P10,000. Such check was supposed to be the payment made by GGG,
AAA Company’s client, to the company. However, when XXX presented the check to the
bank, the bank dishonored the same due to the insufficiency of funds of the maker. XXX
turned to GGG and asked the latter to pay the amount in cash. It was then that XXX was
apprehended and caught. What crime/crimes did XXX commit?

XXX committed an impossible crime of qualified theft. There is factual impossibility when extraneous
circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond his control prevent the consummation of the intended
crime. Qualified theft is a crime against property. The mere act of unlawfully taking the check meant for
AAA Company showed his intent to gain. Were it not for the fact that the check bounced, he would have
received the face value thereof, which was not rightfully his. Therefore, it was only due to the extraneous
circumstance of the check being unfunded, a fact unknown to him at the time, that prevented the crime
from being produced. The thing unlawfully taken by XXX turned out to be absolutely worthless, because
the check was eventually dishonored (Jacinto vs. People, G.R. No. 162540, July 13, 2009).

2. What are the crimes which has no frustrated stage?

1. Rape (People vs. Campuhan, G.R. No. 192433, March 30, 2000).
2. Robbery/theft (Valenzuela vs. People, G.R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007).

3. XXX, an immigration officer, approved the applications for legalization of the stay of 32
aliens in the country. Because these aliens were allegedly disqualified by law, XXX was
charged with a violation of Sec. 3(e) of R.A. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act). The
prosecution filed 32 Informations against XXX for the 32 disqualified aliens benefited by
XXX’s act. Is the act of approving the 32 applications constitute a single crime?

Yes, it will. XXX committed a single act of approving applications for legalization under a single criminal
impulse in violation of a single penal provision, and that is, Section 3(e) of RA No. 3019. The acts as
alleged in these information constitutes delito continuado. Hence, the accused should have been
charged in one Information (Santiago vs. Garchitorena, G.R. No. 109266, December 2, 1993).

4. What are the kinds of Complex Crime?

Compound Crime Complex Crime Proper Special Complex Crime

Compound crime (delito Complex Crime Proper (delito Composite Crime or
compuesto) - a single act complejo) – when an offense is a Special complex Crime –
constituting two or more grave necessary means of committing refers to two or more crimes
or less grave felonies. Its another. Its requisites are: where the law prescribes a
requisites are: 1. That at least two felonies single penalty.
1. That a single act is are committed;
performed by the 2. That one or some of the
offender; and felonies must be necessary
2. That the single act means to commit the other,
produces (a) two or and
more grave or less 3. That both or all the crimes
grave felonies. must be punished under the
Revised Penal Code.
Light felonies produced by the
same act should be treated
and punished as separate
offenses or may be absorbed
by the grave felony.

5. Define and illustrate the Doctrine of Common Elements.

Under this doctrine, an element used to complete one crime cannot be legally re-used to complete the
requisites of a subsequent crime. For instance, the common element of estafa and falsification of private
document is damage to the complainant. Thus, falsification of private document and estafa cannot co-
exist. The use of damage as an element of falsification of private document precludes the reuse thereof
to complete the elements of estafa, and vice-versa. (Batulanon v. People, G.R. No. 139857, September
15, 2006).

6. Compare and distinguish aggravating circumstances and special aggravating circumstances

in Criminal Law.

Aggravating Special Aggravating

- has the effect of increasing the penalty for the - cannot increase the penalty to the next higher
crime to its maximum period, but it cannot degree and it does not change the character of the
increase the same to the next higher degree. offense charged.

- must always be alleged and charged in the - It must always be alleged and charged in the
information, and must be proven during the trial in information, and must be proven during the trial in
order to be appreciated. order to be appreciated.

- it can be offset by an ordinary mitigating - it cannot be offset by an ordinary mitigating

circumstance. circumstance.
(Palaganas v. People, G.R. No. 165483, September 12, 2006)

7. Can self-defense and defense of fulfillment of duty be invoked simultaneously?

No, it cannot be invoked simultaneously. Self-defense and fulfillment of duty operate on different
principles. Self-defense is based on the principle of self-preservation from mortal harm, while fulfillment
of duty is premised on the due performance of duty. The difference between the two justifying
circumstances is clear, as the requisites of self-defense and fulfillment of duty are different.

