Crimes Against Persons in Authority and their Agents

A. They include: (1) Direct Assault (2) Indirect Assault (3) Resistance and Disobedience and
(4) Disobedience to Summons of Congress and Constitutional Commissions

B. Distinctions between:
1. Public officer- any person who takes part in the performance of public functions in
the government (Art. 203)
1. Person in authority( PIA)- one who is directly vested with jurisdiction to execute
or enforce the laws
2. Agent( APIA)- one who is generally charged with the maintenance of peace and
order and the protection and security of life and property
4. Hence a public officer is not necessarily a PIA or APIA but the latter are always public
officers.

Art. 148 Revised Penal Code. Direct Assault

I. There are two kinds the first being: Without a public uprising by employing force or
intimidation to attain any of the purposes of rebellion or sedition. This is very rare. It is
the second form which is commonly committed.

II. Second kind is committed when, without a public uprising, the offender: (i) Attacks (ii)
Employs force (iii) Seriously intimidates or seriously resists (iv) Any person in authority or
his agent (v) while engaged in the performance of official duties or on the occasion
thereof (vi) knowing him to be such.

III. Requirements:

A. There must be an attack or employment of force or serious intimidation, upon the

person of the victim. This includes any offensive or antagonistic movement of any kind,
with or without a weapon. This may be an actual physical contact or the instilling of fear
or threat of an evil on the person of the victim, but not on his property.
1. Examples: boxing, pointing a gun, brandishing a weapon, shouting and berating,
challenging to a fight, throwing an article at him
2). The degree of force required depends on whether the victim is a PIA or APIA. In case
of a PIA actual forced is not necessary because mere laying of hands is sufficient, such as
by pushing or shoving him or pulling at his collar. If he were an APIA, actual force is
required because mere laying of hands would constitute simple resistance
3). As to intimidation and resistance the same must be serious and actual whether the
victim is a PIA or APIA otherwise the offense is resistance and disobedience under article
151.

B. The offended party must be a PIA or a APIA and has not yet been separated from the
service. Thus the crime is committed even if at the time of commission the PIA/APIA is on

1|P a g e
leave, on vacation, or under suspension, but no when he has retired or was dismissed or
removed.

1. The following are PIAs:

a). Any person directly vested with jurisdiction i.e he has the power to govern, execute
the laws and administer justice
b). Teachers, professors and persons charged with the supervision of public or duly
recognized private schools, colleges and universities. They must be within the school
premises during school hours or are actually performing the tasks outside the school
premises
c). Lawyers in the actual performance of their professional duties or on the occasion of
such performance

Note that teachers and lawyers are PIAs only for purposes of Direct Assault and Resistance
and Disobedience but not for purposes of Indirect Assault

d). Under the Local Government Code: (a) the Punong Barangay, (b) Sanguniang Barangay
members and (c) members of the Lupong Tagapamayapa

2. The following are APIAS:

a. Those who, by direct provision of law, or by election or by appointment, are charged
with the maintenance of public order and the protection of life and property ( AGENTS
PROPER) such as :
(i). Law Enforcement Agents such as the PNP and the NBI irrespective of their rank
(ii). Barangay Tanods
(iii).Municipal treasurer being the agent of the provincial treasurer
(iv). The postmaster being the agent of the Director of Posts
(v). But Members of the AFP are not included

b. Any person who comes to the aid of PIAs who is under direct assault. ( AGENTS BY
ASSISTANCE)
Note that if a teacher or lawyer is the person who comes to the assistance of the PIA,
then he is considered as an APIA.

3. Thus private persons may be victims but to a limited extent: (i). when they are
considered by law as PIAs or APIAs such as teachers and lawyers (ii). and those who come
to the aid of PIAs

C. The accused must know the victim is a PIA/APIA which fact must be alleged in the
Information
1. There must be a clear intent on the part of the accused to defy the authorities, to
offend, injure or assault the victim as a PIA/APIA

IV. Time of the Assault:

2|P a g e
1. If the assault is during the occasion of the performance of official duties the motive
of the accused is immaterial. As long as the victim was assaulted in his office or in the
premises where he holds office, or even while on his way to office, it is not required that
he was actually doing an act related to his duties
2. If not on the occasion then the motive is important as the assault must be because
of the past performance of official duties by the victim. The length of time between the
performance of the duty and the time of the assault is immaterial. If the motive cannot
be established, there is no direct assault but some lesser offense.

