CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
CONTENTS
I. General Principles........................................................................ 1
A. Principle of Generality ............................................................... 1
B. Principle of Territoriality and Extraterritoriality ............................ 1
C. Principle of Prospectivity............................................................ 4
D. Rules on Construction of Penal laws.......................................... 4
E. Death Penalty............................................................................ 4
II. Felonies ........................................................................................ 6
A. Error in personae....................................................................... 7
B. Aberratio ictus ........................................................................... 8
C. Praeter intentionem ................................................................... 8
D. Impossible crime ....................................................................... 8
E. Mistake of Fact .......................................................................... 9
F. Duty of the Court ....................................................................... 9
G. Stages of execution of a felony ................................................ 10
H. Grave, Less Grave and Light Felonies ..................................... 10
I. Conspiracy & Proposal ............................................................ 11
III. Modifying Circumstances .......................................................... 14
A. Justifying Circumstances ......................................................... 15
B. Exempting Circumstances ....................................................... 18
C. Mitigating Circumstances......................................................... 23
D. Aggravating Circumstances ..................................................... 25
E. Alternative Circumstances ....................................................... 31
IV. Persons Criminally Liable and Degree of Participation............ 32
A. Principals ................................................................................ 32
B. Accomplices ............................................................................ 33
C. Accessories............................................................................. 33
V. Complex Crimes ......................................................................... 36
VI. Penalties ..................................................................................... 39
A. Prospectivity of Criminal Law ................................................... 39
B. Indeterminate Sentence Law ................................................... 40
C. Probation Law ......................................................................... 41
VII. Modification and Extinction of Criminal Liability ...................... 42
A. Extinguishment of Criminal Liability.......................................... 42
B. Prescription of Penalties .......................................................... 42
C. Amnesty & Pardon .................................................................. 44
D2019
I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
A. Principle of Generality
Art. 14 of the New Civil Code. Penal laws and those of public security
and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the
Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international law
and to treaty stipulations.
B. Principle of Territoriality and Extraterritoriality
Art. 2. Application of its provisions. — Except as provided in the treaties
and laws of preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be
enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its
atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its
jurisdiction, against those who:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine
Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the
Philippine Islands;
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these
islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding
number;
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in
the exercise of their functions; or
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law
of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.
If the crime is committed in Hong Kong, will the PH courts have
jurisdiction over the felony committed and the person of accused?
Yes, PH may acquire jurisdiction depending on the crime committed by
the person as provided for in Article 2 of the RPC. Art 2 is an affirmation
of the Extraterritorial characteristic of the RPC. The Code has provided
1
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
for intraterritorial and extraterritorial application which would be an
exception to the rule of territoriality.
Art 2 is limited only to 5 specific felonies or categories, as follows:
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship
 The ship or airship must be registered in the Philippines.
Ownership is not a determining factor. It may be owned
by a foreigner but may be registered in the PH.
2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the
Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the
Government of the Philippine Islands;
 These are crimes involving Philippine Currencies, bonds,
issuances, certificates of indebtedness, etc. What is
involved here is the Economic Consideration or Life of
the State/Country
 See Art 163 (Making and importing and uttering false
coins) and Art 169 (Forgery)
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into
these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the
presiding number;
 Importation of prohibited coins
4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an
offense in the exercise of their functions; or
 This would involve public officers
 Their punishable acts will be covered by Title VII of Book
II (Crimes committed by Public Officers).
5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and
the law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.
 Crimes against National Security: treason, espionage,
etc. (Art 114-123)
 Law of Nations: Crimes against humanity, piracy, etc.
What would be the principal consideration for providing
extraterritorial application for these particular felonies?
Courts have jurisdiction because these Crimes involve Security and
Economic concerns. The State requires that these crimes be tried in PH
courts.
D2019
A cruise ship navigated in West Philippine Sea, a passenger after
an altercation with a crew member, picked up a knife and stabbed
the crew member resulting to the latter’s death. Did the Philippine
Courts acquire jurisdiction over the case and over the person?
Yes if (1) the cruise ship is registered in the Philippines or (2) even if the
cruise ship is not registered in the Philippines but the crime takes place
within the territorial waters of the Philippines, the court will also acquire
jurisdiction.
And what will constitute Territorial Waters?
Territorial waters or a territorial sea, as defined by the 1982 United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, is a belt of coastal waters
extending at most 12 nautical miles from the baseline (usually the mean
low-water mark) of a coastal state.
What if by chance, it is beyond 12 nautical miles?
If it is beyond 12 nautical miles, then you will have to go to the nationality
of the cruise ship.
What would comprise exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the
Philippines?
The EEZ is the sea beyond the territorial waters but within a distance of
two hundred nautical miles from the baselines (Subject to any other law
the country shall have, in respect of all natural resources in the exclusive
economic zone, the same rights and powers as it has in respect of its
territorial waters).
May foreign ships, merchants or military ships navigate the area
beyond 12 nautical miles but within 200 nautical miles?
YES. There is freedom of navigation beyond the 12 nautical miles even if
within the 200 nautical miles constituting our exclusive economic zone.
What would happen if the crime occured beyond the 12 nautical
miles but within the 200 miles exclusive economic zone?
First, you have to consider first the actual site of the cruise ship of the
time the felony was committed. If it is within 12 nautical miles from the
shoreline that is our territorial waters, that is Philippine Territory and our
Courts would have jurisdiction over the crime regardless of whether the
ship or the sea craft is registered in the Philippines laws or not.
Exceptions to this are military airships or water crafts of friendly nations,
2
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
in which case, regardless of the crime being committed within Philippine
territory, the other state would have jurisdiction.
The second consideration would be the nationality of the sea vessel
involved. If it is a Filipino ship (i.e. registered under Philippine Laws),
Philippine Courts may have jurisdiction regardless of whether it is within
the 12 within the 200 or out there in the open sea. It is considered as an
extension of the Philippine Territory. However, once the Philippine
Registered ship enters the waters of the foreign country, the laws of that
foreign country would take precedence and the ship would be subject to
the laws of that foreign country.
Note: If absent in the problem, no indicators, there is insufficient facts
and circumstances that will guide you to come out to the correct answer,
then supply the same by saying that IF committed within the 12 nautical
miles then that is Philippine territory, our courts would have jurisdiction
regardless of the nationality of the ship. But if it‖s beyond 12 nautical
miles but within 200 that is exclusive economic zone, but here there is
freedom of navigation. Jurisdiction will be determined by the nationality in
cult of the sea craft involved, whether it is registered under Philippine
Laws or not. Beyond 200 nautical miles that is considered high seas. If
the vessel involve is registered under Philippine Laws, our courts may
take jurisdiction. It is set as an extension of Philippine Territory.
Otherwise, if you don‖t adopt that rule, then there is no one that hold, the
responsible to hold the perpetrator or the offender liable for the crime
committed. So, by tradition, the nationality of the vessel will take charge.
But once the same boat entered territory of the foreign country, the
foreign country will have jurisdiction.
What comprises of the Philippine territory?
Constitution: Art 1
The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the
islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which
the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial,
fluvial, and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the
subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. The waters
around, between, and connecting the islands of the archipelago,
regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the internal
waters of the Philippines.
D2019
(no limitation under Article 1 in the Constitution)
UNCLOS:
What then are the pertinent rules in UNCLOS? PH is a signatory of the
UNCLOS and must be covered by the rules of the convention of the sea.
RULES:
1. The flag state of a foreign merchant vessel passing through the
territorial sea has jurisdiction over crimes committed therein;
however, the coastal state of which the PH is classified as such
can exercise jurisdiction to arrest any person or to conduct any
investigation in connection with any crime committed on board
the ship during its passage in the following places
a. if the consequences of the crime extends to the
Philippines
b. if the crime is a crime to disturb the peace of the PH or
the good order of the territorial sea
c. if the assistance of the local authorities have been
requested by the master of the ship or by a diplomatic
agent or consular officer of the flag state; and
d. if such measures are necessary for the suppression of
illicit traffic in narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances
This is pursuant to Article 27 of the UNCLOS
In the 2015 bar exam, the question was:
Ando, an Indonesian national who just visited the Philippines,
purchased a ticket for a passenger vessel bound for Hong Kong.
While on board the vessel, he saw his mortal enemy Iason, also an
Indonesian national, seated at the back portion of the cabin and
who was busy reading a newspaper. Ando stealthily approached
Iason and when he was near him, Ando stabbed and killed Iason.
The vessel is registered in Malaysia. The killing happened just a few
moments after the vessel left the port of Manila. Operatives from the
PNP Maritime Command arrested Ando. Presented for the killing of
Iason, Ando contended that he did not incur criminal liability
because both he and the victim were Indonesians. He likewise
argued that he could not be prosecuted in Manila because the
vessel is a Malaysian-registered ship.
Murder committed aboard a foreign merchant vessel a few moments
after it left the port of manila (destination of the ship). Here the vessel is
within the territorial water of the PH. The murder committed by the
3
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
accused disturbed the peace of the philippines; hence prosecuted in
manila.
If the problem involves the Kalayaan islands, take note that we have
declared juris and ownership over kalayaan islands. The PH has juris
over crimes committed over kalayaan islands. The PH has asserted
ownership over Kalayaan Islands under RA 9522.
C. Principle of Prospectivity
What is the rule on the retroactive application of criminal laws?
As a general rule, criminal laws should be applied prospectively.
Exception: If it would be favorable to the accused, there should
be retroactive application.
Exceptions to Exception:
1. If the accused is a habitual delinquent as defined
under Article 62.
2. If the law specifically prohibits retroactive
application.
Vagrancy has been decriminalized. You are now the counsel of the
accused for the crime of vagrancy. What would be your defense?
R.A. 10158 (law decriminalizing vagrancy) provides that [a]ll pending
cases under the provisions of Article 202 of the Revised Penal Code on
Vagrancy prior to its amendment by this Act shall be dismissed upon
effectivity of this Act.
Raise that since vagrancy has already been decriminalized so there‖s no
more law applicable to the accused. Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine
lege. There is no more crime committed because there is no law
punishing such act and more.
What if your client has been previously convicted and has begun
serving sentence upon decriminalization of vagrancy, what action
should you take?
R.A. 10158 also provides that “[a]ll persons serving sentence for violation
of the provisions of Article 202 of the Revised Penal Code on Vagrancy
prior to its amendment by this Act shall be immediately released upon
effectivity of this Act: Provided, That they are not serving sentence or
detained for any other offense or felony.
D2019
D. Rules on Construction of Penal laws
What would be the rules that the court may conduct in the
constructions and interpretations of penal laws?
Whenever there is ambiguity in the law, courts consume and interpret the
same in favor of the accused. In the first place, the accused was never
involved in the crafting of that law. Consequently, it would be unfair, if the
end there seem to be ambiguity in its provisions, it would be unfair if he
were to be prejudiced by the fault by the legislature.
What are the other rules on construction?
The RPC we have now is a translation of the original Spanish text. If
there be an issue on the interpretation, the Spanish text should prevail
over the English translation.
If the law is clear, do the rules of construction apply?
No. These rules would only contemplate if there be ambiguity. If the
purpose cannot be discerned, then it should be resolved in favor of the
accused.
Can you recall the translations of the Spanish texts?
Under Article 157 - Evasion of service of sentence, one of the ways to
commit the crime is by means of unlawful entry. This is an inaccurate
translation from the Spanish text escalamiento which means scaling the
wall.
After presentation of evidence of both sides and after offsetting of
modifying circumstances, the prosecution and accused had
balanced evidence. What is the court is mandated to do?
The court must acquit because here the state failed to adduce evidence
that would prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The
court reiterated the rule in constructions and interpretations of penal laws
which is to interpret the same against the state and liberally in favor of
the accused.
E. Death Penalty
Republic Act No. 9346 - AN ACT PROHIBITING THE IMPOSITION OF
DEATH PENALTY IN THE PHILIPPINES
4
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

SECTION 1. The imposition of the penalty of death is hereby prohibited.

Accordingly, R.A. No. 8177, otherwise known as the Act Designating
Death by Lethal Injection is hereby repealed R.A. No. 7659, otherwise
known as the Death Penalty Law, and all other laws, executive orders
and decrees, insofar as they impose the death penalty are hereby
repealed or amended accordingly.

SEC. 2. In lieu of the death penalty, the following shall be imposed.

(a) the penalty of reclusion perpetua, when the law violated makes use of
the nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code; or

(b) the penalty of life imprisonment, when the law violated does not make
use of the nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code.

SEC. 3. Person convicted of offenses punished with reclusion perpetua,

or whose sentences will be reduced to reclusion perpetua, by reason of
this Act, shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. 4180, otherwise
known as the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended.

What is RA 9346?
It is the law enacted to suspend the imposition of Death Penalty.
Note, that the 9346 did not abolish death penalty; it only prohibited the
imposition of death penalty by the courts.

If that is so, instead of the death penalty, what is imposed?

If heinous crime is punishable under Revised Penal Code, the penalty
would be automatically reduced to reclusion perpetua. If the crime is
punishable under special law, then it would be life imprisonment.

Would it be correct to say that there has been a reclassification of

these heinous crimes?
The answer is NO. It remains to be heinous crimes. But the correct
penalty would be Reclusion Perpetua or life imprisonment.