8. What are the legal effects of conspiracy?

Once an express or implied conspiracy is proved, all of the conspirators are liable as co-principals
regardless of the extent and character of their respective active participation in the commission of the
crime or crimes perpetrated in furtherance of the conspiracy because in contemplation of law the act of
one is the act of all (People vs. Go, G.R. 168539, March 25, 2014).

9. Explain the "Peanut Butter Defense" and its effect on the part of the person invoking it.

Peanut Butter Defense refers to the act of the offender in "spreading the blame." A person accused of
the crime spreads liability to others, and in effect, he implicitly admits his criminal liability.
Peanut Butter Defense is in a form of negative pregnant, or a form of negative expression which
carries with it an affirmation or at least an implication of some kind favorable to the adverse party. It is a
denial pregnant with an admission of the substantial facts alleged in the pleading (J. Sandoval Lectures).

10. Distinguish an Accomplice from a Conspirator.

Accomplices Conspirator
Conspirators are part of the decision to
Accomplices are mere instruments commit the crime.
Extent of
who concurs in the commission of
the crime.

Penalty One degree lower than the penalty Penalty of the principal
of the principal

The performance of previous or Performance of a previous,

simultaneous acts. simultaneous or subsequent act in
Time of
furtherance of conspiracy. Time of
participation is not important.

11. Distinguish Recidivism, Reiteracion, Habitual Delinquency and Quasi-Recidivism.

Recidivism Reiteracion/ Quasi-Recidivism Habitual

Art. 14(9) Habituality Art. 160 Delinquency
Art. 14(10) Art. 62
Ordinary Aggravating Ordinary Aggravating Special Aggravating
Judgment of Sentence involving the Judgment of conviction Judgments of
conviction involving first crime had already involving the first crime is conviction
the first crime is been served out when already final and the involving the
already final at that the second crime is second crime is previous
time when the second committed committed before crimes are
crime is being tried beginning to serve already final,
such sentence, or while or the accused
serving the same was already
released when
he was
convicted of
within 10
years from
last final
judgement or
last release
Offenses must be Previous and subsequent The character of the Previous
Recidivism Reiteracion/ Quasi-Recidivism Habitual
Art. 14(9) Habituality Art. 160 Delinquency
Art. 14(10) Art. 62
included in the same offenses need not be crime is not important conviction
title of the RPC embraced in the same ONLY of either
title of the code Note: Even if the second of the
crime is punishable under following:
special law, if the penalty [FERTS]
is borrowed from RPC, Falsification,
quasi-recidivism can still Estafa,
be considered Robbery
Theft, Serious
or Less
Physical Injury
At least 2 convictions At least 2 convictions. It At least 2 convictions. It At least 3
does not matter when does not matter when convictions
the last sentence was the last one was
served. committed.
Divisible penalty shall Divisible penalty shall be Divisible penalty shall be Additional
be applied in its applied in its maximum applied in its maximum penalty,
maximum period or period or the lesser period or the lesser depending on
the lesser component component of reclusion component of reclusion the number of
of reclusion perpetau perpetua to death shall perpetua to death shall convictions as
to death shall be be applied. This is be applied. This is NOT mentioned in
applied. This is subject subject to the off-set rule subject to the off-set rule Art. 62(5).
to the off-set rule

12. What are the rules for the application of DIVISIBLE PENALTIES?

No AC and no 1 MC and No AC 1 AC and no MC Multiple MC and 2 or more MC

Medium Period Minimum period Maximum period To offset each One degree lower
other according to (privileged
relative weight mitigating)
(Article 64, RPC).

a) If there are 3 mitigating circumstances, the 2 mitigating circumstances shall be considered in
lowering the penalty prescribed by law by one degree and 1 mitigating circumstance shall be
taken to apply the reduced penalty in its minimum period (Nizurtado vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No.
107838, December 07, 1994; People vs. Castuera, G.R. No. L-62607, December 15, 1982).

b) If there are 4 mitigating circumstances and 1 aggravating circumstances, applying the offset rule,
there are 3 remaining mitigating circumstances. Special mitigating circumstance will not be
appreciated because of the presence of aggravating circumstance (Page 305, Criminal Law
Review Vol. I, Judge Marlo Campanilla).

