Crim 2 April 2

Art. 171 Falsification

Par 1. Counterfeiting or feigning

1st part of par. 1 – counterfeiting

- Signature that is forged must actually exist

- There must be a similarity between the false signature and the original signature

Ex. X signs as the drawer of a check when in fact the signature belongs to Y. X is counterfeiting Y’s
signature.

X, owner of an account and check, is dead. Y signs as X. Is there counterfeiting? No. There is feigning.

X has the check book of his friend Y. X does not know how Y signs. X signs the check which he thinks
would be the signature of Y. The teller discovers the false signature. Does X commit falsification by
counterfeiting? No. there must be a reasonable resemblance between the original and false signature.

But, in the same case, X can be liable under Par. 2 – making it appear that persons participated…

2nd part. – feigning

Falsifying the signature of a deceased person or someone who does not know how to write is feigning.

Par. 3 – attributing to persons

There must be a transaction where a person participated by uttering words etc.

Accused attributes words other than what the person really stated

Par. 4 – making untruthful statements in a narration of facts

Statement made by offender must be material

There must be intent to injure

Omitting material facts in a writing amounts to making untruthful statements

Paragraphs under falsification can be complexed with other crimes

Ex. Falsification through theft

Offender must have a legal obligation to disclose the facts

Offender must have knowledge of the falsity

Good faith cannot be a defense because knowledge is an element

The statements should be absolutely false

The intent of the offender is to violate the integrity of the document

Alteration for the purpose of showing the truth is not a falsification

Estafa through falsification of public document – the falsification is necessary to commit the crime of
estafa

- Complex crime

Falsification of a public document and Estafa

2 Scenarios:

Falsification of a public document complexed with Estafa

- When the falsification was necessary to commit Estafa

Ex. Falsifying a check in order to obtain property

Falsification of public document and Estafa as separate crimes

- The falsification was done to conceal the estafa

General rule: when one crime is used to conceal another crime, there will be separate crimes

Falsification of a private document cannot be complexed with estafa

- Falsification of a public document does not require damage as an element, unlike in the
falsification of a private document where damage is an element
- Estafa also requires damage as an element therefore cannot be complexed with falsification of
private document because of the common element of damage

Private documents – first act is the crime committed

- The crime is either estafa or falsification, whichever comes first

- Ex. Signing a false signature on a document in order to obtain property – falsification was
committed before estafa

Ecclesiastical Minister

- Falsification committed must affect the civil status of individuals

Art. 172

1st part – offender is a private individual and the document is public

- Same modes as Art. 171

Except for:
1st part of par.7 of Art. 171 because only a public officer can issue in authentic form; and
par. 8

2nd part – offender is any person and falsifies a private document

3rd part – use of falsified documents
- Use in judicial proceeding – damage need not be proved
What are the elements of falsification of a private document?
Damage or intent to cause damage
- Proved by an operative act on the part of the offender showing such intent
- Mere alteration does not show intent to cause damage (ex. Falsifying a signature on a document
that is only kept in a drawer)
- There must be an operative act on the part of the offender which causes damage

2 Presumptions with respect to falsified document

1st – person in possession is presumed to have knowledge of the falsity

2nd – person who uses and possesses, thereby having knowledge of the forgery, is presumed to be the
author of the forgery

Art. 173

3 Punishable acts

1 – Uttering a falsified wireless cable…

2 – Falsifying

3- Using

Offenders under this article:

- An employee of a gov’t corporation engaged in the business of sending and/or receiving wireless
cable…messages
- Private individual who is employed in a company engaged in the same business

Utter – reducing the number of letters or messages

Art. 174

1st par.

Committed by: a physician or surgeon in relation to the practice of his profession relative to an injury or
illness

Issuance must be related to an injury or illness

- False certification as to the fees does not constitute the crime under this article

2nd par.

Issuance of false certificate of merit, service etc.

Issued by a public officer

“other circumstances” means related to merit, service etc.

 - The certificate must not relate to property

3rd par.

Offender is not a public officer or physician or surgeon

Art. 175

Use of falsified medical certificate or certificate of merit, service etc.