V. Rule When Material Injury Results: The crime of Direct Assault aims to punish
lawlessness and defiance of authority and not the material injury which results from such
defiance. When material injury however results, the following are the rules:

1. Where death, serious or less serious physical injuries result, they are to be complexed
with direct assault. Example: A policeman was shot death while directing traffic: the crime
is Homicide with Direct Assault
2. If only slight physical injuries are committed, the slight physical injury is a qualifying
circumstance separate offense if the victim is a PIA but it will be absorbed if the victim is
an APIA ( PP. vs. Acierto, 57 Phil. 614)

VI. When the Attack does not Constitute Direct Assault:

1. If both accused and victim are PIAs/APIAs and they contend or there is conflict arising
from the exercise of their respective functions or jurisdictions. Examples:
(a). A fight between the Incumbent Mayor and the Acting Mayor as to who shall occupy
the office
(b). NBI vs. Police concerning who shall take custody of a suspect

2. Where the PIA/APIA act with abuse of their official functions, or when they exceed their
powers they are deemed to be acting in a private capacity. They become aggressors and
the accused has a right to defend himself

3. Where they voluntarily descend to matters which are purely personal. But not when
the PIA/APIA is dragged down to purely personal matters by the accused.

VII. Qualified Direct Assault:

1. When the accused lays hand upon the victim who is a PIA
2. When the accused is himself a Public Officer or employee
3. When the assault is with a weapon

ART. 149 Revised Penal Code. INDIRECT ASSAULT

3|P a g e
I. Concept: The crime committed by any person who uses force or intimidation upon any
person coming to the aid of an APIA who is under direct assault. The person who is
assaulted should not be a PIA because the third person automatically becomes an APIA
and the attack on him would constitute direct assault also.

1. The APIA is an agent proper such as a law enforcement agent. Direct Assault is being
committed against him, not merely Resistance or Disobedience.
2. A Third person comes to his assistance. It is not required that the assistance be by
virtue of the order or request of the APIA.
3. The third person is himself attacked. This is the gist of indirect assault.

II. Illustrations:

A. Examples: 1. A policeman is having a hard time pushing a suspect inside a police car
because the suspect is pulling back. A third person who came to help put the suspect
inside the car was kicked by the suspect. The kicking of the third person constitutes
Physical Injuries merely. The police is not under Direct Assault.

B. Example 2. The Mayor is pushed and shoved while on his way home by an irate person
whose house was demolished. A vendor who pulls the Mayor away is himself slapped.
The crime on the Mayor is direct assault and the crime on the third person is also direct
assault.
But if the third person directs the vendor to stop but the vendor tells him not to
interfere, the crime against the third person would be resistance under Article 151.

C. Example 3. X came to help The Chief of Police who was being pushed and shoved by
vendors who were not allowed to sell on the sidewalk. X was also kicked and boxed and
thrown to the ground. Y came to help X but was himself kicked and boxed. What is the
crime against Y?

ART. 151 Revised Penal Code. Resistance and Disobedience

I. Concept: The crime committed by any person who shall resist or seriously disobey any
PIA or APIA while engaged in the performance of official duties.

A. The essence is the failure to comply with, or refusal to obey, orders directly issued by
the authorities. Such orders are peremptory and not merely a declaration of facts or
rights. They are directed to the accused for compliance or implementation without
allowing any exercise of discretion by him.