D2019 5
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
II. FELONIES
Art. 3. Definitions. — Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies
(delitos).
Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo) but also by
means of fault (culpa).
There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and there
is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack
of foresight, or lack of skill.
Art. 4. Criminal liability. — Criminal liability shall be incurred:
1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act
done be different from that which he intended.
2. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against
persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment or an account of the employment of inadequate or
ineffectual means.
Article 3 defines and provides for elements of a felony
Elements:
1. It must be an act or omission
2. which act or omission must be committed by means of dolo or
culpa
3. and which is punishable by law following the doctrine of nullem
crimen nullem poene sine lege (absent any law, a person cannot
be charged or convicted)
Give an example of punishable omissions:
Art. 275: Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one's
own victim. Failure to extend help to a person whom the offender
discovered in an uninhabited place when such person is seriously injured
and in fear of dying shall be punished by arresto mayor.
Why would such failure to extend help make one criminally liable?
Art. 3 covers acts or omissions. It must be a punishable act as provided
in Art. 3.
D2019
If person dies, accused may be liable for homicide. Why?
The last paragraph of Art. 275 provides “unless such omission shall
constitute a more serious offense.” The basis of this provision: Art. 4 –
criminal liability by any person committing a felony (delito) although the
wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. There is a
punishable omission in 275. It would fall under a felony under Art. 3.
Art. 4 comes in by saying that if as a consequence of such act or
omission, a more serious offense occurred, offender shall be liable for all
consequences whether intended or not.
The spirit of 275 is that you have to extend help to someone who is in
need of help. But this will only apply in an uninhabited place.
Note: in Book 2, there are also other crimes / similar provisions that
would already give you an idea that he would also be liable for the other
acts arising from the principal act by virtue of Art. 4.
Would it be correct to say that voluntariness is not an issue
anymore?
Note that under the Old Penal code, delictus is defined as a voluntary act
or omission. Under Art 3, the word voluntary was omitted. However,
voluntariness of a man is still a requisite. This means it should be free,
intelligent, and intentional act, notwithstanding failure to include
characteristic of voluntariness.
What would happen if there is absence of voluntariness?
Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea or “There can be no crime when
the criminal mind is wanting.”
Actus me invito factus non est meus actus or “An act done by me against
my will is not my act.”
This is exactly what the court adopted in ruling in favor of the accused in
People v. Bandia.
Note: Art 3 classifies felonies into intentional and culpable felonies.
What is dolo and what is culpa?
Dolo is malice which is intent to do injury to another.
Culpa is fault.
In dolo, there is always malice, there is mens rea or criminal mind. While
In culpa, there is no malice. There is only negligence or imprudence.
6
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
Why would the law hold one liable for culpa?
The law expects that a man uses his common sense and due diligence in
acting.
Example: Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence. — Any person who, by
reckless imprudence, shall commit any act which, had it been intentional,
would constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor
in its maximum period to prision correccional in its medium period; if it
would have constituted a less grave felony, the penalty of arresto mayor
in its minimum and medium periods shall be imposed; if it would have
constituted a light felony, the penalty of arresto menor in its maximum
period shall be imposed.
Many consider 365 as merely a mode of incurring criminal liability. This is
why many prosecutors file information on the basis of homicide through
reckless imprudence
However, in Ivler v. People the court held that Article 365 is not a mere
mode of incurring criminal liability, but is a felony in itself. This is because
there is a definition of the punishable crime and there is a penalty for
violation of committing the same.
What are the requisites/elements of dolo?
1. Intent is also significant in determining liability.
2. Motive is also significant.
3. Freedom is also significant.
Note: Absent freedom and intelligence, no crime is committed
(exempting). Example: insane, infants. Absent intent, act is justified.
How will you prove the presence of intent?
Intent, being a purely mental state of mind of the accused, is presumed
in the commission of the subject felony. It is in the same status or nature
when the accused committed physical injuries with no intent to kill but
because of the injury sustained, the victim eventually expired.
Andres, while onboard a passenger jeepney pulled out a Starwars
lightsaber and jokingly announced a hold up. Pedro a passenger
and fearing for his life jumped out of the moving vehicle. Pedro’s
D2019
head hit the pavement and died as a consequence. Is Andres
criminally liable?
No, he did not have intent to commit a crime. He was not committing a
felony under Article 3. For a felony to exist, the following requisites must
be present:
1. Act of omission
2. By means of dolo or culpa
3. Such act or omission is punishable under the Code
It will also be difficult to put him under Article 4 because he was not
committing a felony at that time, as he said it jokingly.
However, he could be made civilly liable. It could be argued that while in
a public vehicle, he should not make jokes and do actions which might
be misunderstood by other passengers.
Pedro, while on a passenger train, cried out. Juan, a passenger
jumped out of a moving train. As a result, the passenger died. How
would the court resolve the liability of the offender?
“If a man creates in another person‖s mind an immediate sense of
danger, which causes such person to try to escape, and, in so doing, the
latter injures himself, the man who creates such a state of mind is
responsible for the resulting injuries.” (People v. Page, Reyes page 71)
What are the causes which may produce a result different from that
which the offender intended? [has been asked in the bar]
1. Error in personae – mistake in person
2. Aberratio ictus – mistake in the blow
3. Praeter intentionem – the injurious result is greater than that
intended
A. Error in personae
In error in personae, how will the court resolve the case and what
penalty will it impose?
Art. 49. Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the crime
committed is different from that intended. — In cases in which the felony
committed is different from that which the offender intended to commit,
the following rules shall be observed:
7
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
1. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be higher than that
corresponding to the offense which the accused intended to commit, the
penalty corresponding to the latter shall be imposed in its maximum
period.
2. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be lower than that
corresponding to the one which the accused intended to commit, the
penalty for the former shall be imposed in its maximum period.
3. The rule established by the next preceding paragraph shall not be
applicable if the acts committed by the guilty person shall also constitute
an attempt or frustration of another crime, if the law prescribes a higher
penalty for either of the latter offenses, in which case the penalty
provided for the attempted or the frustrated crime shall be imposed in its
maximum period.
B. Aberratio ictus
How will the court resolve the case where aberratio ictus is
present?
Art 48. Penalty for Complex Crimes. – When a single act constitutes two
or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is necessary
means for committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime
shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period.
C. Praeter intentionem
What is praeter intentionem?
Praeter intentionem means when a person commits an act which
constitutes a felony, he is liable for the felony which results from the act
even though it is not what he intended to do. An example is when A
punches his wife B and as a result B died. A would be liable for parricide
even though when he committed the act, he only wanted to inflict serious
physical injuries upon B.
Where do you find praeter intentionem in the code?
Article 13, paragraph 3. That the offender had no intention to commit so
grave a wrong as that committed. This is a mitigating circumstance.
However there are cases where even praeter intentionem is present, the
accused cannot avail of the same.
D2019
When the homicide charge would indicate ―without intent to kill‖,
would there be an absence of the element intent to kill in homicide?
NO, the law would itself supply. The State would provide the element of
intent to kill is presumed whenever, as a result of violence, the victim
shall expire or die.
What if you are the counsel for the accused, what is it the defense
that you should raise?
The accused may avail of the mitigating circumstance of praeter
intentionem – no intent to cause such serious offense.
Would there be an exception to this, where the mitigating
circumstance of praeter intentionem will not be appreciated?
Section 14 of the Anti-Hazing Act of 2018 (R.A. No. 11053) provides that
"Any person charged under this Act shall not be entitled to the mitigating
circumstance that there was no intention to commit so grave a wrong."
Note also that under the present law, there is already an absolute
prohibition of hazing, as opposed to the prior law tshat merely regulated
hazing.
D. Impossible crime
What are the requisites of an impossible crime?
1. That the act performed would be an offense against persons or
property
2. That the act was done with evil intent
3. That its accomplishment is inherently impossible, or that the
means employed is either inadequate or ineffectual
4. That the act performed should not constitute a violation of
another provision of the RPC
Thinking that his girlfriend was pregnant, Andres administered
abortive drugs upon her. It turned out the girl was not actually
pregnant, but due to the drugs, the girl suffered injuries
necessitating confinement for 30 days. Was Andres liable for an
impossible crime?
NO impossible crime. However, in administering the abortive drugs, he
was committing a punishable act. He would then still be liable for
physical injuries under Article 263(4). He would also be liable under Art
8
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
264 or Administering Injurious Substance, as an abortive is considered
an injurious substance.
Would there be an impossible crime of rape, considering that
impossible crime is only limited to persons and property?
YES, because rape has already been reclassified from crimes against
chastity to crimes against persons.
A, with intent to kill, barged into the dwelling of B, armed with an M-
16 rifle. He saw B on the floor, motionless. He checked on the pulse
and was convinced that he is already dead. In rage, because of his
being unable to personally kill B, he fired at B. What liability did A
incur in so doing?
Malicious mischief. There is no impossible crime in this case because B
was already dead and A knew that B is already dead. B cannot be
considered a person in the eyes of the law. He is already considered a
thing or “property”.
Note: The essence of malicious mischief is destruction of property
because he wants to vex.
E. Mistake of Fact
How would you classify mistake of fact? (Cases of Oanis and Ah
Chong)
In US v. Ah Chong, the accused was acquitted on account of mistake of
fact because he honestly believed that the person coming in was an
intruder. The court took into account the fact that there were so many
crimes happening in that area at the time and the fact that Ah Chong
actually asked the person coming in who he was before stabbing him.
In Oanis, the court did not apply mistake of fact because the police
officers who shot and killed the victim did not make diligent inquiries as to
the identity of the person before firing at him. There was obviously
negligence on their part which negates their claim of mistake of fact.
Mistake of fact is an accepted modifying circumstance but in order to
invoke mistake of fact, there must be present all the requisites:
1. The act done is lawful had the facts been as what the accused
believed them to be
2. The mistake of fact is not due to negligence
D2019
3. The mistake is not accompanied with criminal intent of the
offender.
F. Duty of the Court
What is article 5 of the RPC?
Art. 5. Duty of the court in connection with acts which should be
repressed but which are not covered by the law, and in cases of
excessive penalties.— Whenever a court has knowledge of any act
which it may deem proper to repress and which is not punishable by law,
it shall render the proper decision, and shall report to the Chief
Executive, through the Department of Justice, the reasons which induce
the court to believe that said act should be made the subject of
legislation.
In the same way, the court shall submit to the Chief Executive, through
the Department of Justice, such statement as may be deemed proper,
without suspending the execution of the sentence, when a strict
enforcement of the provisions of this Code would result in the imposition
of a clearly excessive penalty, taking into consideration the degree of
malice and the injury caused by the offense.
Here after receiving the letter, the president may initiate congress for a
proper legislation.
In the course of the robbery, there were also several victims of
homicide and victims of rape. How would the prosecution or fiscal
charge the accused?
According to the case of Sultan, the additional instances of rape would
not be considered as aggravating circumstance but rather the crime
would be special complex crime. Prior to the Sultan case, the court has
considered the additional homicide and rape as aggravating
circumstance. However Sultan pronounced that there is nothing under
Article 14 (aggravating circumstances) which considers as aggravating
homicide and rape committed in the course of robbery. The list in Article
14 is a closed list as compared to Article 13 which gives the court
authority to consider analogous circumstances as mitigating. Because of
this, there is no basis to consider as aggravating the homicide and rape
in the course of robbery. Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege.
9
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
In this case, the court made use of Article 5. The court called the
attention of the chief executive that this anomalous situation should be
addressed through proper legislation. This is the significance of Article
5.
What are the circumstances the court considered as mitigating
under Article 13, Section 10 (any other circumstances of a similar
nature and analogous to those above mentioned)?
In the case of Dabalos, the officer embezzled money. Later, he returned
the money. The court considered this as mitigating, as being similar to
voluntary surrender.
However in another case, the court considered that the person is not
entitled to the same mitigating circumstance, when the accused only
returned the money more than seven years later and did not even
provide any explanation for the length of time.
What if the subject of the trial would involve a violation of a special
law? Can the court also avail of Article 5 to special penal laws?
Article 5 is inapplicable to special penal laws because under article 5, the
court must take "into consideration the degree of malice and the injury
caused by the offense." Special penal laws are punished regardless of
the malice of the accused because these are offenses mala prohibita.
(People v. Salazar)
What will be the court's course of action where the circumstances
of Article 5 are present?
Under Article 5, paragraph 1, the court shall acquit and dismiss the case
following nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege.
G. Stages of execution of a felony
Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies. —
Consummated felonies as well as those which are frustrated and
attempted, are punishable.
A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its
execution and accomplishment are present; and it is frustrated when the
offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the
felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by
reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.
D2019
There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a
felony directly or over acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution
which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident
other than this own spontaneous desistance.
There are 3 stages – Consummated, Frustrated, Attempted.
What is the significance of determining the stage of execution of a
felony?
To determine the proper penalty to be imposed upon the offender.
Will this apply to all felonies in the RPC?
No. For example, crimes of omission or in relation to Art. 7. Light felonies
shall only be punishable if they are consummated, provided they are not
committed against persons or property.
What about formal crimes?
Formal crimes are those which can only be committed by consummation.
There is no attempted or frustrated stage. Examples are slander and
slight physical injuries. It is punishable only when consummated.
Take note that the offender in committing a crime has external and
internal aspects. In People v. Paraganas, the court described the various
stages in the commission of a felony. The subjective phase in the
commission of the felony is that portion of the acts constituting the crime
starting from the point where the offender begins the commission of the
crime to that point where he has still control over his acts.
H. Grave, Less Grave and Light Felonies
Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable. — Light felonies are
punishable only when they have been consummated, with the exception
of those committed against person or property.
Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light felonies. — Grave
felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or
penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with
Art. 25 of this Code.
10
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties
which in their maximum period are correctional, in accordance with the
above-mentioned Article.
Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which a
penalty of arrest menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both; is
provided.
Under Article 7, light felonies will only be punishable when
consummated. Why?
The Code Commission took into consideration that the penalties are
already low.
Example of light felonies
1. Slight physical injuries
2. Gambling
3. Theft (Art. 309 pars. 7-8)
4. Malicious mischief
5. Intriguing against honor
They are punishable only when consummated.
Would there be an exception to this rule?
Yes. When the crime involved would be against persons or property in
which case light offenses are punishable by the penalty provided by the
law.
Why is the determination of the degree of felonies material?
For purposes of determining the penalties applicable or the possibility of
complexing.
Art. 48. Penalty for complex crimes. — When a single act constitutes two
or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary
means for committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime
shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period.
Under Article 48 there are two types of complex crimes: (1) A single act
constituting two or more grave or less grave felonies, in which case the
penalty would be for the most serious crime committed in its maximum
period and (2) when an act is a necessary means for committing the
other, in which case, the penalty for the most serious crime will be
applied in its maximum period.
D2019
What will the court do to the penalties for the other crimes
committed?
The court would disregard the penalties and instead issue only ONE
penalty corresponding to the most serious crime committed to be applied
in its maximum period. This is in accordance with the principle of PRO
REO.
Illustration:
A vehicular accident resulted in homicide, serious physical injuries,
damage to property, and slight physical injuries. In this case, the court
shall only consider reckless imprudence resulting to homicide in the
information sheet, since this is the most serious crime.
However, slight physical injuries will not be disregarded and cannot be
included in the same charge sheet because a light felony which results
from a single act cannot be complexed with the other crimes.
I. Conspiracy & Proposal
Art. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. — Conspiracy and
proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the
law specially provides a penalty therefor.
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement
concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.
There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony
proposes its execution to some other person or persons.
The concept of conspiracy contemplates where there is more than 1
offender.
When is there a proposal?
When a person who has decided to commit a felony proposes its
execution to some other person/s. There is a proposal when an offer is
made by one who has decided to commit a felony to some other felony
for the purpose of its execution.
When is there conspiracy?
11
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
There is a conspiracy when 2 or more persons come to an agreement
concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.
Are proposals and conspiracies punishable?
Proposal and conspiracies to commit a felony is not in itself a punishable
act unless specifically and particularly provided by the RPC or SPL.
Give an example of an instance where a mere proposal will not be
make you criminally liable under the RPC
Proposing to commit serious physical injuries.
What then are these specific crimes where proposals and
conspiracies would make one criminally liable under the RPC?
Conspiracy
1. Conspiracy to commit treason under Art. 115
2. Conspiracy to commit coup d‖etat, rebellion, or insurrection
under Art. 136
3. Conspiracy to commit sedition under Art. 141
4. Highway robbery under PD 532
5. Espionage under Commonwealth Act 616
Proposals
1. Treason
2. Coup d‖etat
3. Rebellion
4. Insurreccion
5. Art. 150 – Disobedience to summons issued by the National
Assembly.
How about terrorism under the Human Security Act? If someone
should propose & conspire to commit terrorism, can that make
him/her/them criminally liable already?
There is conspiracy to commit terrorism under Section 4 of the HSA.
Consequently, the mere conspiracy to commit terrorism is a punishable
act. Absent such provision then conspiracy generally per se is not a
punishable act.
What is the penalty for proposal/conspiracy to commit treason?
Conspiracy – prison mayor
Proposal – prison correctional
Consummated – reclusion perpetua
D2019
If after conspiring to commit treason, the offenders actually commit
treason how would the Court issue a judgment?
The conspiracy and the proposal would be absorbed by the main crime
i.e. treason. If the crimes proposed would be committed or conspired to
be committed shall have been in fact committed, the acts of the
conspirators will now be considered preparatory acts. The court will not
issue the penalty provided by the code for proposal or conspiracy but will
instead hold the accused liable for the treason actually committed.
There are two kinds of conspiracies – express & implied.
1. Express – easily discernable
2. Implied – no open/express agreement.
How do you prove express conspiracy?
Conversations, text messages, email correspondences actually showing
conspiracy.
Absent any evidence showing express conspiracy, how can
conspiracy be established?
Conspiracy may still be established by the actions of the subject
individuals showing unity in purpose. Direct proof is not essential to
establish conspiracy when it can be inferred from the direct acts of the
accused before, during, or after the commission of the crime.
E.g. where two persons robbed a bank with guns and only used one car.
However in another case, the Court held that conspiracy must be
established by positive and conclusive evidence.
What if one of the accused only stayed outside? How would the
court consider the existence of an implied conspiracy?
When you plan a robbery, you usually have to have a look out. Even if
one‖s participation is that of a mere lookout, there is still unity in his
purpose with those who actually went in did the robbing.
What would be the effect of conspiracy?
The act of one is the act of all.
What would happen if the prosecution would fail to establish
conspiracy among the several accused?
12
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

