5 Pts and 5 Pts
5 Pts and 5 Pts
5 Pts and 5 Pts
5pts)
The following are the distinctions of Robbery from Grave Threats and Grave Coercion:
a. In Robbery, there is intent to gain while in Grave Threats and Grave Coercion, there is no intent
to gain;
b. In Robbery, there is immediate harm while in Grave Threats, the intimidation promises some
future harm or injury and in Grave Coercion, the intimidation is immediate and offended party is
compelled to do something against his will.
In Robbery, the victim is deprived of his money or property by force or intimidation while in Bribery, he
parts with his money, in a sense, voluntarily.
2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or fraudulent acts executed prior to or
simultaneously with the commission of the fraud:
(a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to possess power, influence, qualifications,
property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or by means of other similar deceits.
(b) By altering the quality, fineness or weight of anything pertaining to his art or business.
(c) By pretending to have bribed any Government employee, without prejudice to the action for
calumny which the offended party may deem proper to bring against the offender. In this case,
the offender shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty.
(d) By post-dating a check, or issuing a check in payment of an obligation when the offender
therein were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check. The failure of the drawer of the
check to deposit the amount necessary to cover his check within three (3) days from receipt of
notice from the bank and/or the payee or holder that said check has been dishonored for lack of
insufficiency of funds shall be prima facie evidence of deceit constituting false pretense or
fraudulent act. (As amended by R.A. 4885, approved June 17, 1967.)
(e) By obtaining any food, refreshment or accommodation at a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding
house, lodging house, or apartment house and the like without paying therefor, with intent to
defraud the proprietor or manager thereof, or by obtaining credit at hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding
house, lodging house, or apartment house by the use of any false pretense, or by abandoning or
surreptitiously removing any part of his baggage from a hotel, inn, restaurant, boarding house,
lodging house or apartment house after obtaining credit, food, refreshment or accommodation
therein without paying for his food, refreshment or accommodation.
The following are the distinctions of Estafa with abuse of confidence from Malversation:
a. In the former, the funds or property are always private while in the latter, it involves public
funds or property;
b. In the former, the offender is a private individual or even a public officer who is not
accountable for public funds or property while in the latter, the offender is usually a public
officer is accountable for public funds or property; and
c. In the former, the crime is committed by misappropriating, converting or denying having
received money, goods or other personal property while in the latter, the crime is committed
by appropriating, taking or misappropriating or consenting, or, through abandonment or
negligence, permitting any other person to take the public funds or property.
a. In the former, it imposes a penalty which is two degrees lower than that prescribed for the
principal while in the latter, it imposes heavier penalty;
b. In the former, the subject is an accessory after the fact in the crime of theft or robbery under
the Revised Penal Code while in the latter, the subject is a principal in the crime of fencing;
c. In the former, it is a malum in se crime while in the latter, it is a malum prohibitum crime;
d. In the former, the Revised Penal Code provides no presumption while in the latter, the mere
possession of any good, article, item, object, or anything of value which has been the subject
of robbery or thievery shall be prima facie evidence of fencing; and
e. In the former, accessories are exempt from criminal liability if principal merely committed light
felony while in the latter, there is no provision on criminal exemption.
1. One (1) or more buildings or edifices, consequent to one single act of burning, or as a result of
simultaneous burnings, committed on several or different occasions.
2. Any building of public or private ownership, devoted to the public in general or where people usually
gather or congregate for a definite purpose such as, but not limited to, official governmental function or
business, private transaction, commerce, trade, workshop, meetings and conferences, or merely
incidental to a definite purpose such as but not limited to hotels, motels, transient dwellings, public
conveyances or stops or terminals, regardless of whether the offender had knowledge that there are
persons in said building or edifice at the time it is set on fire and regardless also of whether the building is
actually inhabited or not.
3. Any train or locomotive, ship or vessel, airship or airplane, devoted to transportation or conveyance, or
for public use, entertainment or leisure.
4. Any building, factory, warehouse installation and any appurtenances thereto, which are devoted to the
service of public utilities.
5. Any building the burning of which is for the purpose of concealing or destroying evidence of another
violation of law, or for the purpose of concealing bankruptcy or defrauding creditors or to collect from
insurance.
Under the “New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016”, carnapping is defined as the taking, with intent to
gain, of a motor vehicle belonging to another without the latter’s consent, or by means of violence against
or intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things.
What is Identity transfer under the “New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016”. (2.5pts)
Under the “New Anti-Carnapping Act of 2016”, Identity transfer refers to the act of transferring the
engine number, chassis number, body tag number, plate number, and any other identifying marks of a
motor vehicle declared as “total wreck" or is beyond economic repair by concerned car insurance
companies and/or law enforcement agencies after its involvement in a vehicular accident or other incident
and registers the same into another factory-made body or vehicle unit, of the same classification, type,
make or model.
The distinction of Intriguing against honor from Slander is that, in the former, the source of the
defamatory utterance is unknown and the offender simply repeats or passes the same, without
subscribing to the truth thereof while in the latter, the offender made the utterance, where the source of
the defamatory nature of the utterance is known, and offender makes a republication thereof, even though
he repeats the libelous statement as coming from another, as long as the source is identified.
A libel is public and malicious imputation of a crime, or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or
any act, omission, condition, status, or circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt
of a natural or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.
Elements of:
a. AIDING AND ABETTING A BAND OF BRIGANDS ART. 307
1. There is a band of brigands;
2. Offender knows the band to be of brigands; and
3. Offender does any of the following acts:
a. He in any manner aids, abets or protects such band of brigands;
b. He gives them information of the movements of the police or other peace officers of the
government; or
c. He acquires or receives the property taken by such brigands.