Carla Mae E.

Garcia

Juris Doctor I

CRIMINAL LAW 2 (Midterm Examinations)

1)

a. The crime committed is piracy. Piracy is considered as the robbery or forceable depredation on the high seas,

without lawful authority and done with animofurandi. It can be done either by attacking or seizing a vessel on the

high seas or in Philippine waters or by seizing in the vessel while on the high seas or in Philippine waters the whole

or part of its cargo, its equipment or personal belongings of its complements or passenger committed by a person

not a member of its complement or passenger. In the present case, the act of several persons, not being a

member of its complement or passenger, in taking several heavy crates of the cargo to their motorboats, without

lawful authority and done with animofurandi which constitutes the crime of Piracy.

b. The crime commited by culprits in stabbing the crew while sleeping is Qualified Piracy under Art. 123. Qualified

Piracy is commited under the following circumstances: 1. Whenever they have seized a vessel by boarding or firing

upon the same; 2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims without means of saving themselves; or 3.

Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries, or rape. In the present case, the crime

of Piracy is accompanied by physical injuries or murder had the victim died after being stabbed.

The diiference between Violation of Domicile and Trespass to Dwelling are:

a. As to the offender

The offender in Violation of Domecile is a public officer acting under color of authority; in Trespass to dwelling, the

offender is a private person or public officer acting in a private capacity.

b. As to the ways of commiting such crime

 Violation of Domicile is created in three (3) different ways: a) By entering the dwelling of another against the

will of the latter; b) By searching papers and other effects inside the dwelling without the previous consent of the

owner; and c) By refusing to leave the premises which he entered surreptitiously, after being ordered to leave the

premises.

Trespass to dwelling is commited only in one (1) way, that is by entering the dwelling of another against the

expressed or the implied will of the latter.

3.

a. The crime committed is Coup D ‘etat. All the elements of the crime of Coup D ‘etat is present in such case; the offender is a person

belonging to the military being a member of the Armed Forces, the crime is committed through swift attacks accompanied by

violence, intimidation and threat a military camp or installation for the purpose of overcoming the government.

b) Should the attack be quelled and the leadero is unknown, any person who is in fact directed others, spoke for them, signed the

receipts and other documents issued in their name, or performed several acts on behalf of the others, shall be deemed a leaderof

such Coup D ‘etat,

c) The crime of coup d'etat is a swift attack, accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth, directed against duly

constituted authorities of the Republic of the Philippines, or any military camp or installation, communications networks, public

utilities or other facilities needed for the exercise and continued possession of power, singly or simultaneously carried out

anywhere in the Philippines by any person or persons, belonging to the military or police or holding any public office or

employment, with or without civilian support or participation, for the purpose of seizing or diminishing state power.
 5

a. The teacher committed Coup D ‘etat as a person holding public office or employment.

b. The use of the unlicensed firearm will be absorbed in the crime of Coup D’ etat.

a. As stated in a case, Article 247 of the Revised Penal Code does not define and provide for a specific crime, but grants a privilege or benefit

to the accused for the killing of another or the infliction of serious physical injuries under the circumstances therein mentioned. Far from

defining a felony,  this provision merely provides or grants a privilege or benefit — amounting practically to an exemption from an adequate

punishment — to a legally married person or parent who shall surprise his spouse or daughter in the act of committing sexual intercourse

with another, and shall kill any or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury. It is,

in effect, an exempting circumstance

B. Distierro is a mere banishment. It is intended only more for the protection of rhe accused from the retaliation of the family members of

the deceased then a punishment

c.

A. The difference between Rebellion and Coup D’ etat are the following:
 i. As to the purpose:

The purpose of Rebeliion is to remove from the allegiance to the Philippines or to its laws, the national territory

or any part thereof, Or any body of land, naval, or armed forces or to deprive the Chief Executive or the Congress, in

whole or in part, of any of their prerogatives. On the other hand, the purpose of Coup D ‘etat is only To seize or diminish

state control.

2. As to the persons liable:

In Rebellion, the persons liable may be a Public officers/employees and private citizens while in Coup D ‘etat, the

persons liable are only limited to Military, Police, or any public officers/employees.

3. As to the manner of commission:

Rebellion can be committed by multitudes rising publicly and taking up arms, 0n the other hand, Coup D ‘etat may be commited by

a swift attack accompanied by violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth.

4. As to the target of attack

The target of attack in Rebellion is limited only to the government while the target in Coup D ‘etat is broader as it includes the duly

constituted authorities of the Philippines, military camps or installations, or communications networks, or public utilities (e.g: NAWASA, PLDT,

LRT), or other facilities necessary for the exercise and continued possession of power.