- Use of the certificate in a judicial proceeding is a crime under Art. 175

- Use of any other document in a judicial proceeding is punishable under Art. 172

Person who falsifies the certificate and uses it will be prosecuted under Art. 174 and not 175

- Person who falsifies must be different from the person who uses the certificate

Art. 176

2 punishable acts:

1. Manufacture of instruments used in falsification

- Offender must have the intent to use them

Ex. Manufacturing for the purpose of collecting is not a crime

2. Possession of such instruments

- Offender must also have the intent to use them

Art. 177

Usurpation of authority or official functions

In both punishable acts there must be malice, false pretense, or fraud

Usurpation of authority

- Offender: any person who represents himself as an officer, agent… of the government or foreign
government without authority to do so
- Fraud is involved in the representation of authority
- Usurper – person who assumes a position that is vacant or assumes the authority of another
- Includes pretending to be an agent of a foreign government

Difference between Usurpation of authority and usurpation of official functions

In official functions – there is an act involved

Usurpation of official functions

- Offender performs an act

- Fraud must also be involved
- Applies to hold-over positions (ex. mayor whose term has expired but continues to perform
official acts)
- Applies to public officers who pretend they have authority after they have been discharged

Art. 178

Use of fictitious name or concealing true name

Offender: any person who uses a name other than that which has been registered and uses it publicly

Purposes:

1. To conceal a crime

2. Evade the execution of a judgement

3. Cause damage to public interest

Purpose and publicity must be present

- Use of a fictitious name only in the house is not used publicly

Can be complexed with evasion of sentence

- Evasion of sentence through the use of a fictitious name

Execution of a judgment

- Means any kind of judgment whether civil, criminal, or administrative

Obstruction of Justice Law

- Use of fictitious name is only to evade the execution of a criminal judgment, not civil or
administrative

2nd par. Of Art. 178

- Concealing of name must be coupled with the concealment of any other circumstance
- Concealing does not need the publicity and purpose for use of fictitious name

Art. 178

Wearing a uniform of an office in which the offender doesn’t belong

The office to which the uniform belongs must exist

Art. 180

False testimony – reprehensible because it is a fraud upon the courts

There must be a deliberate falsehood, not a mere mistake

Defendant must be charged with a felony and not under a special law unless the special law uses the
penalties under the RPC

Repudiation of false statement does not extinguish the crime

Good faith is a defense

False Testimony against the defendant

Penalty of the false declarant (offender) is the penalty for the crime charged against the defendant

3 Scenarios

1. Defendant is acquitted – penalty of the offender is arresto mayor

2. Defendant is ordered to pay a fine only

3. Defendant is sentenced to at least a correctional penalty

Essence of false testimony is the influence on the judgment

Material fact – directed to the point in issue; that which will influence the decision in the case

Prescriptive period: begins to run on the day of the finality of the judgment imposed upon the
defendant

Art. 181

False testimony is in favor of the defendant

Prescriptive period: begins at the moment the false declarant takes the witness stand

False testimony made by the defendant in favor of himself does not fall under Art. 181

- Constitutional right against self-incrimination

- But if false testimony made by the defendant in favor of himself incriminates another person,
the defendant is liable under Art. 181

Reason: the penalty for the false declarant depends on the penalty prescribed for the offense charged
against the defendant

Defendant must be charged with a felony and not under a special law unless the special law uses the
penalties under the RPC
Art. 182

Basis of the penalty depends upon the amount in controversy

Apply only to ordinary and special civil actions

- Does not apply to special proceedings

Art. 183

If the act does not fall under 180, 181 or 182, it will fall under 183

2 Components

1. False testimony in other cases

– Those which do not fall under 180, 181 or 182

2. Perjury in solemn affirmation

2 major instances of perjury:

1. Non-judicial proceedings

- Those not happening in court (ex. Preliminary investigation, congressional hearings, administrative
proceedings)

2. Execution of affidavits

– Those taken under oath

Perjury

- There must be a legal obligation to disclose

- Information must be material to the case
- There is no perjury if the false statement is made in a document where the law does not require
it to be under oath
- There must be a willful or deliberate assertion of falsehood
Subornation of perjury
– Procuring or inducing someone to commit
- Not a crime itself
- But a person who induces another to commit perjury is liable as a principal by inducement in
the crime of perjury

Art. 184

Offering False Testimony

Lawyer who offers a witness who he knows would give a false statement is liable under Art. 184
Made in a judicial proceeding or official proceeding

Ex. Congressman who presents a witness in a congressional hearing when the former knows
that the latter will lie

Perjury – not made in a judicial proceeding

Persons who act in conspiracy are all liable for offering of false testimony

- Person who induces another to give a false testimony is also liable for false testimony

Art. 185

Machinations in public auctions

There is a manipulation of the price

2 punishable acts

1. Solicitation to refrain from participating

2. Attempting to cause bidders to stay away by threatening them

Art. 186
Monopoly – only one company who provides the goods or services or 2 companies that merge for such
purpose

Combinations – cartel

Monopolies and combinations dictate the price

Restraining competition – those liable are producers, manufacturers or producers of a thing

- They agree with each other; conspire with each other

- Purpose is to monopolize the market

Importing of gold, silver, etc. without indicating the weight

- Has an equivalent in estafa and the weight act