13. Explain the Three-Fold Rule in Criminal Law.

Under the three-fold rule, in serving multiple sentences, the period of imprisonment that a convict must
serve must not exceed three-fold the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties
imposed upon him (Page 318, Criminal Law Reviewer Vol. I by Judge Marlo Campanilla, 2018 Edition).
14. Does novation extinguish criminal liability in case of estafa?

No. Novation is not one of the grounds prescribed by the RPC for the extinguishment of criminal liability.
Novation affects only the civil liability of the offender, and not his criminal liability. (MBTC vs. Reynaldo,
G.R. No. 164538, August 9, 2010).

15. In private crimes, does the marriage of the offended party with the offender extinguish the
criminal liability of co-principals, accomplices and accessories?

Yes it extinguishes the criminal liability. Article 344 of the RPC expressly provides that the benefit shall be
applicable to the co-principals, accomplices and accessories.

16. In cases of marital rape, will the forgiveness by the wife extinguish criminal liability?

Yes, the forgiveness by the wife shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty. (People of the
Philippines vs Edgar Jumawan, G.R. No. 187495, April 21, 2014, J. REYES)

17. Discuss Prescription of Crime and Prescription of Penalty.


As to Nature Forfeiture or the loss of the right Forfeiture or the loss of the right of
of the State to prosecute the the government to punish the
offender after the lapse of a offender after the lapse of a certain
certain time fixed by law time fixed by law

As to Commencement From the date of discovery by From the date of evasion of service
Period the offended party, authorities, of sentence by the accused
and their agents

As to Interruption Interrupted by the filing of the Interrupted if the defendant should

Complaint or Information; and give himself up, be captured,
shall commence to run again should go to some foreign country
when such proceedings are with which this government has no
terminated without the accused extradition treaty, or should commit
being convicted or acquitted, or another crime before the expiration
are unjustifiably stopped for any of the period of prescription (Page
reason not imputable to him 359, Criminal Law Reviewer Vol. 1
(Art. 91, RPC). by Judge Marlo Campanilla, 2018
As to Penalty Prescribed penalty under the Penalty actually imposed by final
Contemplated law judgment

18. Compare and distinguish Amnesty from Pardon by Chief Executive.


Relieves the person pardoned from the penal Extended to group of persons who committed
consequences of the crime but does not erase of a political offense, which puts into oblivion
blot out the crime itself. the offense itself.
Does not erase the stain of bad behaviour; person Totally extinguishes criminal liability, penalty,
pardoned is still a convicted criminal. and all its effects.
Looks forward and relieves the offender from the Looks backward, and abolishes and puts into
consequences of an offense of which he has been oblivion the offense itself, it so overlooks and
convicted, that is, it abolishes or forgives the obliterates the offense with which he is
punishment, and for that reason it does not work charged, that the person released by
for the restoration of civil and political rights unless amnesty stands as though he had committed
expressly restored by the pardon. no offense.
Granted after conviction. Granted generally before or after the
institution of a criminal prosecution and
sometimes after conviction.

19. In rape cases, what is the so-called “Women’s Honor/Maria Clara” Doctrine?

The Women’s Honor Doctrine states that no young Filipina of decent repute would publicly admit that she
has been sexually abused, unless that is the truth, for it is her natural instinct to protect her honor.
(People vs. Amarela, G.R. No. 225642-63, January 17, 2018).

20. Rustom, a Filipino male went to America to undergo sex reassignment. After the operation
became successful, Rustom return to Philippines and changed her name to “Bebe Gandang
Reyna” who now has all the biological anatomy of a female. One evening, while walking in
the streets of Tondo, Robin saw “Bebe Gandang Reyna” and raped her by inserting his penis
forcibly into the “operated vagina” of “Bebe Gandang Reyna”. What crime/s, if any, did
Robin commit?

Robin committed the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness. Having sexual intercourse through force with a gay,
who underwent gender reassignment, is not rape through sexual intercourse since the victim is not a
woman. Female gender of the victim is an element of this crime. Neither instrument or object rape is
committed since the offender used his penis, and not an instrument or object, in committing the crime,
and the opening made through surgery to resemble the appearance of a vagina is not within the
contemplation of the words ‘genital or anal orifice’; nor rape through oral intercourse or sodomy is
committed because such surgical orifice is not a mouth or anal orifice. Hence, the crime committed is acts
of lasciviousness. (Supplied by Judge Marlo Campanilla).