If the prosecution failed to allege conspiracy then all the accused will be What if B discouraged A in raping the girl and in fact even kicked A
liable for their individual or separate acts. Failure to allege conspiracy will but was not able to successfully discourage A from raping the girl.
be fatal and because of that, it cannot be established that the act of one What would then be the liability of B?
is the act of all the accused. Thus, the court must rule upon the individual B may be exempt from being liable of rape. However, the others who
participation and not the collective participation, because the court knew of the rape but did nothing to discourage or prevent A from doing it
cannot apply the principle of conspiracy where the liability falls upon all. may still be held liable for rape, even if such rape is outside the scope of
the conspiracy to commit robbery.
What would be the rule there for the crimes committed outside the
conspiracy? Summary of rules on conspiracy
A conspirator is liable for such other crimes which could be foreseen and General rule: A conspirator is liable only for such other crimes which
which are the natural and logical consequences of the conspiracy. could be foreseen and those which are the natural and logical
consequences for the conspiracy.
A, B, C, D and E conspired to rob X. It was the condition of E before
joining their group that they will only commit the crime of robbery If the crime committed is not the natural and logical consequence of
and nothing more. Upon arriving at the residence of X, they didn’t the conspiracy, the conspirators can be held liable for those crimes
expect that the caretaker of X would be there. A then stabbed to committed within their knowledge or in their presence, even though
death the caretaker and thereafter took the personal belongings in outside of the scope of the conspiracy.
the house. Thereafter the police filed a case for robbery with
homicide against the five conspirators. E raised the defense that he Except where the other conspirators exerted efforts to prevent or
only conspired to commit robbery and not conspire nor consent to discourage the commission of the crime outside of the
other crimes like the one of homicide here. As the judge how would conspiracy.
you rule on the defense of E?
E cannot raise the defense that he did not agree to commit or conspire to
commit homicide. Robbery can be committed in two ways: (1) robbery
with violence and intimidation against persons and (2) robbery with force
upon things. In the case at bar, there is robbery with violence and
intimidation against persons; thus violence is an element. Naturally
where one agrees to commit robbery by using violence against persons,
the violence there could lead to physical injuries and may also result to
the death of the victim. The death of the caretaker is therefore a natural
consequence of the robbery and violence.

Supposing in the case abovementioned, A also committed rape,

could the other four conspirators be held liable on the basis of
conspiracy.
If the other 4 did not know that there was rape committed then they
cannot be held liable for the rape done by A. However, if A raped the
caretaker in the presence of the other members, the other members
must have exerted efforts to discourage and prevent the rape in order to
be exempt from being liable with A for the rape.

D2019 13
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

III. MODIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES be no other practical and less harmful means of

preventing it.
o “State of Necessity Doctrine” → Civil liability is incurred
There are 5 specific articles in Book I enumerating/describing the
modifying circumstances: Arts. 11-15. They are circumstances that could Article 12 – Exempting Circumstances
modify the offender‖s liability. These are exempting, justifying, mitigating,
 No criminal liability is incurred because there is no criminal
aggravating, or alternative circumstances.
intent; no criminal mind; absence of mens rea
 There is civil liability.
Note however that these are not the only modifying circumstances in the
Code. There are many more spread out in the Code or special laws
Article 13 - Mitigating Circumstances
which would modify the offender‖s liability.
 Results in lowering the penalty imposable. The basis for this is
What are these circumstances? the diminished perversity on the part of the offender.
1. Spontaneous desistance at the attempted stage
2. A light felony is involved and it‖s only in its attempted or Article 14 - Aggravating Circumstances
frustrated stage and is not against persons or property  There is greater perversity on the part of the offender; thus, the
3. Accessories who are relatives of principal under Art. 19 & Art. penalty will be higher, but it should not exceed the penalty
20, provided they did not profit or assist the principal in profiting provided by law.
from the crime
4. Less serious and slight physical injuries if it falls under Art. 247 Article 15 - Alternative Circumstances
5. Legal grounds for trespass under Art. 218  Circumstances may either mitigate or aggravate, depending on
6. Legal grounds for arbitrary detention under Art. 124 the nature and effect of the crime, and other conditions attending
7. Theft, malicious mischief committed mutually by certain persons the commission of the crimes
under Art. 332
8. Marriage by the offender w/ the offended party in Art. 344
9. Instigation as held in jurisprudence. Note that instigation should
be distinguished from entrapment.
10. Battered woman syndrome under RA 9262.

Overview of the modifying circumstances

Article 11 - Justifying Circumstances
 Offender acts in accordance with law
 No criminal/civil liability is incurred
o Except Article 11(4) - Any person who, in order to avoid
an evil or injury, does not act which causes damage to
another, provided that the following requisites are
present;
 Requisites: (1)That the evil sought to be avoided
actually exists; (2) That the injury feared be
greater than that done to avoid it; (3) That there

D2019 14
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

A. Justifying Circumstances
What is the basis of justifying circumstances?
Art. 11. Justifying circumstances. — The following do not incur any The acts of a person under Article 11 are considered in accordance with
law so there is no criminal or civil liability incurred. There is lack of
criminal liability:
criminal intent embodied in the maxim “ACTUS NON FACIT REUM, NISI
MENS SIT REA” – “The act cannot be criminal where the mind is not
1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that the
following circumstances concur; criminal.”
First. Unlawful aggression.
The sole exception to this is paragraph 4.
Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel it.
Who has the burden to prove the justifying circumstance?
Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
The burden of proof here is on the defendant.
defending himself.
―Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea‖
2. Any one who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse,
A crime is not committed if the mind of the person performing the act
ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or
complained of be innocent. Where the facts proven are accompanied by
sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees and those
other facts which show that the act complained of was not unlawful, the
consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, provided that the first and
presumption of criminal intent does not arise (U.S. v. Catolico, 18 Phil.
second requisites prescribed in the next preceding circumstance are
504, 508).
present, and the further requisite, in case the revocation was given by
the person attacked, that the one making defense had no part therein.
Self Defense
3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger,
Why would self-defense be considered as a justifying
provided that the first and second requisites mentioned in the first
circumstance?
circumstance of this Art. are present and that the person defending be
Self-preservation. While it is true it is the obligation of the state to protect
not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive.
persons and their property, the state might not always be able to do so.
Hence, the need for justifying circumstances.
4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does not act which
causes damage to another, provided that the following requisites are
What is the coverage of self-defense?
present;
Self-defense covers defense of the person, rights, honor and property.
First. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists;
Second. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid
Minority is a special mitigating circumstance. Take note of 69.
it;
Third. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of
What are the elements of self-defense?
preventing it.
1. Unlawful aggression
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or
5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful
repel it
exercise of a right or office.
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending
himself
6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for
some lawful purpose.

D2019 15
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
Of the three, which is considered as a condition sine qua non
before one can invoke self-defense?
Unlawful aggression.
What would be the result if the second or third requisite is wanting?
It will be considered as an incomplete self-defense; hence, the court will
consider it as a special mitigating circumstance. Article 69 will apply.
Article 69. Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not wholly
excusable. - A penalty lower by one or two degrees than that prescribed
by law shall be imposed if the deed is not wholly excusable by reason of
the lack of some of the conditions required to justify the same or to
exempt from criminal liability in the several cases mentioned in Article 11
and 12, provided that the majority of such conditions be present. The
courts shall impose the penalty in the period which may be deemed
proper, in view of the number and nature of the conditions of exemption
present or lacking.
Would you know any law where the offender does not incur any
criminal/civil liability notwithstanding the absence of the elements
for justifying circumstance?
BATTERED WOMAN SYNDROME (R.A. 9262)
SECTION 26. Battered Woman Syndrome as a Defense. – Victim-
survivors who are found by the courts to be suffering from battered
woman syndrome do not incur any criminal and civil liability
notwithstanding the absence of any of the elements for justifying
circumstances of self-defense under the Revised Penal Code.
In the determination of the state of mind of the woman who was suffering
from battered woman syndrome at the time of the commission of the
crime, the courts shall be assisted by expert psychiatrists/ psychologists.
What is provided in People v. Alconga, et al. (1947)?
Here the victim is the aggressor. There was an unlawful aggression
against A by B. A still attacked the aggressor (B) even if B already ran
away. The unlawful aggression has ceased. There is no self-defense. It
is retaliation.
D2019
May the accused use a weapon (a firearm) against an unlawful
aggressor who is unarmed?
YES. People v. Ignacio
What if the armed victim is weak, senior citizen, and the aggressor
is an athletic type? Are you saying that the person cant use a
weapon?
He CAN, given the circumstances obtaining.
Note: In another case, there were 3 armed aggressors. The Court said
that the victim is justified to use a weapon. 3 young men against one
person and that one has a gun. They may even get the gun from you.
These are the peculiar circumstances that may be justified, even though
the aggressors were unarmed. The rule is take into consideration the
facts and circumstances obtaining in the case. There is no GR. Consider
the physical attributes and other circumstances when deciding if there is
self-defense.
RA 10630: AN ACT STRENGTHENING THE JUVENILE JUSTICE
SYSTEM IN THE PHILIPPINES, AMENDING FOR THE
PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9344, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
"JUVENILE JUSTICE AND WELFARE ACT OF 2006" AND
APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR
"SEC. 57-A. Violations of Local Ordinances. – Ordinances enacted by
local governments concerning juvenile status offenses such as, but not
limited to, curfew violations, truancy, parental disobedience, anti-smoking
and anti-drinking laws, as well as light offenses and misdemeanors
against public order or safety such as, but not limited to, disorderly
conduct, public scandal, harassment, drunkenness, public intoxication,
criminal nuisance, vandalism, gambling, mendicancy, littering, public
urination, and trespassing, shall be for the protection of children. No
penalty shall be imposed on children for said violations, and they shall
instead be brought to their residence or to any barangay official at the
barangay hall to be released to the custody of their parents. Appropriate
intervention programs shall be provided for in such ordinances. The child
shall also be recorded as a ―child at risk‖ and not as a ―child in conflict
with the law‖. The ordinance shall also provide for intervention programs,
such as counseling, attendance in group activities for children, and for
the parents, attendance in parenting education seminars."
16
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

abandoned by the pronouncement in Narvaez. Here, the court

What are status offenses?
SEC. 57. Status Offenses. - Any conduct not considered an offense or
not penalized if committed by an adult shall not be considered an offense
and shall not be punished if committed by a child.
Ex: Curfew violations, truancy, parental disobedience, antismoking, anti-
drinking, public misdemeanors: disorderly conduct, drunkenness, public
intoxication, littering, public urination, trespassing
recognized the Civil Code which allowed reasonable defense of the
owner or possessor of property without requiring a simultaneous attack
on his person.
Would the accused be entitled to the justifying circumstance of
avoidance of greater evil or injury if the evil feared turned out as
lesser than the injury caused?
Yes, if accused honestly believed that the evil is greater during the time
of the act.

What is provided by the repealing clause under RA 10630 (2013)?

All existing laws, acts, ordinances inconsistent with the law are hereby
repealed accordingly.

Note: The law is very clear. They must not be detained at the
policestation. By express provision of the law, these ordinances are
intendedfor their protection, and not as penal laws. These ordinances
must havean intervention program. Applying now the repeal clause,
theseordinances are deemed repealed. So what then is the basis of the
policein detaining the minors in the police station? Juvenile delinquents
arenot supposed to be detained, they must be released to the
guardians.

Defense of Property

What is the old rule provided in People v. Apolinar?

Defense of property is a justifying circumstance only when it is coupled
with an attack on the person of one entrusted with said property.

If an intruder said that I will get your laptop but said that I will not hurt
you, is this what the Apolinar case is saying, because the court is saying
in the case that defense of property must be coupled by a physical act.

What is the new rule provided in People v. Narvaez (April 20, 1983)?
The simultaneous attack of the person is not required in the defense of
property.