B. Whether it be resistance or disobedience depends upon the degree of defiance by the

offender

C. Examples:

4|P a g e
1. Refusal to submit to the authority of the police and proceed to the police station by
pushing and shoving the police
2. Refusal to hand over one’s driver’s license when required to do so
3. Refusal to vacate premises despite writ issued by court to place a party in possession,
or disobeying a writ of injunction
4.. Refusal to give up article subjects of lawful seizure
5. But merely questioning the manner of arrest is not resistance

II. It is distinguished from direct assault thus:

a. In assault the force employed is more serious, unless the offended party is PIA
b. Resistance and disobedience can only be committed on the occasion of actual
performance of duties by the offended party
c. Direct assault is committed in 4 ways, not just by resisting and disobeying
Instigation vs. Entrapment
In instigation, the instigator practically induces the will-be accused into the commissionof
the offense and himself becomes a co-principal, in entrapment ways and means are
resorted to for the purpose of trapping and capturing the law breaker in the execution of
his criminal plan. People vs Galicia.
In entrapment the crime had already been committed while in instigation the crime was
not yet and would not have been committed were it not for the instigation of the peace
officer. People vs. Cahilig.
Entrapment is the employment of such ways and means for the purpose of trapping or
capturing a lawbreaker.
Oftentimes it is the only effective way of apprehending a criminal in the act of the
commission of the offense. In entrapment the Idea to commit the crime originated from
the accused. Nobody induces or prods him into committing the offense. A criminal is
caught committing the act by ways and means devised by peace officers.
It must be distinguished from inducement or instigation wherein the criminal intent
originates in the mind of the instigator and the accused is lured into the commission of
the offense charged in order to prosecute him. The instigator practically induces the
would-be accused into the Commission of the offense and himself becomes a co-principal.
In entrapment ways and means are resorted to for the purpose of capturing the
lawbreaker in flagrante delicto. In entrapment, the crime had already been committed
while in instigation, it was not and could not have been committed were it not for the
instigation by the peace officer.
Entrapment has proven to be an effective means of apprehending drug peddlers as in this
case.

[I]n buy-bust operations demands that the details of the purported transaction must be
clearly and adequately shown. This must start from the initial contact between the
poseur-buyer and the pusher, the offer to purchase, the promise or payment of the
consideration until the consummation of the sale by the delivery of the illegal drug subject
of the sale. The manner by which the initial contact was made, whether or not through

5|P a g e
an informant, the offer to purchase the drug, the payment of the “buy-bust” money, and
the delivery of the illegal drug, whether to the informant alone or the police officer, must
be the subject of strict scrutiny by courts to insure that law-abiding citizens are not
unlawfully induced to commit an offense. Criminals must be caught but not at all cost. At
the same time, however, examining the conduct of the police should not disable courts
into ignoring the accused’s predisposition to commit the crime. If there is overwhelming
evidence of habitual delinquency, recidivism or plain criminal proclivity, then this must
also be considered. Courts should look at all factors to determine the predisposition of an
accused to commit an offense in so far as they are relevant to determine the validity of
the defense of inducement.

Murder
Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code defines murder as killing someone other than a
family member[1] with any of the following six circumstances:
1. With treachery [see below], taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid
of armed men, or employing means to weaken the defense, or of means or
persons to insure or afford impunity;
2. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise;
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a
vessel, derailment or assault upon a railroad, fall of an airship, by means of
motor vehicles, or with the use of any other means involving great waste and
ruin;
4. On occasion of any calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of an
earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic, or any other
public calamity;
5. With evident premeditation;
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the
victim, or outraging or scoffing at his person or corps.[2]
Murder is punishable by reclusión perpetua (20 to 40 years' incarceration).[2] Without any
of these six aggravating circumstances, a killing is instead homicide punishable
by reclusión temporal.[2] A murder is committed “with treachery” by

RAPE
Under Section 2 of RA 8353, the crime of rape has been classified as a crime against
persons, and the victim of such crime is no longer confined to the female gender and the
assailant may also be either a male or a female. To be more specific, the law reads:
“Article 266-A. Rape: When And How Committed. – Rape is committed:
(1) By a man who has carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following
circumstances: (a) Through force, threat or intimidation; (b) When the offended party is
deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; (c) By means of fraudulent machination or
abuse of authority; and (d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or
demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.
(2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof,
shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person’s mouth

6|P a g e
or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another
person.”
Accordingly, your friend may institute a criminal complaint for rape if his situation falls
under the circumstances mentioned under the second paragraph above-stated. Should
he be able to establish the guilt of his brother’s friend, the latter may be made to suffer
the penalty of prision mayor (Article 266-B, id.).