21. XXX and YYY, aiding each other, destroyed the door lock of the stall of the victim AAA, and
once inside, took the personal effects of the latter, the value of which totaling to P42,000.00.
AAA’s stall was a store not used as a dwelling. What was the crime committed by XXX and

The crime committed was robbery in an uninhabited place or in a private building . Since the store
was not actually occupied at the time of the robbery and was not used as a dwelling because the owner
lived in a separate house, and not an inhabited house, public building or building dedicated to religious
worship and their dependencies under Article 299, the robbery committed therein is punished under
Article 302 (Marquez v. People, G.R. No. 181138, December 3, 2012).

22. Distinguish Estafa from BP Blg 22.

Estafa - Art. 315 2(d) BP Blg 22

Malum in se Malum prohibitum

Crime against property Crime against public interest

Deceit is an element Deceit is not required

The act constituting the offense is postdating or Punishes the making or drawing of any check that
issuing a heck in payment of an obligation when is subsequently dishonored, whether issued in
the offender has no funds in the bank or his funds payment of an obligation or to merely guarantee
deposited therein were not sufficient to cover the an obligation. Issuance of a check not the non-
amount of the check payment of the obligation is punished.

Not violated if the check issued in payment of a Violated if check is issued in payment of a pre-
pre-existing obligation existing obligation

There must be damage Damage is not required

Drawer is given 3 days to make arrangements of Drawer is given 5 baking days to make
payment after receipt of notice of dishonor arrangements of the payment after receipt of
notice of dishonor

23. Can person be liable for BP Blg 22 for a dishonored check drawn against uncollected

No, DAUD means that the account has sufficient funds on its face but not yet available to the drawer
because the deposit has not yet been cleared. (Dy v Pp, GR No. 158312, Nov. 14, 2008)

24. Compare and distinguish bigamy from illegal marriage.


Subsequent marriage must be perfectly valid Subsequent marriage is annullable or void even if
except that it is bigamous. there is no 1st marriage.

Refers only to contracting of a 2nd marriage Covers all marriages which are otherwise voidable or
before the former marriage has been legally null and void other than bigamous marriage.
dissolved or before the absent spouse has been
declared presumptively dead.

25. X placed the words "gay" to a billboard against Mayor Y. Y was offended and believed that it
was highly libelous, offensive and defamatory to the good name, character, and reputation
of Y and his office. Was libel committed?

No, libel was not committed. There are no derogatory imputations of a crime, vice or defect or any act,
omission, condition, status or circumstance tending, directly or indirectly, to cause his dishonor. It is a
mere epithet or personal reaction on Y’s performance of official duty and not purposely designed to
malign and besmirch his reputation and dignity more so to deprive him of public confidence. (Lopez vs.
People, G.R. No. 172203, February 14, 2011)

26. After receiving a subpoena for the dishonoured checks, Cardo issued a replacement
check which adequately covered the amount of the bounced checks. However, 6
months later, a case was filed against him before the MeTC of Makati. Will the case

No, the case will not prosper. The spirit of B.P. Blg. 22, is the protection of the credibility and stability of
the banking system, would not be served by penalizing people who have evidently made amends for their
mistakes and made restitutions for damages even before charges have been filed against them. In effect,
the payment of the checks before filing of the Informations has already attained the purpose of the law.
(Ariel T. Lim vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 190834, November 26, 2014)


27. Where both burning and death occurred at the same occasion, what crime/crimes was/were


Arson (Simple or Destructive as the Burning of the building or edifice
case may be)
Special complex crime of arson with Burning of the building or edifice
Murder Kill a particular person who may be in a building or edifice, when
fire is resorted to as the means to accomplish such goal
Two separate and distinct crimes – Kill a particular person and in fact the offender has already done
homicide/murder and arson so, but fire is resorted as a means to cover up the killing
(People vs. Baluntong, G.R. 182061, March 15, 2010)

NOTE: There is no complex crime of arson with homicide because the crime of arson absorbs the
resultant death or is a separate crime altogether. (People vs. Abayon, G.R. 204891, September 14, 2016)

ANTI-CARNAPPING LAW (R.A. 6539, as amended by R.A. 7659 and 10883)

28. XXX took away one motor vehicle and killed AAA the driver of the said vehicle, during the
commission of the crime. Can XXX be convicted of the special complex crime of carnapping
with homicide?