DVI: The ruling in Apolinar may be considered as modified if not

D2019 17
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
B. Exempting Circumstances
Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt from criminal liability. — the
following are exempt from criminal liability:
1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless the latter has acted during a
lucid interval.
When the imbecile or an insane person has committed an act which the
law defines as a felony (delito), the court shall order his confinement in
one of the hospitals or asylums established for persons thus afflicted,
which he shall not be permitted to leave without first obtaining the
permission of the same court.
2. A person under nine years of age.
3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he has
acted with discernment, in which case, such minor shall be proceeded
against in accordance with the provisions of Art. 80 of this Code.
When such minor is adjudged to be criminally irresponsible, the court, in
conformably with the provisions of this and the preceding paragraph,
shall commit him to the care and custody of his family who shall be
charged with his surveillance and education otherwise, he shall be
committed to the care of some institution or person mentioned in said Art.
80.
4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes
an injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it.
5. Any person who act under the compulsion of irresistible force.
6. Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an
equal or greater injury.
7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when
prevented by some lawful insuperable cause.
What is the principle behind Art 12?
Law presumes would not have the freedom, intent.
The basis for exempting circumstances are:
D2019
1. Lack of intelligence more particularly to par. 1, 2 and 3
2. Lack of criminal intent in par. 4 and 7.
3. Lack of freedom under par. 5 and par. 6.
Does it also exempt one from civil liability?
No. They may be held liable for damages.
Minority
At what age would one incur criminal liability, and when will he be
exempt?
15 years old and below – Exempt even if acted with discernment; this is
a conclusive presumption.
What if the offender is a minor below 15, and he is subjected to an
IQ test and he turned out to have an IQ of a 28-year-old adult, could
the court now try the minor?
No. Conclusive presumption. Even if prosecution established the state of
mind of the child as that of an adult, as when the child is a genius, that
will not affect the exemption granted by law. This is because the
presumption is conclusive.
Who would determine discernment?
If the charge sheet involving the minor above 15 but below 18 shall fail to
allege discernment, such failure is FATAL.
RA 9254 (2006) was amended by RA 10630 (2013). The purpose is to
promote and protect rights of child.
Child in conflict with the law - A child alleged as accused under PH laws.
Child at risk – vulnerable to committing offenses
RA 7610 and anti trafficking – child below 18 or over but can‖t protect
themselves.
Sec 6, RA 9344 amended Par 2 and 3 of Art 12.
Under the new law, there is a presumption that the minor offender
completely lacked the intelligence to tell what is right from wrong.
RULE NOW
 15 years old and below – EXEMPT even if he acted with
18
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
discernment. However, the child shall be subject to an
intervention program. Here the presumption of lack of
intelligence is CONCLUSIVE.
 Above 15 and below 18, EXEMPT unless he or she acted with
discernment. In which case, subject to appropriate proceedings.
Failure to allege discernment is FATAL on the part of prosecution
9344 is applicable to any act, punishable under the RPC or SPL.
How do you determine age of child?
 Child shall enjoy presumption of minority.
 Note: 30-A of the IRR of RA 9344.
 Should the age of the child be contested, summary
determination of the age in a family court, the court to decide it
within 24 hrs.
th
 15 years of age on the day of the 15 anniversary of the
birthday.
X is an 18-year-old girl but with a 9-year-old mental age. She
unlawfully took the cellphone of A. May the court appreciate par 1
of Art 12 (imbecile or insane) in favor of the accused?
No, because Art. 12 par. 1 would refer to imbecility or insanity. Since the
girl has a mental age of a 9 years old she cannot be considered as an
imbecile. An imbecile has a mental age of 7 years old.
The court may however consider the accused being a feeble minded
person as a mitigating circumstance under Art. 13 par. 9.
She is not a minor being 18 years old and Art. 12 par. 2 would refer to a
minor. Neither she would be considered as an imbecile because her
mental age is 9 while an imbecile has a mental age between 2 and 7. But
she could be considered as a feeble minded person that would constitute
as a mental illness which is a mitigating circumstance.
A feeble minded person is considered a moron. Following the
jurisprudence that would be an illness of the mind. Take note of the
sequence of your answer.
For minors take note that a person below 18 years is exempt from
prosecution in the following cases,
D2019
1. Vagrancy - because vagrancy has already been decriminalized,
2. How about prostitution (under Article 202 cannot be prosecuted)
How about sniffing rugby, would minors be exempt from criminal
liability?
Yes, and that is the reason why minors are sniffing rugby under EDSA or
public plaza, dinedisplay pa nila, and there is nothing the government
can do because under the convention of the rights of the child, he/she is
exempt from prosecution.
Insanity
Insanity in law is an impairment of the mind as would prevent a
person from distinguishing right from wrong. If a person perceived
to be insane committed a felony would that automatically mean he
would not incur criminal liability?
Generally, he would not incur criminal liability. However, if there is
evidence that he committed the felony during his lucid interval, he would
be liable for criminal liability.
What if the fiscal was able to prove that the accused committed the
felony during his lucid interval; however, during trial his insanity
became much worse. What should the court do?
The trial should be suspended and an order for the confinement of the
accused to a hospital for appropriate medical attendance until the
accused regain his sanity.
If the accused suddenly regain his sanity as certified by the
physician, what should the court do?
The court should now resume the trial.
During the promulgation of the decision, the accused was again
considered insane. What should the court do?
The court should once again commit the accused to the hospital for
medical care and the promulgation of the decision be suspended until the
accused regain his sanity.
After the promulgation of the decision, the accused was again
considered insane. What should the court do?
19
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
The court should once again commit the accused to the hospital for
medical care and if the accused shall regain his sanity, he shall be order
to serve his sentence. The prescription of the penalty shall be suspended
during the period wherein the accused is insane.
Regarding committing the insane person in the hospital, how does
the defense prove that the accused is once again sane, or does the
defense have to give a physician or a doctor that will testify as to
the sanity of the insane person or is it the judge who will determine
the sanity?
It has to be the doctor because the judge is not competent to rule on the
accused‖s sanity or insanity.
Is there a specific competent witness that could establish a
person's insanity or sanity?
Yes, a medical doctor. The accused has to be very resourceful.
How about the psychologist? Will the testimony of the
psychologists be better than that of a psychiatrist?
There is a distinction between a psychologist and a psychiatrist, a
psychologist is not a medical practitioner unlike a psychiatrist who holds
a medical degree, so between the to a psychiatrist‖s testimony is more
valuable than a psychologist‖s.
Accident
4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes
an injury by mere accident without fault or intention of causing it.
What is an accident?
It is something that happens outside the way of out will although it carries
of some act in our own will that lies beyond the bounds of humanly
foreseeable consequences.
Notes:
If the consequences are plainly foreseeable, it will be a case of
negligence and not accidents.
And if there be negligence and it caused harm or damage, chances are
the doer will be liable for quasi-felony under Article 365.
D2019
Article 365. Imprudence and negligence. - Any person who, by
reckless imprudence, shall commit any act which, had it been
intentional, would constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of
arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its
medium period; if it would have constituted a less grave felony, the
penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods shall be
imposed; if it would have constituted a light felony, the penalty of
arresto menor in its maximum period shall be imposed.
Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall commit an
act which would otherwise constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the
penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods; if it
would have constituted a less serious felony, the penalty of arresto
mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed.
When the execution of the act covered by this article shall have only
resulted in damage to the property of another, the offender shall be
punished by a fine ranging from an amount equal to the value of said
damages to three times such value, but which shall in no case be less
than twenty-five pesos.
A fine not exceeding two hundred pesos and censure shall be imposed
upon any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall
cause some wrong which, if done maliciously, would have constituted
a light felony.
In the imposition of these penalties, the court shall exercise their sound
discretion, without regard to the rules prescribed in Article sixty-four.
The provisions contained in this article shall not be applicable:
1. When the penalty provided for the offense is equal to or lower than
those provided in the first two paragraphs of this article, in which case
the court shall impose the penalty next lower in degree than that which
should be imposed in the period which they may deem proper to apply.
2. When, by imprudence or negligence and with violation of the
Automobile Law, to death of a person shall be caused, in which case
the defendant shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium
and maximum periods.
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntary, but without malice, doing
or falling to do an act from which material damage results by reason of
inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing of
20
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
failing to perform such act, taking into consideration his employment or
occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition and other
circumstances regarding persons, time and place.
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution displayed in
those cases in which the damage impending to be caused is not
immediate nor the danger clearly manifest.
The penalty next higher in degree to those provided for in this article
shall be imposed upon the offender who fails to lend on the spot to the
injured parties such help as may be in this hand to give. (As amended
by R.A. 1790, approved June 21, 1957).
What is 365 reckless imprudence, negligence. If there is a pure
accident, there is no criminal liability. How about civil liability? 2%
If it‖s pure accident, there is no criminal, no civil liability.
Note: the amendatory law provides that above 12 up to 15 who
commits serious crimes like parricide, murder, infanticide, kidnapping
with serious illegal detention and the victim is killed or raped,
destructive arson, rape or kidnapping, or offenses under the CDDA
shall be deemed under neglected child. Such child shall be
mandatorily placed in a special facility called Bahay Pag-asa.
Equivalent to placing them under arrest. Thus the child, should not be
released. There is an involuntary confinement here.
Child committing offense for the the second time or oftener will be
subject to intervention also. Repeat offenders.
Those who exploit children shall suffer penalty in maximum period.
Aggravating circumstance of using minors in committing felony.
Avoidance of greater evil or injury
X wanting to have her mother release from the hospital was asked
by the hospital to pay the amount due before the patient would be
released. Hearing that the mother would repeatedly asked to be
brought home. The daughter draws post-dated checks in favor of
D2019
the hospital and the checks bounced for being drawn for account
with insufficient funds. Charged with bounced checks, the daughter
raise the justifying circumstance of state of necessity or avoidance
of greater evil. May the court appreciate that modifying
circumstance of state of necessity which is to avoid greater injury?
No, the court may not appreciate the defense of the daughter. Because
there would be other means to avoid the greater injury. This is what the
court said in the case of People vs Ty Sept. 27, 2004.
Excerpt from Ty vs People.
The only question of law raised whether the defense of uncontrollable
fear is tenable to warrant her exemption from criminal liability has to be
resolved in the negative. For this exempting circumstance to be invoked
successfully, the following requisites must concur: (1) existence of an
uncontrollable fear; (2) the fear must be real and imminent; and (3) the
fear of an injury is greater than or at least equal to that committed.
It must appear that the threat that caused the uncontrollable fear is of
such gravity and imminence that the ordinary man would have
succumbed to it. It should be based on a real, imminent or reasonable
fear for ones life or limb. A mere threat of a future injury is not enough. It
should not be speculative, fanciful, or remote. A person invoking
uncontrollable fear must show therefore that the compulsion was such
that it reduced him to a mere instrument acting not only without will but
against his will as well. It must be of such character as to leave no
opportunity to the accused for escape.
In this case, far from it, the fear, if any, harbored by Ty was not real and
imminent. Ty claims that she was compelled to issue the checks a
condition the hospital allegedly demanded of her before her mother could
be discharged for fear that her mothers health might deteriorate further
due to the inhumane treatment of the hospital or worse, her mother might
commit suicide. This is speculative fear; it is not the uncontrollable fear
contemplated by law.
To begin with, there was no showing that the mother’s illness was so life-
threatening such that her continued stay in the hospital suffering all its
alleged unethical treatment would induce a well-grounded apprehension
of her death. Secondly, it is not the laws intent to say that any fear
exempts one from criminal liability much less petitioners flimsy fear that
21
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

her mother might commit suicide. In other words, the fear she invokes
was not impending or insuperable as to deprive her of all volition and to
make her a mere instrument without will, moved exclusively by the
hospitals threats or demands.
Ty has also failed to convince the Court that she was left with no choice
but to commit a crime. She did not take advantage of the many
opportunities available to her to avoid committing one. By her very own
words, she admitted that the collateral or security the hospital required
prior to the discharge of her mother may be in the form of postdated
checks or jewelry. And if indeed she was coerced to open an account
with the bank and issue the checks, she had all the opportunity to leave
the scene to avoid involvement.
Moreover, for the defense of state of necessity to be availing, the greater
injury feared should not have been brought about by the negligence or
imprudence, more so, the willful inaction of the actor. In this case, the
issuance of the bounced checks was brought about by Tys own failure to
pay her mothers hospital bills.
The Court also thinks it rather odd that Ty has chosen the exempting
circumstance of uncontrollable fear and the justifying circumstance of
state of necessity to absolve her of liability. It would not have been half
as bizarre had Ty been able to prove that the issuance of the bounced
checks was done without her full volition. Under the circumstances,
however, it is quite clear that neither uncontrollable fear nor avoidance of
a greater evil or injury prompted the issuance of the bounced checks.

Moreover, petitioner had sufficient knowledge that the issuance of

checks without funds may result in a violation of B.P. 22. She even
testified that her counsel advised her not to open a current account nor
issue postdated checks because the moment I will not have funds it will
be a big problem. Besides, apart from petitioners bare assertion, the
record is bereft of any evidence to corroborate and bolster her claim that
she was compelled or coerced to cooperate with and give in to the
hospitals demands.

Ty likewise suggests in the prefatory statement of her Petition and

Memorandum that the justifying circumstance of state of necessity under
par. 4, Art. 11 of the Revised Penal Code may find application in this
case.

We do not agree. The law prescribes the presence of three requisites to

exempt the actor from liability under this paragraph: (1) that the evil
sought to be avoided actually exists; (2) that the injury feared be greater
than the one done to avoid it; (3) that there be no other practical and less
harmful means of preventing it.

In the instant case, the evil sought to be avoided is merely expected or

anticipated. If the evil sought to be avoided is merely expected or
anticipated or may happen in the future, this defense is not applicable. Ty
could have taken advantage of an available option to avoid committing a
crime. By her own admission, she had the choice to give jewelry or other
forms of security instead of postdated checks to secure her obligation.