Act 3815's Article 336. Acts of lasciviousness. - Any person who shall commit any act of
lasciviousness upon other persons of either sex, under any of the circumstances
mentioned in the preceding article, shall be punished by prision correccional.
Article 337. Qualified seduction. - The seduction of a virgin over twelve years and under
eighteen years of age, committed by any person in public authority, priest, home-servant,
domestic, guardian, teacher, or any person who, in any capacity, shall be entrusted with
the education or custody of the woman seduced, shall be punished by prision correccional
in its minimum and medium periods. The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed
upon any person who shall seduce his sister or descendant, whether or not she be a virgin
or over eighteen years of age. Under the provisions of this Chapter, seduction is
committed when the offender has carnal knowledge of any of the persons and under the
circumstances described herein.
DURATION AND EFFECTS OF PENALTIES
1. Reclusion Perpetua- imprisonment for at least thirty [30] years after which the convict
becomes eligible for pardon. It also carries with it accessory penalties, namely: perpetual
special disqualification, etc.
2. Reclusion Temporal- 12 years and 1 day to 20 years
3. Prision Mayor and Temporary Disqualification- 6 years and 1 day to 12 years
4. Prision correccional, suspension, and destierro- 6 months and 1 day to 6 years
5. Arresto Mayor- 1 month and 1 day to 6 months
6. Arresto Menor- 1 day to 30 days
7. Bond to keep the peace— The bond to keep the peace shall be required to cover such
period of time as the court may determine.
Section One. — Duration of Penalties
Art. 27. Reclusion perpetua. — Any person sentenced to any of the perpetual penalties
shall be pardoned after undergoing the penalty for thirty years, unless such person by
reason of his conduct or some other serious cause shall be considered by the Chief
Executive as unworthy of pardon.
Reclusion temporal. — The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be from twelve years and
one day to twenty years.
Prision mayor and temporary disqualification. — The duration of the penalties of prision
mayor and temporary disqualification shall be from six years and one day to twelve years,
except when the penalty of disqualification is imposed as an accessory penalty, in which
case its duration shall be that of the principal penalty.
Prision correccional, suspension, and destierro. — The duration of the penalties of prision
correccional, suspension and destierro shall be from six months and one day to six years,

7|P a g e
except when suspension is imposed as an accessory penalty, in which case, its duration
shall be that of the principal penalty.
Arresto mayor. — The duration of the penalty of arresto mayor shall be from one month
and one day to six months.
Arresto menor. — The duration of the penalty of arresto menor shall be from one day to
thirty days.
Bond to keep the peace. — The bond to keep the peace shall be required to cover such
period of time as the court may determine.

I. Introduction: Art. 270 lays down the penalty for kidnapping and enumerates when
the detention becomes serious. The concept is of American origin

1. To kidnap is to forcibly take a person from he has a right to be ( such as his place of
work, residence, rest and recreation, school, street, park or public place) and bring him to
another. The taking is always without the consent of the victim. Kidnapping need not be
followed by detention as where the talking was only to briefly restrain the victim. It is
usually for ransom.
2. To “detain” is to deprive a person of his liberty or restrict his freedom of locomotion or
movement, and may not involve a kidnapping. This includes the following situations:
a). Lock up or actual physical deprivation of the personal liberty by confinement in an
enclosure
b). immobilizing the victim though he has not been placed din an enclosure
c). by placing physical, moral or psychological restraint on his freedom of locomotion or
movement

Example: The Mayor confronted a DENR Inspection team, calls for reinforcements,
refuses their request to leave, orders them to go with him and allows them to leave only
the following day.
Held: “The curtailment of the victim’s liberty need not involve any physical restraint upon
the victim’s persons. If the acts and actuations of the accused produced such fear in the
mind of the victim sufficient to paralyze the latter, to the extent that he victim is
compelled to limit his own actions and movements in accordance with the wishes of the
accused, then the victim is detained against his will” ( Aslega vs. People, Oct. 01, 2003)

d). The detention may either be Serious Art. 267 or Slight ( Art. 268)
II. Persons Liable.
A. The offender is a private person and not a Public Officer else the crime is Arbitrary
Detention, unless the latter has no duty to arrest or order the detention of another.
B. One who furnished the place of detention is liable as an accomplice unless he was in
conspiracy with the other accused.