Yes, XXX can be convicted. To prove the special complex crime of carnapping with homicide, there must
be proof not only of the essential elements of carnapping, but also that carnapping was the original
criminal design of the culprit and the killing was perpetrated on the occasion thereof. (People
vs. Mallari, G.R. No. 179041, April 1, 2013)

In “New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016” what is the penalty imposed when the owner, driver,
or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle was killed or raped?

Under Sec. 3 par. 2 of R.A. No. 10883, the penalty of life imprisonment shall be imposed when the
owner, driver, or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed or raped in the commission of the



29. AAA, a 14-year-old boy went with P in Subic for initiation rites in a fraternity. After
succumbing to P’s persuasion to drink alcohol and smoke marijuana, he lost control of
himself. P performed oral sex on AAA. P was charged with other sexual abuse under Section
5(b) Article III of RA 7610. Is P liable?

Yes. P is liable for violating Sec. 5(b), Art. III of R.A. 7610, which have the following elements: (1) the
accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct; (2) the said act is performed with a
child exploited in prostitution or subjected to sexual abuse; and (3) the child, whether male or female, is
below 18 years of age. Here AAA was deemed subjected to “other sexual abuse” when he was subjected
to lascivious conduct under the coercion or influence of any adult. Here, P influenced minor AAA to go to
Subic, made him take drugs and drink liquor; and when he was already high and out of control, P
performed lascivious conduct on AAA. (Pinlac vs. People, GR No.197458, November 11, 2015)


30. Distinguish Fencing from an Accessory to Theft or Robbery.

Fencing Accessory to theft or Robbery

A fence is punished as a principal under PD As a general rule, an accessory to robbery or theft
1612 and the penalty is higher. under the RPC is punished two degrees lower than
the principal.

Fencing is a Malum Prohibitum and therefore In accessory to the crime of robbery or theft under
there is no need to prove criminal intent of the RPC, intent is an element of the crime therefore
accused. Good Faith is not a defense. good faith is a proper defense.

All the acts of one who is an accessory to the The accessory in crimes of robbery and theft could
crime of robbery and theft are included in the be prosecuted as such under the RPC or as a fence
acts defined as fencing. under PD 1612.

(Festin, 2013, Special Penal Laws Criminal Reviewer, Volume II)


31. Who are persons liable in Hazing?

1. Those who directly participated in inflicting physical harm and inducement;
2. Those who has mere presence in the initiation is a prima facie participation, unless prevented
the initiation rite.
3. Recruiters- considered as principal by inducement.
4. Officers- who are not present but has knowledge of the initiation rite.
5. Parents of the member who owns the place where the initiation took place.
6. School Authority or Faculty Members- considered as accomplices if they have knowledge of
the hazing initiation but failed to act immediately.
7. Owners of the place- considered as accomplices where the hazing initiation took place. (Lopez,

ANTI-PLUNDER ACT (R.A. 7080, as amended)

32. Distinguish series from combination under the Anti-Plunder Act.

"Series" refers to a repetition of the same predicate act in any of the items in Section 1 (d) of the R.A.
7080; While, "combination" contemplates the commission of at least any two different predicate acts in
any of said items (Estrada vs Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001).

33. Differentiate Single to Multiple Conspiracy.

Single Conspiracy Multiple Conspiracy

All of the conspirators agree to commit a felony Each conspirator, by their individual acts, agreed
by different and independent acts. to participate, directly or indirectly, in the
amassing, accumulation and acquiring ill-gotten
wealth result in plunder.

Anyone or all of them are mastermind. There is one mastermind that dictates the goal.