D2019 22
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
C. Mitigating Circumstances
Art. 13. Mitigating circumstances. — The following are mitigating
circumstances;
1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all the requisites
necessary to justify or to exempt from criminal liability in the respective
cases are not attendant.
2. That the offender is under eighteen year of age or over seventy years.
In the case of the minor, he shall be proceeded against in accordance
with the provisions of Art. 80.
3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that
committed.
4. That sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party
immediately preceded the act.
5. That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave
offense to the one committing the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants,
or relatives by affinity within the same degrees.
6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have
produced passion or obfuscation.
7. That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in
authority or his agents, or that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt
before the court prior to the presentation of the evidence for the
prosecution;
8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering some
physical defect which thus restricts his means of action, defense, or
communications with his fellow beings.
9. Such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the will-
power of the offender without however depriving him of the
consciousness of his acts.
10. And, finally, any other circumstances of a similar nature and
analogous to those above mentioned.
D2019
The mitigating circumstances enumerated in article 13 must be present
prior to or at least simultaneously with the commission of the felony as a
general rule. Except only
1. Voluntary surrender
2. Confession or plea of guilt
Note: that this is true also with respect to justifying and accepting
circumstances and even absolutory cause.
What are the classes of mitigating circumstances?
Ordinary or privileged.
Passion or Obfuscation
Article 13, Par 6 -
6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have
produced passion or obfuscation.
A young man while wandering about the woods saw a young girl
taking a bath in the river. The man attacked (raped) the girl. If the
man was subsequently charged of rape, may he raised the defense
of passion?
No. The passion must arise from lawful sentiments.
Note: Basis is diminution of intelligence and intent. Must arise from
lawful sentiments provoked by prior unjust or improper acts of the
offended party. Also note that exercise of right or duty is not a proper
source of passion or obfuscation.
May passion or obfuscation be appreciated even if the reported act
turned out to be not true?
YES. As long as it was honestly and reasonably believed by the accused
to be true. The rationale being that it may be likened to acting in a
mistake of fact.
Voluntary Surrender and Plea of Guilt
Article 13, Par 7-
7. That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in
23
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
authority or his agents, or that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt
before the court prior to the presentation of the evidence for the
prosecution
(1) Voluntary surrender to a person in authority or his agents.
(2) Voluntary confession of guilt before the court prior to the presentation
of evidence for the prosecution.
If both are present in the same case they have the effect of two
independent circumstances and in the absence of aggravating
circumstances, they will reduce divisible penalties by one degree.
Requisites for voluntary surrender:
1. that the offender had not been actually arrested
2. that the offender surrendered himself to a person in authority or to the
latter‖s agents
3. that the surrender was voluntary
A surrender to be voluntary must be spontaneous, showing the
intent of the accused to submit himself unconditionally to the
authorities either because:
(1) He acknowledges his guilt.
(2) He wishes to save them the trouble and expense necessarily incurred
in the search and capture.
Requisites for the plea of guilt:
1. That the offender spontaneously confessed his guilt
2. That the confession of guilt was made in open court
3. That the confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of
evidence for the prosecution
What if after a plea of guilty, and during the clarificatory questions
asked by the court, the statement of the accused turned out to
constitute a valid self-defense, w/c is a justifying circumstance.
How will the court rule on the prior plea of guilty?
Counsel of the accused must move for the withdrawal of the plea. The
accused can simply withdraw his plea of guilty and re-enter a plea of not
guilty based on the justifying circumstances proved.
D2019
Counsel of the accused can ask the court to set the case for reception of
evidence to prove the justifying circumstance.
Similar and Analogous Causes
Article 13, Par 10
10. And, finally, any other circumstance of a similar nature and
analogous to those above mentioned.
What are the circumstances not particularly listed in Art. 13 but the
court in the past considered them as mitigating circumstances?
1. Over 60 years old with failing sight, similar to over 70 years of
age mentioned in par. 2;
2. Outraged feeling of owner of animal taken for ransom analogous
to vindication of a grave offense;
3. Outraged feeling of creditor, similar to passion and obfuscation in
par. 6;
4. Impulse of jealous feeling, similar to passion and obfuscation;
5. Manifestations of BWS, analogous to an illness that diminishes
the exercise of will power;
6. Esprit de corps, similar to passion and obfuscation;
7. Voluntary restitution of stolen property, similar to voluntary
surrender mentioned in par. 7;
8. Extreme poverty and necessity, similar to incomplete justification
based on state of necessity testifying for the prosecution,
analogous to plea of guilty;
9. Return of money malversed is akin to voluntary surrender.
Note: Davalos v. People. The accused after 7 years, returned
themoney malversed. This will not be considered a
mitigatingcircumstance because the accused failed to return the
moneyimmediately without giving plausible reason/s.
24
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
D. Aggravating Circumstances
Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances. — The following are aggravating
circumstances:
1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position.
2. That the crime be committed in contempt or with insult to the public
authorities.
3. That the act be committed with insult or in disregard of the respect due
the offended party on account of his rank, age, or sex, or that is be
committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has not given
provocation.
4. That the act be committed with abuse of confidence or obvious
ungratefulness.
5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief Executive or in
his presence, or where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of
their duties, or in a place dedicated to religious worship.
6. That the crime be committed in the night time, or in an uninhabited
place, or by a band, whenever such circumstances may facilitate the
commission of the offense.
Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have acted together
in the commission of an offense, it shall be deemed to have been
committed by a band.
7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration,
shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.
8. That the crime be committed with the aid of armed men or persons
who insure or afford impunity.
9. That the accused is a recidivist.
A recidivist is one who, at the time of his trial for one crime, shall have
been previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced
in the same title of this Code.
D2019
10. That the offender has been previously punished by an offense to
which the law attaches an equal or greater penalty or for two or more
crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty.
11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward, or
promise.
12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison,
explosion, stranding of a vessel or international damage thereto,
derailment of a locomotive, or by the use of any other artifice involving
great waste and ruin.
13. That the act be committed with evident premeditation.
14. That the craft, fraud or disguise be employed.
15. That advantage be taken of superior strength, or means be employed
to weaken the defense.
16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia).
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against
the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof
which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to
himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
17. That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add
ignominy to the natural effects of the act.
18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry.
There is an unlawful entry when an entrance of a crime a wall, roof, floor,
door, or window be broken.
20. That the crime be committed with the aid of persons under fifteen
years of age or by means of motor vehicles, motorized watercraft,
airships, or other similar means. (As amended by RA 5438).
21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately
augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commission.
25
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
What are the kinds of aggravating circumstances?
1. Generic Aggravating— applies generally to all crimes i.e. dwelling,
night time, and recidivism;
2. Specific Aggravating— apply only to particular crimes i.e. cruelty and
treachery which only applies to crime against persons; for ignominy they
apply against crimes against chastity;
3. Qualifying circumstances— changes the nature of the crime i.e.
from homicide to murder where there is treachery, evident premeditation,
and other aggravating circumstance found in Art. 248;
4. Inherent— those of necessity which accompanies the commission of
the crime which are not used in the commission of the crime i.e. evident
premeditation, in robbery, estafa, adultery, and concubinage;
5. Special Aggravating Circumstance— those which arise under
special conditions to increase penalty for the offence and cannot be
offset by mitigating circumstances such as quasi-recidivism under Art.
160, complex crimes under Art. 48, and error in personae in Art. 49.
Note: In order to be considered in a case, both qualifying and
aggravating circumstances must be specially alleged in the charge
sheet, or information, or complaint as provided now in Sec. 8 and 9 of
Rule 110 of the RoC otherwise they will not appreciated by the court
even if proved during trial.
Note: There are aggravating circumstances which do not have the effect
of increasing the penalty because they are considered as crimes already
especially punishable by law i.e. by means of fire or explosion in Arson
under Art. 321, and in Art. 324 in crimes involving destruction.
Note: Taking advantage of public position is inherent in the crimes
committed by PublicOfficers in the exercise of their functions i.e.
bribery and malversation.
In par. 1, advantage taken of official position — it will aggravate
offender’s liability. Why?
This could expose greater perversity in the personal circumstance of the
offender and means used. In par. 1, the offender must have abused his
public position or at least the same facilitated the commission of the
offense. It will not apply if the taking advantage of the position is an
D2019
integral element of the offense i.e. falsification of documents committed
by public officers under Art. 171. Consequently, if the public officer
committed falsification but did not take advantage or used his public
position, his liability will not be under Art. 171 but instead, the public offer
will be charged under Art. 172.
Art. 171— falsification committed by public officers, taking advantage of
his position and his duties.
Art. 172— falsification committed by the individual. If the offender is a
public officer who did not take advantage or abuse his position, he
should be held liable under Art. 172 because by then he will be
considered to have been acting in his private and personal capacity.
Consequently, Art. 172 will apply.
Par. 2, contempt of public authorities.
Par. 2 would not apply when the crime is committed in the presence of
the agents of persons in authority only. The basis for par. 2 would be lack
of respect to public authorities . Par. 2 disregards rank, age, sex, and
dwelling of offended party. The basis of classifying such as an
aggravating circumstance would be the greater perversity shown by the
circumstances of the offended party and the place of commission of the
crime.
Par. 3 provides for four aggravating circumstances, which if
present, will be considered independently from each other and
numerically reckoned accordingly. What is the scope of the
application of Par. 3?
The circumstances of rank, age, or sex may be taken into account only
against persons or honour but will not be applicable when sex is
indispensable in the crime committed such as parricide, abduction, and
seduction.
Crime committed in dwelling of the offended party — The crime that
took place fully or partly in crime committed in the dwelling or in any
integral part thereof. Thus, it is still aggravating where the victim was
attacked inside the dwelling and dragged outside to be killed. Or even
where attack of the victim inside his house was made by firing a gun from
the outside.
26
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
If the problem shows that a gunman climbed a tree about several meters
tall at the victims house and waited for the victim to come out and took
an aim and fired at the victim, dwelling has been considered as
aggravating even thought the culprit did not even enter the dwelling.
Note: Dwelling is not aggravating where the offended party gave
provocation which shouldbe sufficient and immediate to the
commission of the crime.
Where both offender and offended party are occupants of the same
house, what if the wife, as soon as the husband leave for work, will
invite a paramour in the conjugal dwelling and commit adultery,
would dwelling be considered as an aggravating circumstance
given the fact that the wife has every reason to be in that conjugal
dwelling?
It is still aggravating.
If the problem would show that both the unfaithful wife and the
paramour who is a border in the same house shall commit adultery
right there and then, would you still consider dwelling as an
aggravating circumstance provided that both of them have every
reason to be there?
Cannot consider dwelling, but you can use abuse of confidence as
aggravating circumstance.
In robbery with force upon things, dwelling is inherent to commit the
crime. But it is applicable in robbery with violence or intimidation of
persons as entrance to dwelling is not an element of the offense. Also, in
trespass to dwelling, as this is by law included in the commission of the
offense.
What if the victim happens to be mere visitors in the dwelling? Lets
say A, B, and C came to visit D. While they are inside the offender
breached in and fired at the visitors, would dwelling be an
aggravating circumstance?
In the case of People v. Ramolete, the court did not consider dwelling as
aggravating. The reason is that the victims were merely visitors of the
house.
But if you read the case of People v. Basa, dwelling was
appreciated in the killing of guests in the house of another. How
D2019
then would you reconcile these two conflicting pronouncements of
the court?
Where the victims were actually guests in the house allowed to use the
facilities and amenities of the house, dwelling is aggravating. But where
the victims are mere visitors in the house, dwelling is not an aggravating
circumstance. There is already trust, confidence, or familiarity when the
visitors are allowed to use the facilities. So they are no longer considered
as strangers. Take note of People v. Basa and People v. Ramolete.
Par. 4 of Art. 14
Here there are two aggravating circumstance, which if present in the
same case, can already be perceived as arising from different basis.
They must be independently appreciated. In abuse of confidence, this
requires special confidential relationship between the offender and the
victim and this is not so in ungratefulness.
Abuse of confidence must be immediate and personal. There is no abuse
of confidence in malversation, estafa by conversion, misappropriation,
and qualified seduction.
How about the palace or other places where authorities are
engaged in the discharge of their duties or place dedicated to
religious worship, what would be the justification for this?
These are places which are entitled to special respect.
What happened in the case of People v. Jauregi?
There was a crime committed in the place dedicated for worship. The
woman in this case was carrying a fan knife when she entered the place
of worship.
One time when the girl was walking along the street, the boy approached
the girl and kept insisting his desire on the girl. The boy in fact attempted
to kiss the girl. Since then on the girl brought a “balisong”. The girl
planned to stab the boy in case he approached her again. One day, the
girl went to the chapel. The boy went inside the chapel and sat beside
the girl. The boy touched the thigh of the girl. At that moment, the girl
struck the boy on his neck. She could have aimed on the boy‖s legs or
even just shout. But No. She decided to use the fan knife to struck the
boy at a strategic part of his boy which resulted into the boy‖s death.
27
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
On the issue of the aggravating circumstance in the place dedicated for
religious worship, the court did not appreciate the aggravating
circumstance in this case. The court said that there is no evidence that
the girl had murder in her heart when she entered the chapel.
If the problem would show facts identical to People v. Jauregi, then just
follow the court‖s line of thinking— “no murder in her heart”.
Par. 6, nighttime or uninhabited place that facilitate the commission
of the crime.
This involves taking advantage of night time and uninhabited place to
facilitate the commission of the crime. There are three aggravating
circumstances in par. 6 which may be considered as one if they
concurred in the commission of the felony but may be severally
appreciated if their elements are distinct and can subsist independently.
Night time by and of itself is not aggravating. It becomes aggravating
only when the offender specially sought or took advantage of the night
time to facilitate the commission of the offense.
By a band or a cuadrilla
 Note: there must be more than 3 armed men
 It is considered aggravating in crimes against property, persons,
illegal detention, treason
 But by a band is not aggravating in brigandage under Art. 306
Par. 8 - aid of armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity.
 Aid of armed men to persons to afford impunity
 Requires that the armed men are mere accomplices to take part
in that minor capacity directly or indirectly and not when they
were merely present at the crime scene
 Should they act in the commission of the crime under the same
purpose as the principal accused, they shall be considered as
co-conspirators or co-principals.
 Neither should they constitute a band as the appropriate
aggravating circumstance then would be cuadrilla
Par. 9 - Recidivism
 Offender‖s criminal liability is aggravated
 Ordinary aggravating circumstance
 It affects only the periods of the penalty
D2019
 E: in prostitution, gambling PD 1602 where recidivism
increases the penalty by degrees
 If the accused was serving sentence for robbery or homicide
which is a crime against property, and he commits homicide, he
is not a recidivist but only a QUASI-REVIDIVIST (People v.
Atienza)
Reiteracion / Habituality
There are 4 forms of committing more than 1 crime on different
occasions that may aggravate a eprsons‖s criminal liability:
1. Recidivism (Par. 9, Art. 14)
2. Reiteracion / Habituality (par. 10)
3. Habitual delinquency (Art. 16, par. 5)
4. Quasi-recidivism (Art. 160)
Par. 13 - evident premeditation.
Basis: it will show greater perversity by the act of deliberately planning
before the commission of the felony
Note: evident premeditation cannot be appreciated where the accused
had planned, but the victim is different from the victim which the accused
originally intended to kill
E: where the accused has determined not only to kill the intended victim
but also anyone who would help him or have a violent desistance
(People v. Pinoco)
Par. 14 – Craft, fraud, disguise
If the person uses a helmet purposely to hide their face and conceal
their identity, would he be liable for the AC of disguise?
No, if they wont do that, they will be violating the Motor Vehicle Law.
Test of disguise: whether the disguise resulted to when the accused
intended to or did make identification more difficult such as the use of
mask (People v. Pagas)
Thus, if the offender used a handkerchief to cover his face but was
still recognized by the victim, would disguise be considered as
aggravating?
People v. Samsona: disguise is not aggravating but if the accused used
a mask to cover his face but fell down thus revealing his identity, it is
aggravating. In using a mask, there could have been no other purpose
but to conceal his identity.
28
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
Par. 15 - superior strength, or means employed to weaken the
defense.
There are 2 aggravating circumstances, either of which will qualify the
crime to murder.
Treachery
 Offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing
means or methods in the execution thereof which tends directly
or especially to insure its execution without
 Treachery cannot be presumed. It must be proven as fully as the
crime itself. But the killing of a child of 10 years involves
treachery even if the manner adopted against the victim was not
shown or testified to, provided the killing was intentional.
 In relation to other AC, treachery absorbs:
 Abuse of superior strength
 Employing means to weaken the defense
 Treachery is inherent in murder by poisoning
 Treachery cannot co-exist with passion and obfuscation
 Treachery must precede at the present in the inception of the
attack of the victim
 If there are actually 2 stages, it is sufficient that treachery
was present at the 2nd stage in order to qualify the killing
to murder
 Treachery cannot be appreciated against the mastermind
charged only as principal by inducement if he has no knowledge
of how and was not present when the crime was committed.
Par. 17 – Ignominy
People v. Torrefiel – wrapped penis in cogon before raping the girl. This
is an aggravating circumstance.
People v. Siao – accused, in committing rape, used dog-style position as
aggravating circumstance of ignominy
Par 21 - deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not
necessary for its commissions.
 In short, CRUELTY
 Evident intent: Prolong the suffering of the victim;
D2019
 Cruelty can be considered only if the other norms performed
while the victim is still alive.
What are these privileged aggravating circumstances?
Privileged aggravating, special aggravating, if present would
automatically give basis for imposing a higher penalty.
What are the examples of a Privileged aggravating circumstances?
Complex Crimes under Article 48
Article 168, Quasi-recidivism which would require the imposition of an
extra penalty and that is compulsory.
Why is it considered privilege aggravating?
It would increase the penalty by specific provision of the law
How about under special laws? What else? How about Article 9165?
1. Under RA 9165 - No Qualifying Aggravating
2. Organized or syndicated crime group, quasi-recidivism, the use
of a firearm (under PD1866)
3. Influence of drugs (under 9165)
4. Exploitation of a minor.
The Off-setting rule is that, if there be two mitigating and no
aggravating in a particular case, it will warrant the deduction of a
penalty by at least one degree lower. If there is one mitigating and
one aggravating that would offset each other, which would result to
zero aggravating and zero mitigating, will that give the court the
opportunity to lower?
Yes
But what if there is a special aggravating and there is a privileged
mitigating, how will the court appreciate this modifying
circumstances in the imposition of the proper penalty? Which one
would prevail? Yun isa, special mitigating, and what is the other
special mitigating?
- Minority
- Incomplete Self-Defense (Article 68)
What if it’s the same? One special privilege mitigating versus a
special aggravating? Which one would prevail?
29
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

The special mitigating should prevail over the aggravating because that From parricide to destierro? That is an example of a special mitigating.
is an interpretation that would be more favorable to the accused. Specific.