III. The circumstances which make the detention serious are:

1. The kidnapping or detention shall have lasted more than 3 days
2. It is committed by simulating public authority

8|P a g e
Example: a person represents himself to be a police investigator who tells victim he will
bring him to the police station, but brings him elsewhere
3. If serious physical injuries were inflicted or threats to kill were made
4. If victim is a minor, female or public officer. In case of minors, the kidnapper should not
be the parent.
IV.. Kidnapping for Ransom. The victim is held hostage until demands of the kidnapper
are met.

1. The penalty is death

2. Ransom is any consideration, whether in the form of money, articles of value, or
services or favors, for the release of a person.
3. It need not be given or received it being sufficient that a demand was made
4..Examples: (i).The son of the Judge will be released if the Judge dismisses a case or
allows the bail to be reduced (2) The grandson of a physician will be released if the
physician will perform an operation on the mother of a friend of the kidnappers (3) The
wife of a politician will be released if the husband makes a public apology (4) The pupils
of a school will be released if the school lowers its tuition fees.

V. New Special Complex/Composite Crimes

1. Kidnapping/Serious Illegal Detention with Homicide

a). The person killed is the victim of the kidnapping or illegal detention. If the person killed
is a third person, such as the bodyguard, the driver or an innocent person, it is article 48
which applies and the crime is an ordinary complex crime.
b). Hence previous decisions which say the crime is either murder or kidnapping
depending on the intention of the accused do not anymore hold water. It is enough the
victim was killed whether the original intention was to kill or to detain.

2. Kidnapping/Serious Illegal Detention with Rape. The victim of rape is the victim of
kidnapping and not a third person else the rape is a separate offense.
a) Includes a situation where several rapes are committed
b) The taking way must not be with lewd designs

3. Kidnapping /Serious Illegal Detention with Physical Injuries as a result of torture or

dehumanizing acts

(i). Question: A Woman was kidnapped, ransom was demanded, and then later was killed.
What crime was committed? (Answer): Kidnapping for Ransom with Murder. ( PP. vs.
Ramos: Oct. 12, 1998)
(ii). Question: Suppose the victim was also raped before being killed? (Answer). It is still
Kidnapping for ransom with Murder. The rape will be considered as an aggravating
circumstance

9|P a g e
(iii). Question: The robbers held hostage the customers of a bank as human shield against
the police. Are they also liable for detention? (Answer) The detention in robbery is
absorbed unless the victims are detained to compel delivery of money

VI. Distinguished from Other Crimes Which Involved Detention and Taking Away of a
Person

1. From coercion- where there is no intent to detain or deprive a person of his liberty.
Examples:
a). dragging a woman to a waiting car but was let go due to her remonstrations or
because she was able to wrest herself free.
b). a debtor was forcible taken from his store and brought to a house to compel him to
pay
c). A woman was taken to a house and kept there in order to break her will and agree to
marry the accused
d). Where a woman was seen dragging along a missing boy who was crying and refusing
to go with her

2. Abduction- where the taking away of the woman against her will (Forcible Abduction)
or by artifice upon a minor girl (Consented Abduction)) was with lewd designs, which was
present at the very moment of the taking away, as it was the purpose thereof.

Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention

Elements of abduction with consent (People v. De la Cruz, 48 Phil 535):
1. The taking away or kidnapping of a woman over 12 but below 18 years of age;
2. The girl shall have consented to the taking away.
3. The act shall have been committed with lewd designs.
Elements of Abduction (US v. De Vivar, 29 Phil. 456):
1. The person kidnapped must be a woman.
2. It must be against her will.
3. The abduction must be for lewd or unchaste designs.

Abduction is the taking away of a woman from her house or the place where she may be
for the purpose of carrying her to another place with the intent to marry her or corrupt
her. - People v. Crisostomo, 48 Phil 780.

