CRIMINAL LAW BOOK ONE CHARACTERISTICS OF CRI L LAW What are the characteristics of criminal law? Explain each. Criminal law is general, territorial, and prospective. Itis general, hence penal laws and those of public security and safety are obligatory upon all who live and sojourn in the Philippine territory (Art. 14, NCC). It is territorial, meaning, penal laws of the Philippines have the force and effect only within the Philippine territory except as provided under Art, 2 of the RPC. It is prospective, thus, ‘a penal law cannot make an act punishable in a manner in which it was not punishable when committed. Art. 366, RPC says that crimes are punished under the laws in force at the time of their commission, Encoptons soi Laveen RoE Finis ef rate a The main yard determination of under the terme’ immunity from missions or mer p fl others (Minucher wo ‘eptiticd to immunity is the ‘Qiily “diplomatic agents,” se with blanket diplomatic inatic“agents” as the heads of ‘same privileges from all General Rule: P Exceptions: Treat AAA committed adi r was in China. During the AR je cannot be made liable for the sald crime beca jomjef/the crime, he was outside the in able? territorial jurisdict No. Under the prinple Seite 9 pines are enforceable only within its security’ and the law of natioris~shal Unishable-even if committed outside the Philippine jurisdiction, Treason is a crime against(national séeufty and the law of nations. Hence, he is liable for treason even if twas committed outside the Philppine.territory. AAA and BBB were married in the P! 's. When AAA went abroad to work, he met girlfriend, CCC. They renewed their friendship and rekindled their affections for each other and eventually got married in California. When BBB found out about the second marriage, she filed a case of Bigamy against AAA and CCC in the Philippines. Will the case prosper? No, the case will not prosper. Under the principle of territoriality, Philippine penal laws, are enforceable only within its territory unless the act is one that falls under exceptions provided in Article 2, RPC. Bigamy is not among those mentioned in Article 2. Hence, the Philippine Courts have no jurisdiction over the bigamous marriage contracted by AAA in California, Saw Bepa Cource oF Law 2017 Cenrrauizep Bar OPERATIONSCRIMINAL LAW_.: - 7. What are the rules on crimes committed on ships or airships? The following rules shall be considered: a. In crimes committed on Philippine ships or airships, the RPC applies whether the said ship or airship is found in Philippine waters or in the high seas as long as the ship or airship is registored under the Philippine laws b. In crimes committed on private or merchant vessels found in Philippine territorial waters, the English Rule shall be applied which provides that crimes perpetrated under such circumstances, are in general triabie in the courts of the country within territory they were committed, and cc. Incrimes committed on foreign warships, the nationality of the warship or airship determines the applicabie penal laws to the crimes committed therein as such ships or airships are considered to be an extension of the territory of the country to which they belong (REYES, Book Gne, at 25-31), Prospectivity 8 General Rule: An act cannot be penalized if it was nct punishable at the time of its commission Exception: A new law may be applic Exception to the exception: a, When.the new law expres b. When tite pffender is @ hat ay ions are favorable to the accused ero es ravi J MAURIN'SEV. MALAPROHIGITA 9. Discuss the aiffevences bebwelenlerimés nfala in 88 and mala\prohibica Grint aw heen sided eras me at engin ness cal ad mel ine: and acs which would nott i beg called acts mala prohibita. mafulect is cone. The rule.on the subject is that Tilaels mate propibita, the only inquiry i, has the law beea Mi a ME of 1e offender is immaterial. When the 40. Are all mala in = i special penal lay No. A common gafore fo the RPC while all mala h fo distinguish between mala irimorality or vileness of the itis a crime mala in se; on the jg-its commission by reasons of jef or not a crime involves moral ‘the circumstances surrounding fice end mala proha penalized act. If thé itselt Contrary, iti not ter ot public policy, then Nis In the final analysis. {urpitude is Ultimately cation ee the violation ofthe statute AAS “Se es When the acts complained of-are'l ef are deemed mata in se, even if they are unithed bya opel Taw: Recerlhg eon Must be claty established with the other Elements of the crime: otherwise, no cimé is committed. On the other hand, in crimes that are mala prohibita, the criminal acts are not inherently immoral-but become punishable only because the law says they are forbidden (Garcia v. Court of Appeals, 2006), el inner 11. Are there felonies under the RPC which are mala prohibita? Are there crimes punished under special penal laws which are considered mala in se? Yes. Under the RPC, the crime of technical malversation is malum prohibitum. Criminal intent is not an element of technical malversation. The law punishes the act of diverting public property earmarked by law or ordinance for a particular public purpose to another public purpose. It is malum prohibitum (Ysidoro v. People, 2012) Yes. Plunder, defined and punished under RA 7080, as amended, is a crime malum in se. Plunder is 2 malum in s@, requiring proof of criminal intent. Precisely because the constitutive crimes are mais in se the element of mens rea must be proven in a prosecution for plunder. The legisiative declaration in RA 7659 that plunder is a heinous offense implies that it is malum in se. For when the acts punished Sax Bea Cousce oF LAW 2017 Cenrrauizep Bar OrerarionsCRIMINAL LAW am are inherently immoral or inherently wrong, they are mala are punished in a special Iaw, especially since in the case of plunder tne predicate crimes are mainly mala in se. Indeed, it would be absurd to weat prosecutions for plunder as though thay are mere prosecutions for violations of the Bouncing Check Law (B.P. Big. 22) or of an ordinance against Jaywalking, without regard to the inherent wrongness of the acts (Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, 2011}, 9 se and it does not matter that such acts Violation of Section 27(b) of RA 6646 involving tampering. increasing or decreasing the number of votes is malum in se. Tampering, increasing or decreasing the number of votes received by a candidate in any election or refusal, after proper verification and hearing, to credit the correct votes or deduct such tampered votes is inherently immoral. For otherwise, even arrars and mistakes committed due to overwork and fatigue would be punishable. Given the volume of vates to be counted and canvassed within a limited amount of time, errors and miscalculations are bound to happen. And it could not be the intent of the law to punish unintentional election canvass errors (Garcia v, Court of Appeals, supra). 12, What is the nature of hazing defined itis'@ orime mela protic. Hatt vieen the proposed law (RA 8048) and thegore,principle of mai PC ongress did not simply enact an amendment iret, Instoag aa UBSRANEepeIToae ot ae prohibitaThe) set of hazing public pokey of is not inherently immoral. bul ust be prohibifGd. Actarkingly the existence of criminal inigat is Immaterial in the i a Aine LEGE Aso. the defense Be raised in its proseuion (Dungo v. People 4, GOLLEG r fA } 43. May felonies p; No. RPC does that a mala in SefelOny ( absorb mala probibits-cri 9 in-Dariage to Property) cannot 4, arid RA 7942). What makes the at Irakeyrthe latter crimes are the i It is important where the’ Jot Ravirg committed a crime is in dispute or where the identi seus-from an unreliable source and testimony is inconclusive and nol bt . 46. ofterertate general rom spacitcSAlane. SD General Intent is presumed inthe commission of @ felony. Speci Intent must be proven as tn elomont of felony. 17. What circumstances may be considered to determine the presence or absence of itont to kill? Motive; Nature or number of weapons used in the commission of the crime; Nature and number of wounds inflicted on the victim; Manner the crime was committed; and Words uttered by the offender at the time the injuries are inflicted by him on the victim (People v. Mapalo, 2007), a b. ©. 4 e Saw Bepa Cource oF Law 2017 Cenrrauizep Bar OPERarions