The classification of the mitigating circumstances are ordinary, which There are other classification of other mitigating circumstances such as
would affect only the periods. special mitigating circumstances. What are these special mitigating.
If it is privilege, it would affect the penalty by degrees. Accused is over 70 years., there is no death penalty. That is a provision
It cannot be offset or affected by aggravating circumstances and it is of the law now. Can we impose or carried out, see article 47 and 83, that
applicable to all crimes. The privilege mitigating circumstances of has already been amended.
minority and incomplete justifying and exempting circumstances cannot
be offset by aggravating circumstances and may reduce the penalty by Why Would being 70 years old be a special mitigating
one or two degrees. circumstances? Why?
He doesn‖t have an answer to this
What are the other classifications of other mitigating
circumstances? Take note of incomplete justifying or exempting circumstances of
We have specific or particular. They are those that would apply only to paragraph 1 of article 13
specific penalties applicable only by express provisions of the code to Note: that in Paragraph 1 of 13, it pertains to the elements of justifying
particular felonies. circumstance of Article 11 and exempting circumstance of Article 12
being a complete. However, it should be the elements of the means
What are they? employed or lack of sufficient provocation that should be lacking.
1. The penalty of death for the spouse or paramour or serious
physical injuries under the exceptional circumstance in Article
247 will reduce the penalty to destierro, that is a specific or
mitigating circumstances applicable only under 247.
2. Another would be the intent to conceal the dishonor of the
mother in infanticide and abortion and its presence would be
result to the reduced penalty and that is only specific to
infanticide and abortion. Hindi toh pwede sa prostitution or
adultery, it is only specific and particular to abortion and
infanticide
3. Article 268, voluntary release of a person within 3 days, lower
the imposable penalties, particular only to kidnapping and
serious illegal detention.
4. Abandonment of the wife by the offender spouse reduces the
penalty of adultery by one degree

Recall: what is the Penalty for killing your legitimate or lawful

spouse?
Reclusion perpetua to death, but death has already been suspended
because there is present a special mitigating. The penalty has been
reduced how degrees. And take note, that the period for destierro would
be 6 months to 6 years. And it is not to be served in any penal institution.

D2019 30
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

E. Alternative Circumstances It is aggravating in case where the offended party is a relative of a

higher degree than the offender; or when the offended party are
ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES relatives of the same level

Art. 15. Their concept. — Alternative circumstances are those which In Crimes Against CHASTITY, Relationship is always AGGRAVATING.
must be taken into consideration as aggravating or mitigating according But Relationship is NEITHER AGGRAVATING, MITIGATING OR
to the nature and effects of the crime and the other conditions attending EXEMPTING, when it is an ELEMENT of a crime such as
its commission. They are the relationship, intoxication and the degree of  Parricide
instruction and education of the offender.  Adultery
 Concubinage
The alternative circumstance of relationship shall be taken into
consideration when the offended party in the spouse, ascendant, Intoxication
descendant, legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or sister, or relative It is MITIGATING if not habitual or not subsequent to the plan to commit
by affinity in the same degrees of the offender. felony.
It is AGGRAVATING if its
The intoxication of the offender shall be taken into consideration as a (1) habitual or
mitigating circumstances when the offender has committed a felony in a (2) subsequent
state of intoxication, if the same is not habitual or subsequent to the plan
to commit said felony but when the intoxication is habitual or intentional, There is a presumption that intoxication is not intentional; Incumbent
it shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance. upon prosecution to prove otherwise

The Alternative Circumstances are:

 Relationship;
 Intoxication; and
 Degree of Instruction and Education of the Offender

Relationship
Relationship is an ABSOLUTORY (EXEMPTING) cause in:
 Theft
 Estafa
 Malicious Mischief
Relationship is MITIGATING in crimes against Property and Trespass to
Dwelling:
 Robbery
 Usurpation
 Fraudulent Insolvency
 Arson
Relationship is AGGRAVATING in crimes against Persons:

D2019 31
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

IV. PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE AND A. Principals

DEGREE OF PARTICIPATION
Art. 16. Who are criminally liable. — The following are criminally liable for
grave and less grave felonies:
1. Principals.
2. Accomplices.
3. Accessories.
For LIGHT offenses, only principals and accomplices are liable.
Accessories are not liable for light offenses because the social wrong as
well as the individual prejudice is so small that penal sanction is deemed
not necessary for accessories.
But the classification of offenders as principal, accomplice, and
accessory is not applicable in CONSPIRACY because of the doctrinal
ruling that the act of one is the act of all; and the liability of one is the
liability of all.
Article 16 will only be applicable when the accused will be charged by
individual not collective liability.
Art. 17. Principals. — The following are considered principals:
1. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act;
2. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it;
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act
without which it would not have been accomplished.
 In order to convict the accused as principal in the crime of
murder, prosecution must prove specific acts done by him which
fall in any of the circumstances mentioned in Article 17
 If the principal is not present in the scene of the crime, he cannot
be deemed to be principal by direct participation.
There are two ways of becoming principal by inducement:
1. By directly forcing another to commit a crime
2. By directly inducing another to commit a crime
If the force used is by (1) irresistible force or (2) uncontrollable fear, the
material executor is not criminally liable.
If by inducement, it could be a giving or offering a price or reward, the
one giving the price is principal by inducement while the one committing
the felony is a principal by direct participation.

How would you consider the inciting expression? “sige na” “go ahead”

What then are the liability of the by-standers who are in the know of the
assault, but instead of discouraging the minor to commit the felony, they
said inciting words to the accused to commission the offense?

 Article 17 (2) can apply AND

 Article 8 – Conspiracy (implied conspiracy; for common purpose)

But what can be the defense of the by-standers

 No prior agreement; No evidence to show that the accused was

influenced by the remarks

D2019 32
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

The inciting and encouraging expressions ARE NOT NECESSARILY
DETERMATIVE of the role of the person to conclude that they are
principally liable by inducement. There must be a showing of a DIRECT
and DETERMINATIVE INFLUENCE in the mind of the actor.
Two factors need to be considered:
library
1. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by the effects
of the crime.
2. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects or
instruments thereof, in order to prevent its discovery.

1. Utterances 3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principals of

2. The utterances have direct influence to the offender in proceeding to the crime, provided the accessory acts with abuse of his public functions
the intended crime. (People vs Tamayo) or whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide,
murder, or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive, or is known
Principal by Offender who made proposal to to be habitually guilty of some other crime.
Inducement commit a Felony
Similarity There is inducement There is inducement to commit a Art. 20. Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability. — The
to commit a crime crime penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon those
When Becomes liable only The mere proposal to commit a who are such with respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendants,
liable when the crime is felony is punishable in treason or legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by
committed by the rebellion. However, the person to affinity within the same degrees, with the single exception of accessories
principal by direct whom the proposal is made should falling within the provisions of paragraph 1 of the next preceding article.
participation not commit the crime, otherwise,
the proponent becomes a principal
by inducement A killed B. X, the father of A, burned the body of B to prevent the
What kind Involves any crime The proposal to be punishable must discovery of the crime. What would be the criminal liability of X, the
of crime involve only treason, rebellion, father? May he be charged as an accessory?
involved insurrection or coup d‖ etat X cannot be charged as an accessory, as A is his son. Relationship
exempts the father from incurring criminal liability pursuant to Art. 20 of
B. Accomplices RPC.

Art. 18. Accomplices. — Accomplices are those persons who, not being
included in Art. 17, cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous
or simultaneous acts.
C. Accessories
Art. 19. Accessories. — Accessories are those who, having knowledge of
the commission of the crime, and without having participated therein,
either as principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to its
commission in any of the following manners: chan robles virtual law
Can the father be charged for the crime of obstruction of justice PD
1829?
Yes, PD 1829 did not provide relationship as a ground for criminal
exemption. Father is liable as a principal for the crime of obstruction of
justice PD 1829.
Art. 20(3) Public officer who acted with abuse of public functions or
whenever the author of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide, murder,
or an attempt to take the life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other crime.
 Requirement is not applicable is the accused is charged with
obstruction of justice.

D2019 33
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
 Accessories under Art. 20 are exempt from criminal responsibility
if they are related to the criminal act charged. However, if the
accessories are charged with obstruction of justice, they cannot
claim criminal exemption.
NOTE: PD 1829 has no provision on criminal exemption by reason of
relationship.
Andres committed suicide. Carlos placed the gun inside Badong’s
bag to make it appear that Badong murdered Andres . What is the
criminal liability of Carlos, if any?
NOTE: Committing suicide is not a crime. So do not think that Carlos is
an accessory.
1 Art. 363. Incriminating innocent person. — Any person who, by any act
not constituting perjury, shall directly incriminate or impute to an innocent
person the commission of a crime, shall be punished by arresto menor.
2 PD 1829 Obstruction of Justice
If Andres survived, can the State file a charge?
No, as far as the State is concerned Andres is mentally, emotionally sick.
A person will not commit suicide if not sick.
But if there was assistance in the commission of suicide? What is
the penalty?
Art. 253. Giving assistance to suicide. — Any person who shall assist
another to commit suicide shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor; if
such person leads his assistance to another to the extent of doing the
killing himself, he shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal. However,
if the suicide is not consummated, the penalty of arresto mayor in its
medium and maximum periods, shall be imposed.
What if the person who assisted was the one who consummated the
act? What is the penalty?
Liable for the same crime, assisting but penalty now is Reclusion
temporal; same penalty as homicide
RA 11053, July 29, 2018. It is an amendment to the Anti-Hazing Law
(entitled Anti – Hazing Law of 2018). Sec. 3 provides that all forms of
hazing shall be prohibited both in school-based and community-based
organizations.
D2019
Those that did not participate in the commission of the felony, but having
knowledge of the commission of the crime, they subsequently take part
in three ways by:
1. Profiting;
2. Concealing of the body of the crime to prevent its discovery;
and
3. Concealing/ assisting in the escape of crime with abuse of
public function or the principal is liable for treason or habitually
guilty of some other crime.
Accessory after the fact
1. The acts of the accessory are always committed after the
commission of the crime of the principal. The accessory had no
participation in any form before.
2. Accessory does not take direct part or cooperate or induce in the
commission by acts either prior or simultaneous to the
commission.
Accessory who profits
1. Accessory even related with principal, he shall not be exempted
from criminal liability unlike the other classes of accessories
acting on the natural instincts to protect their relatives.
Accessory who conceals
In the case of US v. Romulo, the accused by gave authorities false
information. Such act is concealment and the accused is correctly held to
be an accessory.
Note: The same act now will constitute obstruction of justice.
A attacked and killed X. B arrived and assisted in burying the
cadaver of X. What is the participation of A and B in the crime
committed? May A and B be liable for Obstruction of Justice?
A is the principal in the crime of homicide or murder. B will be liable as an
accessory for concealing the body of X to prevent its discovery. B may
be liable as principal in the crime of obstruction of justice.
34
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

Obstruction of justice is only applicable to a person other than the

accused himself. A is not liable in the crime of obstruction of justice
because he is the principal in the crime of killing committed.

Accessory does not take direct part or cooperate in or induce the

commission of the crime. Accessory does not cooperate in the
commission of the offense by acts either prior thereto or simultaneous
therewith.
- Participation in all cases always takes place after the
commission of the crime.

Under Article 20, there are some accessories which are exempt
from criminal liability, what is the basis of such exemptions?
Based on the ties of blood and preservation of the cleanliness of one‖s
names which compels one to conceal crimes of the relatives mentioned
in the Article.
o Nephews and nieces are not included in such
enumeration
o Same relatives mentioned under Article 13, paragraph 5
and Article 15.

Is the public officer who, with evident abuse of his office, furnished
the means of escape to his brother, who had committed murder,
criminally liable as an accessory?
- No. Because he would still fall under the people contemplated
under Article 20.
o But if the acts are performed not only by reason of
relationship but also of profit or enable the offender to
profit from the crime, he loses the benefit of the
exemption granted in Article 20.