B. The differences between violation of domicile and trespass to dwelling are; 

1) The offender in violation of domicile is a public officer acting under color of authority; in trespass to dwelling, the offender is a private
person or public officer acting in a private capacity. 
2) Violation of domicile is committed in 3 different ways: (1) by entering the dwelling of another against the will of the latter; (2) searching
papers and other effects inside the dwelling without the previous consent of the owner; or (3) refusing to leave the premises which he entered
surreptitiously, after being required to leave the premises. 
3) Trespass to dwelling is committed only in one way; that is, by entering the dwelling of another against the express or implied will of the
latter. 

Yes. The suspect may be charged with complex crime of direct assault with murder. The suspect has committed the second form of

assault, the elements of which are: 1) that there must be an attack, use of force, or serious intimidation or resistance upon a person in

authority or his agent; 2) the assault was made when the said person was performing his duties or on the occasion of such performance; and

3) the accused knew that the victim is a person in authority or his agent, that is, that the accused must have the intention to offend, injure or

assault the offended party as a person in authority or an agent of a person in authority. Here, A, was the duly elected the Barangay Captain of

Barangay Tagay. There is no dispute that A, was in the performance of his duty when B stabbed him at his back twice which ultimately caused

the death of A. When the assault results in the killing of an agent or of a person in Authority for that matter, there arises the Complex Crimes

of Direct Assault with murder.

a. The accused cannot be held criminally liable for the possession of 100 counterfeit P100 bills. In Art 168 of the Revised

Penal Code, the act of illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank notes and other instruments of credit must be

coupled with the intent to to use such false or falsified documents. Possession of false treasury or bank notes alone

without anything more, is not a criminal offense. For it to constitute an offense under Article 168 of the Revised Penal

Code the possession must be with intent to use said false treasury or bank notes. It follows that an information, as in

this case, alleging possession of false treasury and bank notes without alleging intent to use the same but only "intent

to possess" them, charges no offense.

b. No. The mere possession of money bills is not punishable under the Revised Penal Code. Art 168 states that “Unless the

act be one of those coming under the provisions of any of the preceding articles, any person who shall knowingly use or

have in his possession, with intent to use any of the false or falsified instruments referred to in this section, shall suffer

the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed in said articles”. The act that is punishable under Art 168 is the act

of possessing such false/falsified document with the intent to use them.

10.

a. There is no question that the testimony of the accused relative to his civil status was false, because in fact he was married.

However, such false statement of the accused was not material to the immorality charged. One of the elements of Perjury as

stated in Art 183 of the Revised Penal Code is that the accused should have made a statement under oath or executed an
 affidavit upon a material matter. Herein, the testimony of the accused concerning his civil status is not material as tending

either to prove or disprove a fact bearing on any matter at issue; and the collateral matter does not become a “material

matter”. A should be acquitted of the crime of perjury.

b.

11.

a. The three ways of are: Arbitrary detention by detaining a person without legal ground. (Art. 124), Delay in the delivery of

detained persons to the proper judicial authorities. (Art. 125) and, Delaying release. (Art. 126)

The first way of committing arbitrary detention is by detaining a person without legal ground. Arbitrary detention is

committed by any public officer or employee who without legal grounds detains a person (Art 124). The elements of Arbitrary

Detention are: 1) That the offender is a public officer or employee 2) That he detains a person 3) The detention is without legal

grounds. The detention of a person is without legal ground: 1) When he has not committed any crime or, at least, there is no

reasonable suspicion that he has committed a crime, or 2) when he is not suffering from violent insanity or any other ailment

requiring compulsory requirement in a hospital.

The second way of committing Arbitrary detention is the Delay in the Delivery of detained persons to the proper

judicial authorities. The elements of such crime are: 1) That the offender is a public officer/employee 2) Thaat he has detained a

person for some legal grounds 3) That he fails to deliver such person to the proper judicial authorities within twelve (12) hours,

for crimes or offenses punishable by light penalties, or their equivalent therof; or eighteen (18) hours, for crimes or offenses

punishable by afflictive or capital penalties, or their equivalent. Under Art. 125, the public officer or employee has detained the

offended party for some legal ground. The detention is legal in the beginning, because the person detained was arrested under

any of the circumstance where arrest without warrant is authorized by law. The detention becomes illegal after a certain period

of time, because the offended part is not delivered to the proper Judicial Authority, within the period specified by Art. 125.

The third way of committing Arbitrary Detention is by delaying the performance of a judicial or executive order for

the release of a prisoner, by unduly the service of the notice of such order to said prisoner, or by unduly delaying the

proceedings upon any petition for the liberation of such person.

b. The legal grounds for detention are:

1) The commission of crimes;

2) Violent insanity or any other ailment requiring the compulsory confinement of the patient in the

hospital
c. An arrest by a peace officer or by a private person is considered lawful when:

1. When, in the presence of the policeman, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an
offense. This is the "in flagrante delicto" rule.
2. When an offense has just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe, based on personal knowledge of facts or
circumstances, that the person to be arrested has committed it. This is the "hot pursuit" arrest rule.
3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment.

12