The kidnapping of a woman by removing her from home, or from whtever place she may
be, to take her to some other, for the purpose of her abductor's marrying her or
corrupting her. - US v. De Vivar, 29 Phil 458.

There is abduction when a woman is carried away against her will, whether a vehicle is
used or not. The crime is not aggravated by the use of a vehicle-- the use merely facilitated
it. The use if motor vehicle in abduction is absorbed by the crime itself. - People v.
Panganiban, 18953-CR, August 21, 1981.

10 | P a g e
ROBBERY IN GENERAL
Art. 293. Who are guilty of robbery. — Any person who, with intent to gain, shall take any
personal property belonging to another, by means of violence or intimidation of
any person, or using force upon anything shall be guilty of robbery.
Section One. — Robbery with violence or intimidation of persons.
Art. 295. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons; Penalties. — Any
person guilty of robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of any
person
Art. 295. Robbery with physical injuries, committed in an uninhabited place and by a band,
or with the use of firearm on a street, road or alley. — If the offenses mentioned
in subdivisions three, four, and five of the next preceding article shall have been
committed in an uninhabited place or by a band, or by attacking a moving train,
street car, motor vehicle or airship, or by entering the passenger's compartments
in a train or, in any manner, taking the passengers thereof by surprise in the
respective conveyances, or on a street, road, highway, or alley, and the
intimidation is made with the use of a firearm, the offender shall be punished by
the maximum period of the proper penalties.
In the same cases, the penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon the leader of
the band.
Art. 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred by the members thereof. — When more
than three armed malefactors take part in the commission of a robbery, it shall be
deemed to have been committed by a band. When any of the arms used in the
commission of the offense be an unlicensed firearm, the penalty to be imposed
upon all the malefactors shall be the maximum of the corresponding penalty
provided by law, without prejudice of the criminal liability for illegal possession of
such unlicensed firearms.
Any member of a band who is present at the commission of a robbery by the band, shall
be punished as principal of any of the assaults committed by the band, unless it be
shown that he attempted to prevent the same.
Art. 297. Attempted and frustrated robbery committed under certain circumstances. —
When by reason or on occasion of an attempted or frustrated robbery a homicide
is committed, the person guilty of such offenses shall be punished by reclusion
temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua, unless the homicide
committed shall deserve a higher penalty under the provisions of this Code.
Art. 298. Execution of deeds by means of violence or intimidation. — Any person who, with
intent to defraud another, by means of violence or intimidation, shall compel him
to sign, execute or deliver any public instrument or documents, shall be held guilty
of robbery and punished by the penalties respectively prescribed in this Chapter.

Robbery with Homicide

A. This is committed “ When by reason or on the occasion of robbery, the crime of

homicide shall have been committed”. This phrase requires that there is a causal

11 | P a g e
connection between the robbery and the death, had it not been for the robbery, there
would have been no death.

B. Both the robbery and the homicide should be consummated to be penalized by

Reclusion Perpetua to Death.
1. If it was the Robbery which was not consummated, but there was a killing, it is still
a special complex crime of Attempted or Frustrated Robbery with Homicide but
the penalty is as provided for under Article 297
2. If both the robbery and the killing are either attempted or frustrated, the result is
either a complex crime of Attempted/Frustrated Robbery with
Attempted/Frustrated Homicide under Article 48, or as separate crimes
depending on the circumstances
3. If the Robbery is consummated but the homicide is attempted or frustrated, they
may be ordinary complex crimes or separate crimes depending on the
circumstances

C. The term “Homicide” is used in its generic sense and it includes any kind of killing
whether it be murder, parricide or infanticide, and irrespective of how many killings were
there. The following are not proper terms:
1. Robbery with Murder: if there is any qualifying circumstance which was present,
such as treachery, it will be considered as an ordinary aggravating circumstance
2. Robbery with Double, Triple or Multiple Homicide:

D. The killing may be intentional, or accidental. The killing may be by the acts of the
robber, or by the act of the victim, or act of a third person. The person killed may be the
victim of the robbery or his friend, or family member. The person killed may even be
one of the robbers themselves, or a person wanting to assist or even a total stranger.