D2019 35
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
V. COMPLEX CRIMES
Article 48. When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave
felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the
other, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same
to be applied in its maximum period.
Two forms of complex crimes:
1. Compound
2. Complex crime proper
Illustration: Compound – A with intent to kill fired at B but the bullet hit X
instead, causing the latter‖s death. This is an example of compound
crime. Here A committed the crime of homicide with attempted
homicide. One act would result into two or more grave or less grave
felonies.
A shot B inflicting upon B slight physical injuries only but the same
slug hit C causing the latter’s death. Recall that the penalty for
slight physical injuries is only arresto mayor. Question: did A
commit a complex crime (bar question)?
Yes, but qualify the answer by saying that assuming that there was intent
to kill on the part of A when he fired at B although it resulted only to slight
physical injuries, nonetheless that act would constitute attempted
homicide and attempted homicide is not a light felony. On the other hand,
when the said bullet hit B which caused C‖s death, even if C was not the
intended victim, there is a presumption in law of intent to kill whenever
the injured victim, as a result, will die. So yes, it is a complex crime
assuming that intent to kill is present. Otherwise, no, because the first
form of complex crime can only happen if the other crime resulting from
the same act be grave or less grave.
A pulled the trigger of a Thompson submachine gun at a group of
many persons, without releasing the trigger, several shots were
fired, 5 persons were killed. How many crimes were committed?
Will you apply the rules of Art. 48 here? (People v. Disierto)
NO, Article 48 will not apply. There are 5 separate crimes and not just a
complex crime. The court explains that five crimes of homicide were
committed because although there was only one act of pulling the trigger
performed by the offender, each death corresponds to a distinct and
D2019
separate shot fired by A which does make himself criminally liable for as
many offenses as those resulting from the single act that produced the
same. The court explained that although there was only one act of pulling
the trigger, because of the special mechanism of the firearm, it will
automatically fire several shots and the court said that for each bullet that
would be released as a consequence of his pressing the trigger although
there is only one act, there are as many acts as there are bullets actually
fired from the submachine gun.
Illustration: Complex crime proper - one offense is a necessary means
of accomplishing the other. Public officer falsifies receipts is also guilty
of malversation of public funds.
City treasurer who receives 10,000 pesos from a taxpayer placed in the
duplicate original copy of the receipt in the amount of 1,000 pesos only
although he received 10,000 and thereafter pocketed and
misappropriated the sum of 9,000 thousand pesos which is the
difference. The offense committed is malversation through falsification of
public documents. Here, the falsification is a necessary means to commit
malversation.
We said that there are rules obtaining in Article 48 that if one act shall
result to two or more grave or less grave felonies, there would only be
one penalty and the penalty would be for the most serious crime and the
penalty to be imposed in its maximum period. That is the rule also with
respect to committing an offense as a necessary means of committing or
achieving the other.
Instances when the rules obtaining in rule 48 will not apply:
1. When the crime subject of the case is covered by the doctrine
of common elements
a. Doctrine of common elements - if one of the elements is
common to the two felonies and if already used in one
felony it may render the other crime incomplete and
consequently non-existent.
b. Illustration - Estafa (Art. 315) through falsification of
private documents. An element would be damage or
intent to cause damage. The same is also an element
falsification of private documents. If the prosecution
would choose to file estafa then he can no longer pursue
falsification of private documents since the element of
36
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
damage has already been applied and used in the crime
of estafa and there is no such thing as estafa through
falsification of private documents.
2. Where the crime subject of the phase is covered by the rule on
absorption
a. Rule of absorption - If one of the offense is an element of
another, then the former is deemed absorbed by the
latter and is thus considered only one crime.
b. Illustration - Murder and Rebellion. You don‖t charge the
offender separately, murder is absorbed
3. In special complex crime provided by the RPC
a. Art. 266-B— penalties for rape. Here the court has
already provided for specific penalties corresponding for
these compound crimes. So you don‖t apply the rule on
48 like for the most serious crime.
b. Art. 267— kidnapping and serious illegal detention.
c. Art. 294— Robbery with violence or intimidation against
persons.
d. Art. 297— attempted and frustrated robbery and
homicide is committed. This is a special complex crime
not covered by 48.
e. Art. 320— Destructive Arson where death results. This is
a special complex crime. If not so designated then apply
the rule on 48. But since it was already designated as a
special complex crime, then apply penalty provided for.
If arson was committed, and it resulted in homicide, what
would be the liability of the offender?
Homicide is included in Arson. No more separate charges.
What if on the other hand, the intent of the offender is to kill
a specific person and in order to accomplish this criminal
design, he burned the house, what would be the liability of
the offender?
Murder through the use of fire.
What if the problem would show that the intent is to kill a
specific victim and he accomplished the purpose, and in
order to prevent its discovery, he set fire to the building,
what would be the crime?
Murder and Arson.
D2019
Most of the time, if the subject is arson and homicide, the
problem would involve this sequence— arson is the principal
intent and homicide occurred or absorbed, it is a special complex
crime. But if the intent was to kill a particular individual and the
offender was able to accomplish that, but in order to hide the
crime the offender set fire to the place, there are two separate
crimes – murder and arson.
4. When the crimes involved cannot be legally complexed
because the provisions provide that the penalty for such is
in addition to those imposed on the other felonies
committed by the accused in relation thereto
a. Art. 129— maliciously obtaining and abuse in the service
of a search warrant. If the offender in the course of his
application secures a search warrant, executed and
used falsified documents or committed falsification.
b. Falsification is a punishable act under Art. 171 if
committed by public officers and under Art. 172 if
committed by an individual.
c. Art. 210 – direct bribery – “in addition to the penalty
corresponding to the crime agreed upon, if the same
shall have been committed.”
d. Art. 235 – “in addition to his liability for the physical
injuries or damage caused”
e. Sometimes it may even constitute of a violation of the
Anti-Torture act. Whenever the custodian maltreats the
prisoner under his custody for whatever reason or
purpose such as obtaining a confession or information,
the maltreatment itself shall already be a punishable act
and in addition would still be liable for other crimes that
may have been committed.
f. Art. 312 - “in addition to the penalty incurred for the acts
of violence executed by him”
g. Art. 275 – Abandonment of persons in danger - Failing to
render aid or assistance to a person seriously injured or
in fear of dying is already a punishable omission under
Art. 275. If you look at the definition of the felony under
Art. 3. A felony is any act or omission punishable by law.
In Art. 275, the punishable act is an omission.
37
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

What will happen if the seriously injured person The court must favour that which would be an advantage of the accused.
eventually expired? Can you hold the person who The special privilege mitigating will prevail of the special aggravating
failed to render assistance liable for the subsequent circumstance. If habitual delinquency is present, it will warrant an
death of the seriously injured person? imposition of an additional penalty. There is required of the court to issue
No. This is justified. this phrase “unless such omission an additional penalty.
shall constitute a more serious offense”.
May the court disregard this rule?
Go to Art. 4. For you to be able to solve problems in No. The imposition of the additional penalty is mandatory.
Book 2, go to Book 1. Criminal liability attaches to any
person committing a felony. A felony has already been
established when we looked at Art. 3, an act or omission
punishable by law. By virtue of Art. 4, the person who
failed to render assistance shall be liable for all the
consequences of his felonious act, intended or
otherwise.

Is it correct to say that such person who failed to

render assistance shall be liable for the death of the
seriously wounded person?
Yes. There are provisions in the Code. So Art. 48 rules
cannot apply to Art. 275.

h. Art. 276 – abandoning a minor - “when the same shall

constitute a more serious offense.”

Republic Act 7659

Special aggravating circumstances under RA 7659:

1. When advantage was taken by the offender of his public position
in committing the crimes;
2. 2. If the offender belongs to an organised or syndicated crime
group, the maximum penalty shall be imposed regardless of the
mitigating circumstances present

These are special aggravating circumstances that cannot be offset by

mitigating circumstances.

But if the problem would involve any of these two special

aggravating v. a special/privileged mitigating circumstance, how
then would the court rule? May the amendment introduced in R.A.
No. 7659 prevail over a privileged mitigating circumstance?

D2019 38
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
VI. PENALTIES
A. Prospectivity of Criminal Law
Article 21 – the imposable penalty is that which is provided by law prior
to the commission of the offense or the law of time of such commission
- Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege
- Penalty is the retribution or suffering imposed by law for the
crimes committed.
Article 22 – statement of the retroactive effect of penal laws as an
exception to the fundamental characteristic of prospectivity of penal laws.
When would penal laws be given retroactive effect?
1. If it is in favor of an accused who is not a habitual delinquent
2. New or subsequent law expressly provides for retroactivity
Article 23 – Pardon by the offended party extended to the offender, as a
general rule, will not extinguish criminal liability of the accused/offender
- It is the State which is the actual offended party with regard to
the prosecution of the criminal action.
o The enumeration under Article 89 on the modes of total
extinction of criminal liability is exclusive.
 Pardon under Article 89 – refers to the absolute
pardon granted by the President under the
exercise of his executive clemency powers
granted by the Constitution
- Presidential pardon is different from amnesty.
- At most, it would only bar the prosecution by the offender
o If the offended party executes an affidavit of desistance
– there would no longer be a private complaining witness
in Court, but the complainant will still be the People
of the Philippines
Under Article 344, there are certain felonies wherein the marriage of the
offender to the offended party would have the effect of a pardon.
- Abduction, seduction, and acts of lasciviousness – crimes
against chastity
- It shall extinguish or remit the penalty already imposed.
D2019
What is the reason why the marriage would subsequently cause the
setting aside of judgment/penalty? (Assuming that both the
offended party and the offender are legally capacitated to contract
marriage)
- The parties would have to first acquire a marriage license, and
the same will be issued by the Local Civil Registrar (part of the
government)
o By virtue of the giving of the license, the State is deemed
to have acceded to the principle of forgiveness.
What is it that parties will have to accomplish before they could
enter into marriage?
They have to apply for a marriage license. And which entity would issue
permit/license? Local civil registrar. And this is part of the government.
By virtue of the application and the state granting license to get married,
it is in effect acceding to that principle of forgiveness or pardon extended
to the offender. Otherwise government is estopped. So what is the
purpose or what is the use of such?
In art 24 preventive measures are not penalties. The administrative
suspension from public office or employment are not the suspension or
fine as penalties for violation of the RPC. Chapter 2 would refer to the
classification of penalties.
Take note of art 35 – penalties that may be imposed. Scale is only a
general classification based on the feasibility or nature of the subject
matter. The scale of penalties in art 70 refers to successive service of
sentence. Sentences imposed on the same accused according to their
severity and nature. Based on severity ,the scale in art 25 classifies into
capital, afflictive, and light penalties.
Accesory penalties under art 25 may in appropriate cases be used either
as principal or accessory penalties. Also, perpetual special
disqualification is a principal penalty in malversation art 317 while
temporary absolute disqualification is a principal penalty when the
necessary acts with abuse of public function under art 19 accessory
under the third mode and art 58, temporary special disqualification in
bribery under art 210.
Fines are classified
39
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
-afflictive
-corrective
-light
Take note of duration and effects of penalty. Recall RA 7656 provided for
a specific duration for Reclusion Perpetua. Should be no duration but the
duration is 20 years and 1 day to 40 years. Would that range be
considered as classifying death penalty as a divisible penalty? No it
remains to be an indivisible penalty.
In the past they have asked distinguish reclusion perpetua to life
imprisonment? As to accessory penalties?
Nature of destierro as a penalty? When is destierro deemed a penalty?
In what offenses? Or is it available for all punishable acts in the code?
Deed: art 247 - death under exceptional circumstances.
Sir: here the offended spouse who shall discover the unfaithful spouse in
the act of sexual intercourse and who shall inflict violence upon the
unfaithful spouse and the paramour which caused the death of one or
both or inflicted serious physical injuries on both or either. Note that the
penalty for killing the legitimate or lawful spouse is? Parricide – reclusion
perpetua. But here if there is a proper application of 247 what is the
penalty? Only destierro
How about if serious physical injuries what will be the penalty? Destierro
also.
The rule is if 247 will be properly applied the penalty will be reduced from
parricide - reclusion perpetua to destierro or reclusion temporal –
homicide with respect to the paramour to destierro. If serious physical
injuries we don‖t apply the penalty for serious physical injuries but also
destierro
247 is a special mitigating circumstance which will warrant diminution of
the penalty form reclusion perpetua to destierro. The range of destierro is
6 months and 1 day to 6 years
What if the offended spouse only inflicted less serious physical
injuries on the wife and slight physical injuries on the paramour?
What would be the penalty and what would be the names if any?
Read 247 – Death or physical injuries under exceptional circumstances –
D2019
if less serious or slight physical injuries – injuries OF ANY OTHER KIND:
no punishment, exempt
So what would be the nature of second part of 247?
It is ABSOLUTORY
A crime has been committed but by virtue of express provision of
the law, the offender will not incur liability. What other crimes under
the code would the penalty of destierro be the correct and proper
penalty?
- failure to give a bond for good behavior – art 284
- concubinage (destierro against concubine only)
- where the reduction of penalty results to imposition of
destierro
- art 247
What would be the liability of a convict who shall escape to evade
sentence imposed by the court? What is the crime committed?
Look at 157 – penalty of prision correccional in its med and max periods
escaping sentence and evading – refers to a convict serving sentence in
a prison
What would happen if that convict serving destierro would violate
by entering the prohibited area? What then would that act
constitute? That is evasion of service of sentence under 157. But note
that destierro is a penalty which can be the subject of evasion of service
of sentence as held in the case of People v. Avilon.
B. Indeterminate Sentence Law
What are the things that you should remember in ISL?
1. Purpose
2. Who are covered/ When applicable
3. How is it applied
Significant rules in ISL:
 It shall apply to crimes punishable under the RPC and in
appropriate situations by special laws (e.g. such as when the spl
provides for their own maximum and minimum penalties or use
rpc penalties)
40
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
 ISL will not apply when the penalty imposed does not exceed 1
year
Note: recidivists are entitled to indeterminate sentence although the
penalty imposed is a result of a valid plea bargaining (Landicho v
Garcia) Drug offenses are not included in the exemptions except when
the penalty involved imposed is RP or life imprisonment under RA
9561.
C. Probation Law
In the past if the accused, after conviction, shall have perfected his
appeal, may he still apply for probation?
The Court has consistently ruled that no, you cannot avail of two
remedies. But look at Sec 10 of IRR: when an accused who appealed
may still apply for probation
When a judgment of conviction imposing a non-probational employee is
appealed or reviewed regardless of the nature of such appeal and the
judgment is modified by an appellate court through an imposition of the
lesser penalty or conviction or lesser crime which is probationable, the
accused shall be allowed to apply for probation based on the modified
decision within 15 days from receipt of accused of modified decision
The Colinares case gave rise to the amendment. In this case, the
accused appealed and the Court said that we have already struck down
the erroneous provision. The penalty of attempted homicide is within the
coverage of probation law.
Sec 3: Provides for liberal construction – so as to efficiently and
effectively implement and carry out the spirit of the Probation Law. In the
event of doubt and conflict, the spirit and intent of the Probation Law, the
rules shall prevail in liberal interpretation thereof.
Sec. 7: Disqualifying offenders in 2 categories
1. Those sentenced to serve a min term of imprisonment of more
than 6 years
2. Convicted a crime of national security
Those disqualified under special law introduced new categories
D2019
1. Offenders found guilty of any election offense
2. Offenders found guilty of violation of 6727 (wage rationalization
act, as amended)
3. Offenders found guilty of violation of 9165 (comprehensive
dangerous drugs act) except violations of sec 12,13,14, 17
a. 12 – Possession of Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus
and Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs
b. 14 – Possession of Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus
and Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs During
Parties, Social Gatherings or Meetings.
c. 17 - Maintenance and Keeping of Original Records of
Transactions on Dangerous Drugs and/or Controlled
Precursors and Essential Chemicals
d. 70 – non compliance of community service for first time
offenders (Probation or Community Service for a First-
Time Minor Offender in Lieu of Imprisonment.)
Sec 4 of Probation Law: no application for probation shall be entertained
or granted if the defendant has perfected an appeal from the judgment of
conviction and
Colinares v. People: here, accused Colinares appealed his conviction for
frustrated homicide and thus he should be deemed permanently
disqualified for applying for probation. Notwithstanding, SC allowed
Colinares to apply for probation maintaining that he had been convicted
of the wrong crime of homicide. Because the wrong decision convicting
him of homicide has been set aside and a new one has been issued by
the SC finding him guilty instead of attempted homicide which new
decision should be considered as an original one. Finding him guilty of
attempted homicide, the penalty of which is probationable. Colinares is
now allowed to apply for probation.
Sec 18 of the Rules – the accused may be allowed temporary liberty
under this bail filed in the criminal case where he has been convicted or
released on recognizance to the custody of a responsible member of the
community.
41
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
VII. MODIFICATION AND EXTINCTION OF
CRIMINAL LIABILITY
A. Extinguishment of Criminal Liability
How criminal liability is totally extinguished?
DEATH OF THE ACCUSED
1. Death After Finality of Judgment — When the death of the offender
occurs after final judgment, only his criminal liability is extinguished.
However, his civil liability is not affected by his death. Hence, despite the
death of a convict after finality of conviction for theft, his heirs are
obligated to return to the offended party the stolen properties.
2. Death Before Finality of Judgment — When the death of the
offender occurs before final judgment, his liability as to the personal
penalties and pecuniary penalties is extinguished under Article 89 of the
Revised Penal Code. Pecuniary penalties include not only fine and cost
but also civil liability arising from crime.
3. Death Pending Appeal — As a rule, Article 89 merely provides
modes of criminal extinction. The modes of extinguishing civil liability are
found in the Civil Code. However, there is an exception. Under Article.
89, death of the offender, which occurs before the finality of judgment, is
a mode of extinguishing both criminal liability and civil liability arising
from crime.
Upon death of an accused pending appeal, his criminal liability and the
corresponding civil liability arising from crime are extinguished, but civil
liability arising from other source of obligation such as quasi-delict,
contract, quasi-contract or law survives.
Does service extinguish criminal liability and civil liability?
Only the criminal liability is extinguished by the service of sentence, civil
liability is not.
B. Prescription of Penalties
 Would result to the extinction of criminal liability
 Period of prescription commences to run from the date when
the culprit evaded the service of his sentence.
D2019
 It is deemed interrupted when the convict:
o Gives himself up
o Is captured
o Goes to a foreign country with which we have no
extradition treaty, or
o Commits another crime before the expiration of the
period of prescription
Two Kinds of Prescription
1. Prescription of the crime – is the forfeiture or loss of the right of
the State to prosecute the offender after the lapse of the certain
time.
2. Prescription of the penalty – is the forfeiture or loss of the right
of the Government to execute the final sentence after the lapse
of certain time.
The prescription will commence to run again when the convict escapes
again, after having been captured and return to prison.
On being informed that you are being convicted by the trial court,
the accused went to the South, and through the back door, went to
Malaysia, therefore, authorities could not apprehend him. Will the
period of prescription of the penalty start to run?
No. The prescription of the penalty will commence to run the day the
accused has evaded the service of his sentence. In this case, even
before he was convicted, accused already left the country, so there was
no evasion of the service of his sentence.
 In Castillo v. Torrecampo, the accused went into hiding before
the promulgation of judgment so there was no evasion of service
to speak of at all.
What if the accused went to another country to avoid the service of
his penalty, wherein there is an extradition treaty?
The prescriptive period will run, because the Court may request the
extradition of the accused.
If the accused decided to proceed to Portugal, and bought an estate
there, then authorities in Manila are aware that he went there. What
would be the recourse or action that Manila can take to bring her
back to the Philippines and make her serve the sentence?
42
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO

If there is an extradition treaty, request the extradition. But if there is no No more. In dubito pro reo. Construe things in favor of the accused.
extradition treaty, the government authorities cannot do anything. (Check the ruling in the case of Yapdiangco v. Buencamino)

What is the rule on the falsification of public documents which were

X is the neighbor of A. X personally witnessed today the killing of registered with the Register of Deeds?
his neighbor by a policeman who thereafter threw the cadaver in the If the crime is not concealed, under Act 496 as amended, the prescriptive
river. Body was never recovered. Neighbor out of fear moved to period was computed from the date of the registration of the documents
another place. After 21 years, returned to the place and reported the and not from the date of actual discovery thereof (Cabal v. Puno, et al.)
authorities. May the police authorities arrest and prosecute the  Reason: The presence of constructive notice is considered to be
killer? notice to the whole world.
Yes. The period will commence to run upon the discovery of the offended  Reiterated in the Balane v. People case.
party, who is the relative of the victim or authorities or those vested with
the authority to prosecute. In this case, the neighbor is not an offended Departure from the general rule in Behest loans cases – the anomalous
party. transactions commonly would have been discovered after the ouster of
Marcos, prior thereto, no person would have questioned the illegality of
What if the act of killing has been publicly exposed in media? these transactions.
The running of the period of prescription will commence on the day it was
exposed to the media. For purposes of prescription of Special Penal Laws, see Act No.
3763, amending Act No. 3326* (Periods of prescription for violation of
What if the crime involved is estafa. The deed of sale is falsified and offenses punished by Special Penal Laws)
the land was registered, when would the prescription of the offense
commence? Penalty Imposed by Law Prescriptive Period
From the date of the notarization of the public documents, pursuant to Offenses punished by fine or by 1 year
the constructive notice rule. Period of prescription will run from the date imprisonment for not more than
of the notarization. one month, or both
Offenses punished by 4 years
Will you check if the same will be similar to the public sale of the imprisonment for more than one
property without the knowledge of the owner, and a buyer in good month but less than two years
faith purchased the real property. Offenses punished by 8 years
Real owner would have one year to redeem the property upon imprisonment for two years or
knowledge of such public sale. more but less than six years
 Check the case of Behest Loans during the term of Marcos – the Offenses punished by 12 years
prescription will commence to run on the date after the EDSA imprisonment for six years or more
Revolution (1986)
o SC said that during the dictatorship, no one would have Offenses under the Internal 5 years
the courage to question the registration of the Revenue Laws
anomalous transactions.
Violations of municipal ordinances 2 months
If the prescriptive period to file an action against an offender would
fall on a Sunday, may the fiscal still file the charge sheet or
information the following working day?

D2019 43
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
Violations of the regulations or 2 months
conditions of certificate of
convenience issued by the Public
Service Commission
*not applicable where the SPL provides for its own prescriptive period
For continuing offenses, the prescriptive period will start from the day
the accused desisted from committing the offense. (Arches v.
Bellosillo, et al.)
C. Amnesty & Pardon
What is amnesty?
Act of grace given by the President with the concurrence of the State.
What is the effect of amnesty extended by the state to the convicted
person? May the President waive the civil liability of the accused?
Amnesty will completely extinguish the penalty/criminal liability but not
civil liability. Civil liability is not extinguished because civil liability pertains
to private persons and it is outside the power of the President to waive it.
It is only the private offended party who can waive the civil liability.
When a crime is committed, there are two offended parties – the private
person and the State. If it is only the State that is injured by a crime or
offense, amnesty or pardon will extinguish all liability. There is no civil
liability in such case.
What is pardon?
The basis is executive clemency power of the President under the
Constitution. Pardon is an act of grace that exempts the individual from
serving the penalty from a crime he has committed. It is a private act of
the President alone which the court cannot question.
May a private individual or citizen question the propriety of the
grant of pardon?
No. This is an exclusive right granted by the Constitution to the
President.
What would be the remedy now of the person? If you are the
counsel for the petitioner granted conditional pardon, what is the
advise you can give your client?
D2019
Under the RPC, would such act of the agents be a punishable act i.e.
incriminating someone?
Look at Art. 363. Incriminating Innocent Person— here although he was
previously charged or convicted, he is still innocent of the charge of
illegal possession since he was set up.
Under R.A. 9165 as amended, is that a punishable act also?
That act will constitute planting of evidence. This is a very serious
offense. The penalty is death although death has been reduced to
reclusion perpetua. You have options available. File a case against these
agents who set you up under the RPC and Dangerous Drugs Act.
Good conduct for allowances earned will also reduce the period in
addition to those enumerated include also special conduct and
workmanship allowance under Act. No. 2489, also loyalty allowance
under Art. 98, go back to Art. 98. Note that Art. 98 has been amended by
R.A. 10592.
Let‖s say an earthquake and typhoon occurred destroying the prison
institution and some inmates taking advantage of the confusion escaped.
And then after the restoration of the institution, the inmates would return
within 48 hrs. They will be credited with 1/5 of the period of their
sentence.
Note: R.A. No. 10591 and 10592 are important.
How will the court appreciate the period for which you are being
confined in the prison because there is an ongoing Preliminary
Investigation or failure to post bail?
Look at Art. 29— Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term
of imprisonment.
 “shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting of
deprivation of liberty, with the full time during which they have
undergone preventive imprisonment, if the detention prisoner
agrees voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary
rules imposed upon convicted prisoners”
 Period of preventive imprisonment would deduct and is a mode
of reducing the sentence.
How about detention of minors in a detention facility?
44
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
The period of detention would also be credited as service an in effect
reduce the period for the term. The president has been empowered to
order the recommitment under the Revised Administrative Code and
courts cannot inquire into the validity of such order of recommitment
except in the case of Espuelas v. Provincial Warden of Bohol.
In case of violation of the conditional pardon that the convict will
not commit a crime, is it necessary that there be a conviction?
No, it is not necessary that there be conviction by a final judgment before
recommitment. (Torres v. Gonzales, July 23, 1987).
People v. Coral – the condition that the convict shall not commit any
crime was held to include to include both felonies and crimes punished
by penal laws. So it is not only limited to the RPC.
A person criminally liable is also civilly liable, the exception to the rule
would be with respect to victimless crimes such as espionage. Generally,
these are crimes against the state affecting peace. There is no private
offended party. Consequently, no damages may be issued by the court in
this case.
If a person is acquitted, GR: civil liability is extinguished
Exceptions.
 Where the acquittal of the accused is based on the ground that
the guilt of the accused has not been established beyond
reasonable doubt
 Where the acquittal is based on an exempting circumstance
such as insanity. And third, where the courts after trial declare
that there is only civil liability on the part of the accused.
Art. 101 refers to rules regrinding civil liability in certain cases. Art.
101, par. 4 and 7 of exempting circumstances are not included
under the coverage of Art. 101. Why?
Par. 4 refers to accidents. Par. 7 refers to non-performance of a lawful
duty when prevented by a lawful aid or insuperable cause. Par. 4 and 7
presuppose the lack of criminal intent. There is an absence of criminal
intent. Here there is no crime, consequently, there is no civil liability ex
delicto that may arise.
Art. 102 refers to subsidiary liability. Under Art. 102, would that
mean teachers would be subsidiarily liable for criminal acts of its
students? No. The teacher referred to in Art. 103 does not refer to an
D2019
academic instructor but one conducting a course of instruction in a
particular industry. Not an academic teacher but someone teaching in an
industry relating to commercial activities i.e. seminars, or workshop. Art.
104 would refer to civil liability. There is restitution under Art. 105,
reparation for damage under 106, and indemnification under 107.
Restitution and Reparation are available in crimes against property.
Indemnification is available in crimes against persons and honor.
Restitution may be demanded even from third persons. But
indemnification or restitution may be required only from the accused and
his heirs.
What would be the distinction between effects of pardon granted by the
president which is different from pardon granted by the offended party?
o The president can extend pardon to any crime while pardon by
offended party applies only to crimes under art 344. All other
pardons will have no legal effect – will not extinguish bec of art
89.
o Pardon by the president extinguishes criminal liability. Pardon by
offended party may constitute a bar to prosecution of offender.
o Pardon by president cannot affect the civil liability ex delicto of
offender. While offended party can waive civil liability. What
would be the reason? Because pres is not offended party, it is
the state. Civil liability for damage is personal to the private
complainant.
o Pardon by president can only be extended after conviction by
final judgment while pardon by offended party can be validly
granted even before the institution of criminal action
o Pardon by president may be granted to any and all of the
accused while pardon by offended party in adultery and
concubinage must include both offenders
o Pardon by the president may be absolute of conditional pardon
while pardon by offended party cannot validly made subject to a
condition
From where would the president derive the right to pardon?
Executive clemency. Part of power president provided in the Constitution.
45
 CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW – JUSTICE DENNIS VILLA-IGNACIO
May the court or citizen question the propriety of the pardon
granted by the president pursuant to his executive clemency
powers?
No it is an absolute privilege and right so that if the president would
choose to pardon a serial killer, plunderer, rapist, may a person go to
court to question the propriety? No it is an absolute right of president.
May Juan de la Cruz go to court to question pardon?
No, it is an absolute right of the President. One may not ask the propriety
of the pardon of Juan.
If the president on the other hand decided to pardon an impeached
public official, lets say the late CJ Corona, may a citizen go to court
and question such grant of pardon?
Yes, it is within the scope of the president cannot grant pardon to an
impeached public officer.
Why is there a distinction in the exercise of such clemency power,
President has the power to grant pardon regardless of the nature of
the offense, even serial killers or rapists, and yet same president
cannot extend executive clemency power to an impeached
impeachable public officer?
Pardon under the executive clemency in the Constitution would refer to a
conviction issued by a regular court under the judicial system. The
impeachment tribunal is not a court in the strict sense, it is a tribunal only
to exist for that purpose.
But what if subsequently, a change in the political landscape occurred in
the country, he still cannot pardon those impeached because pardon is
not available in impeachment conviction based on Cristobal v. Labrador.
President cannot extend pardon to cases of impeachment.
Even plunder convicts can be pardoned by the chief executive.
Article 39 is about SUBSIDIARY PENALTY. It refers to subsidiary
penalty which is an ancillary liability to be imposed upon and undergone
by the convict who has no property to pay his pecuniary liability for the
penalty of fine. Note that subsidiary penalty is not an accessory penalty
consequently it must be specifically imposed by the court in its judgment.
D2019
What if the convict was fined to pay 1 million pesos under pain of
serving subsidiary imprisonment in case of failure to do so
manifested in court: ―I will not pay the 1 million‖ although he is
capable of doing so. Can he just serve the subsidiary imprisonment
because ―I would like to preserve and save my money para
paglabas ko may pera ako. Free board and lodging pa nga eh why
would I go out eh kug matokhang ako sa labas.‖ May the convict
opt to serve the subsidiary penalty instead of paying the fine?
No, the convict is not allowed to choose to serve the subsidiary liability
instead of paying the fine, People vs. Dacuycuy.
Also no subsidiary penalty shall be imposed if the penalty is higher than
prision correccional for felonies or for non payment of reparation or
indemnity or non payment of costs.
Would imposition of subsidiary penalty under the code be available for
violation of Special Penal Laws? Bar Question. In people v. Lardizaga,
the Court ruled that subsidiary penalty in Article 39 may apply to crimes
punishable by special laws on the basis of the authority of Article 10 of
the RPC.
No criminal intent to kill, ritual is part of the tradition. Under what
title to place Hazing?
Under crime on persons. There is absent mens rea though. But there is
intent to inflict violence there will be no criminal mind to cause death.
Difficult to reclassify. Place it under 365, reckless imprudence.
46