(Estrada v Sandiganbayan, GR No. 148965, February 26, 2002)


34. May Philippine courts exercise jurisdiction over an offense constituting psychological
violence under VAWC, committed through marital infidelity, when the alleged illicit
relationship occurred or is occurring outside the country?
Yes, the courts may exercise jurisdiction. A person charged under VAWC, may manifest a continuing or
transitory crime, be validly tried in any municipality or territory where the offense was in part committed.
Further, it is the violence inflicted and not the marital infidelity per se that the law seeks to outlaw. Thus,
the alleged extra-marital affair causing the offended wife mental and emotional anguish is committed
abroad, the same does not place a prosecution under R.A. No. 9262 absolutely beyond the reach of
Philippine courts. (AAA v. BBB, GR No. 212448, January 11, 2018)


35. Is the presentation of money used in the buy-bust operation required in the prosecution for
violations of R.A. 9165?

NO, because it is not an element of the crime. It is sufficient to show that the illicit transaction did take
place, coupled with the presentation in court of the corpus delicti in evidence. (People v. Gapas, G.R. No.
193385, December 1, 2014)


36. What are the instances/crimes to which the benefits of ISLAW are not applicable? (1947,
1959, 1964, 1970, 1988, 1999 and 2003)

1.) Treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason, misprision of treason, rebellion or sedition,
espionage or piracy;
2.) Habitual Delinquents;
3.) Those who have escaped from confinement or evaded sentence;
4.) Those who violated the terms of conditional pardon;
5.) Penalty of imprisonment, the maximum term of which does not exceed one year;
6.) Death Penalty or life imprisonment (Section 2 of Act No. 4103); or Reclusion Perpetual (R.A. No.
7.) Use of trafficked victim. (Section 11 of R.A. No. 9208, as amended by R.A. No. 10364).

Application of Imposable Penalties; When the penalty imposable for the crime is:

 Below 1 year  straight penalty should be imposed; meaning – no range of penalties.

 Above 1 year  indeterminate sentence should be imposed; meaning – there must be a
minimum and a maximum penalty.
 Has a minimum below 1 year and a maximum above 1 year  Treat as if “Above 1

How to apply ISLAW:

1. Special law - fix the minimum to the minimum imposable penalty – which should be more than
1 year, and maximum not more than the maximum.
2. RPC
- Minimum: Within range of penalty, 1 degree lower than that prescribed by RPC, without
considering any ordinary aggravating or mitigating circumstances. Consider all others (e.g. 2
degrees lower for special mitigating circumstance of minority, circumstances that qualify
homicide to murder).

- Maximum: Imposed by the RPC and considering the mitigating and aggravating.

Determine the proper penalty applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law for the crime of
Bigamy (prescribed penalty is Prision Mayor; no mitigating and aggravating circumstances).

Since there is no aggravating and mitigating circumstance, the maximum term should be prision Mayor
in its medium period.

The minimum term shall be within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the code for
the offense. The prescribed penalty for bigamy is prision mayor, one degree lower from prision mayor is
prision correccional. Thus, the minimum term should be prision correccional in any of its period.

JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT (R.A. 9344, as amended by R.A. 10630, and in
relation to P.D. 603)

37. Distinguish intervention from diversion.

Intervention Diversion
Refers to a series of activities which are designed Refers to an alternative, child-appropriate process
to address issues that caused the child to commit of determining the responsibility and treatment of a
an offense. It may take the form of an child conflict with the law on the basis of his/her
individualized treatment program which may social, cultural, economic, psychological or
include counselling, skills training, education, and educational background without resorting to formal
other activities that will enhance his/her court proceedings.
psychological, emotional and psycho-social well-
This is available to a child 15 years old or less at This process governs when the child is over 15
the time of the commission of the crime or years old but below 18 at the time of the
although over 15 but below 18 years old at the commission of the crime and he acted with
time of commission of the crime, the child acted discernment.
without discernment.


38. Compare and distinguish an Accessory for a Crime with a Principal for violation of P.D. 1829.


The exempting circumstance of relationship
under Article 20 of RPC cannot be appreciated
The exempting circumstance of relationship under in favor of an accused in the crime of
Article 20 of RPC can be appreciated in favor of obstruction of justice since he is being
an accessory to a felony. prosecuted as principal and not as an

Light felony is punishable except when the Obstruction of justice can be committed
accused is merely an accessory (Article 16 of
even though the crime under investigation is
RPC) or when it is at the attempted or
frustrated stage unless it is a crime against property a light felony.
or person (Article 7).
(Criminal Law Reviewer Vol. I by Judge Marlo Campanilla, 2018 Edition).