E. The following will constitute robbery with homicide:

1. The robber fired his gun upwards to frighten the victim but the bullet killed a person
who was hiding in the ceiling
2. The victim drew a gun to defend but his aim was deflected and instead hit his
companion
3. It was a responding policeman who was killed by a robber.
4. The responding policeman fired a shot but missed and killed the victim of robbery
5. The several robbers fought over the loot and one killed another, even if this took
place after the taking had taken place and the robbers had fled the scene of
robbery
6. One of the victims suffered a stroke due to the tension and dies
7. The gun of a robber accidentally fell and killed a person outside the house

12 | P a g e
F. The killing may be before, during, or immediately after the taking provided that the
original intent of the robbers must have been to rob and not to kill, which need not be
the sole motive either.

Example: X pointed a knife at Y and divested him of his cell phone. X turned and ran
whereupon Y chased him so that X stabbed and killed Y.

G. If the original intention was to kill and the idea of taking came only thereafter, there
results two separate crimes of theft and murder or homicide. Example: The accused shot
to death his enemy. Then he decided to take the victim’s necklace.

H. All those who conspired in the robbery will be liable for the death unless he proved he
endeavored to prevent the killing. Physical absence in the place where the killing took
place is not a defense, or that the accused was not aware his co-accused would resort to
a killing.

Example: A, B, C and D conspired to rob a house with D acting as look-out at the road.
Jose, an occupant refused to give money so A leveled his gun at him. B shielded Jose with
his body as he did not like any killing A pushed B aside and shot Jose. C was then at the
rooms ransacking it. A, C and D will be liable for Robbery with Homicide, but not B, who
tried to prevent it.

COMPLEX CRIMES
-at least two crimes are committed
-a complex crime is only one crime; only one penalty is imposed
Two kinds:
1. COMPOUND CRIME: a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave
felonies
2. COMPLEX CRIME PROPER: offense is necessary means for committing the
other

1.COMPOUND
a. only one single act is performed by the offender
b. produces
(1) 2 or more grave felonies
(2) one or more grave felonies and one or more less grave felonies
(3) two or more less grave felonies

13 | P a g e
People vs. GUILLEN:
Single act: throwing hand grenade
Product: murder and multiple attempted murder
TWO OR MORE GRAVE OR LESS GRAVE FELONIES.
-Light felonies produced by the same act:
(1)treated and punished as separate offenses (several light felonies) or
(2) absorbed by the grave felony.
Applicable to crimes through negligence.

2.COMPLEX CRIME PROPER

a.at least two offenses are committed
b. one or some of the offenses: necessary to commit the other
c. all of the offenses are punishable under same statute.

Necessary means =/= Indispensable means

Indispensable: ingredient of the crime (part of act/s of execution)
The offender, in executing various acts, must have a single purpose.

There is NO complex crime…

 -when in the definition of a felony one offense is a means to commit the other
(murder qualified by means of fire which by itself is arson)
 -when one offense is committed to conceal the other (not necessary means)
 -when one of the offenses is penalized by a special law (example: homicide and
illegal possession of firearms)
 -when two or more crimes are committed but a) not by a single act or b) one is
not a necessary means for committing the other
 -of rebellion with murder, arson, robbery or other common crimes
PENALTY: penalty for the most serious crime applied in its maximum period

SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIMES

PLURALITY OF CRIMES
Successive execution by the same individual of different criminal acts upon any of which
no conviction has yet been declared.
KINDS:
1.FORMAL OR IDEAL- one criminal liability
a) complex crimes under art 48
b) law specifically fixes a single penalty for two or more offenses
committed (ex: robbery with homicide)
c) continued crime
2.REAL OR MATERIAL- there are different crimes in law as well as in the
conscience of the offender
-recidivism (there must be conviction with final judgment)

14 | P a g e
CONTINUED CRIME: a single crime, consisting of a series of acts but all arising from one
criminal resolution
 -set foot by a single impulse
 -NOT a complex crime: offender does not commit only a single act but a series
of acts
 -not being a complex crime, the penalty should not be imposed in its maximum
period

TRANSITORY CRIME: different from continued in criminal procedure to determine venue

-“moving crime”

15 | P a g e