PROBATION LAW (P.D. 968, as amended by R.A. 10707)

39. Who are disqualified to avail the benefits of Probation?

a. Those sentenced to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years (Section 9 of
P.D. No. 968) unless the crime involved is possession or use of dangerous drugs committed by first time
minor offender (Section 70 or R.A. No. 9165);
Those convicted of any crime against national security;
b. (N.B. Rebellion is a crime against public order and not a crime against national security. But it is not
probationable since the penalty prescribed for it is higher than six years of imprisonment.)
a. Those who have been previously convicted by final judgment of an offense
punished by imprisonment of more than six months and one day and/or a fine of
more than P1,000;
b. Those who have been once on probation;
c. Those who are already serving sentence at the time the substantive provisions of the law
became applicable (Section 9 of P.D. No. 968, as amended by R.A. No. 10707); and
d. Those convicted of dangerous drug trafficking or pushing even if the accused is a
minor (Section 24 of R.A. No. 9165).

40. Rain was convicted of frustrated homicide and was sentenced to suffer a non-
probationable penalty. On appeal, the C.A. convicted Rain only for the lesser crime of
attempted homicide with its imposable penalty of imprisonment of four months of
arresto mayor, as minimum, to two years and four months of prision correccional, as
maximum. May Rain still apply for probation despite appealing the trial court’s

Yes, he may still apply.. When a judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty is
appealed or reviewed, and such judgment is modified through the imposition of a probationable
penalty, the defendant shall be allowed for probation based on the modified decision before such
decision becomes final (Section 4, P.D. 968, as amended by R.A. No. 10707).

41. Is Technical malversation mala in se or mala prohibita?

Technical malversation is mala prohibita. Criminal intent, to be liable of technical malversation, is not an
element of the crime. The law punishes the act of diverting public property earmarked by law or
ordinance for a particular public purpose to another public purpose. The offense is mala prohibita,
meaning that the prohibited act is not inherently immoral but becomes a criminal offense because
positive law forbids its commission based on consideration of public policy, order and convenience.
Hence, malice or criminal intent is completely irrelevant. (Ysidoro vs. People, November 14, 2012)


42. Can the persons who liked and shared a libelous online post be held liable under Cybercrime

No. The provision on the Aiding or Abetting and Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrimes has been
declared unconstitutional because of its obvious chilling effect on the freedom of expression, especially
since the crime of aiding or abetting ensnares all the actors in the cyberspace front in a fuzzy way. (Disini v Secretary of Justice G.R. No. 203335, February 11, 2014).


43. What is terrorism under the Human Security Act of 2007?

Predicate Crimes (Sec. 3, R.A. 9372):

Article 122 (Piracy in General and Mutiny in the High Seas or in the Philippine Waters);
Article 134 (Rebellion or Insurrection);
Article 134-a (Coup d'état), including acts committed by private persons;
Article 248 (Murder);
Article 267 (Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention);
Article 324 (Crimes Involving Destruction, or under
Presidential Decree No. 1613 (The Law on Arson);
Republic Act No. 6969 (Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Control Act of 1990);
Republic Act No. 5207, (Atomic Energy Regulatory and Liability Act of 1968);
Republic Act No. 6235 (Anti-Hijacking Law);
Presidential Decree No. 532 (Anti-piracy and Anti-highway Robbery Law of 1974); and,
Presidential Decree No. 1866, as amended (Decree Codifying the Laws on Illegal and Unlawful
Possession, Manufacture, Dealing in, Acquisition or Disposition of Firearms, Ammunitions or Explosives)
(Source: Human Security Act of 2007 (R.A. No. 9372)
(6) to any individual persons who, although physically outside the territorial limits of the Philippines,
commit said crimes directly against the Philippine government. (Section 58, R.A. No. 9372 or Human
Security Act)

44. If the accused has been acquitted for terrorism, may he still be prosecuted for any of
the predicate crimes of terrorism?
No, he cannot. When a person has been prosecuted for terrorism, the acquittal of the accused or the
dismissal of the case shall be a bar to another prosecution for any of the predicate crimes. (Sec. 49, R.A.