LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 1-10

Criminal Law – A branch of municipal law which defines crimes, treats of their
nature and provides for their punishment.
Limitations on the power of Congress to enact penal laws (ON)
1. Must be general in application.

2. Must not partake of the nature of an ex post fact law.

3. Must not partake of the nature of a bill of attainder.

4.  Must not impose cruel and unusual punishment or excessive fines.

Characteristics of Criminal Law:

1. General – the law is binding to all persons who reside in the
Philippines
2. Territorial – the law is binding to all crimes committed within the
National Territory of the Philippines
Exception to Territorial Application: Instances enumerated under Article 2.
3.   Prospective – the law does not have any retroactive effect.
Exception to Prospective Application: when new statute is favorable to the
accused.
Effect of repeal of penal law to liability of offender
Total or absolute, or partial or relative repeal. — As to the effect of
repeal of penal law to the liability of offender, qualify your answer by
saying whether the repeal is absolute or total or whether the repeal is
partial or relative only.
A repeal is absolute or total when the crime punished under the repealed law
has been decriminalized by the repeal.  Because of the repeal, the act or
omission which used to be a crime is no longer a crime. An example is
Republic Act No. 7363, which decriminalized subversion.
A repeal is partial or relative when the crime punished under the repealed
law continues to be a crime in spite of the repeal.  This means that the
repeal merely modified the conditions affecting the crime under the repealed
law.  The modification may be prejudicial or beneficial to the offender. 
Hence, the following rule:
Consequences if repeal of penal law is total or absolute
(1)           If a case is pending in court involving the violation of the
repealed law, the same shall be dismissed, even though the accused may be a
habitual delinquent.
(2)           If a case is already decided and the accused is already
serving sentence by final judgment, if the convict is not a habitual
delinquent, then he will be entitled to a release unless there is a
reservation clause in the penal law that it will not apply to those serving
sentence at the time of the repeal.  But if there is no reservation, those
who are not habitual delinquents even if they are already serving their
sentence will receive the benefit of the repealing law.  They are entitled to
release.
If they are not discharged from confinement, a petition for habeas corpus
should be filed to test the legality of their continued confinement in jail.
If the convict, on the other hand, is a habitual delinquent, he will continue
serving the sentence in spite of the fact that the law under which he was
convicted has already been absolutely repealed.  This is so because penal
laws should be given retroactive application to favor only those who are not
habitual delinquents. 
Consequences if repeal of penal law is partial or relative
(1)           If a case is pending in court involving the violation of the
repealed law, and the repealing law is more favorable to the accused, it
shall be the one applied to him.  So whether he is a habitual delinquent or
not, if the case is still pending in court, the repealing law will be the one
to apply unless there is a saving clause in the repealing law that it shall
not apply to pending causes of action.
(2)           If a case is already decided and the accused is already serving
sentence by final judgment, even if the repealing law is partial or relative,
the crime still remains to be a crime.  Those who are not habitual
delinquents will benefit on the effect of that repeal, so that if the repeal
is more lenient to them, it will be the repealing law that will henceforth
apply to them.
Under Article 22, even if the offender is already convicted and serving
sentence, a law which is beneficial shall be applied to him unless he is a
habitual delinquent in accordance with Rule 5 of Article 62.
Consequences if repeal of penal law is express or implied
(1)           If a penal law is impliedly repealed, the subsequent repeal of
the repealing law will revive the original law.  So the act or omission which
was punished as a crime under the original law will be revived and the same
shall again be crimes although during the implied repeal they may not be
punishable.                 
(2)           If the repeal is express, the repeal of the repealing law will
not revive the first law, so the act or omission will no longer be penalized.
These effects of repeal do not apply to self-repealing laws or those which
have automatic termination.   An example is the Rent Control Law which is
revived by Congress every two years.
Theories of Criminal Law
1. Classical Theory – Man is essentially a moral creature with an absolute
free will to choose between good and evil and therefore more stress is
placed upon the result of the felonious act than upon the criminal
himself.
 2. Positivist Theory – Man is subdued occasionally by a strange and morbid
phenomenon which conditions him to do wrong in spite of or contrary to
his volition.
Eclectic or Mixed Philosophy
This combines both positivist and classical thinking.  Crimes that are
economic and social and nature should be dealt with in a positivist manner;
thus, the law is more compassionate.  Heinous crimes should be dealt with in
a classical manner; thus, capital punishment
 

BASIC MAXIMS IN CRIMINAL LAW

Doctrine of Pro Reo
Whenever a penal law is to be construed or applied and the law admits of two
interpretations – one lenient to the offender and one strict to the offender
– that interpretation which is lenient or favorable to the offender will be
adopted.
Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege
There is no crime when there is no law punishing the same.  This is true to
civil law countries, but not to common law countries.
Because of this maxim, there is no common law crime in the Philippines.  No
matter how wrongful, evil or bad the act is, if there is no law defining the
act, the same is not considered a crime.
Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea
The act cannot be criminal where the mind is not criminal.  This is true to a
felony characterized by dolo, but not a felony resulting from culpa.  This
maxim is not an absolute one because it is not applied to culpable felonies,
or those that result from negligence.
Utilitarian Theory or Protective Theory
The primary purpose of the punishment under criminal law is the protection of
society from actual and potential wrongdoers.  The courts, therefore, in
exacting retribution for the wronged society, should direct the punishment to
potential or actual wrongdoers, since criminal law is directed against acts
and omissions which the society does not approve.  Consistent with this
theory, the mala prohibita principle which punishes an offense regardless of
malice or criminal intent, should not be utilized to apply the full harshness
of the special law. 
Sources of Criminal Law
1. The Revised Penal Code
2. Special Penal Laws – Acts enacted of the Philippine Legislature
punishing offenses or omissions.
Construction of Penal Laws
1. Criminal Statutes are liberally construed in favor of the offender. This
means that no person shall be brought within their terms who is not
 clearly within them, nor should any act be pronounced criminal which is
not clearly made so by statute.
2. The original text in which a penal law is approved in case of a conflict
with an official translation.
3. Interpretation by analogy has no place in criminal law
MALA IN SE AND MALA PROHIBITA
Violations of the Revised Penal Code are referred to as malum in se, which
literally means, that the act is inherently evil or bad or per se wrongful. 
On the other hand, violations of special laws are generally referred to
as malum prohibitum.
Note, however, that not all violations of special laws are mala prohibita. 
While intentional felonies are always mala in se, it does not follow that
prohibited acts done in violation of special laws are always mala prohibita. 
Even if the crime is punished under a special law, if the act punished is one
which is inherently wrong, the same is malum in se, and, therefore, good faith
and the lack of criminal intent is a valid defense; unless it is the product
of criminal negligence or culpa.

Likewise when the special laws requires that the punished act be committed
knowingly and willfully, criminal intent is required to be proved before
criminal liability may arise.

When the act penalized is not inherently wrong, it is wrong only because a law
punishes the same.

Distinction between crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code and crimes
punished under special laws
1.             As to moral trait of the offender
In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, the moral trait of the
offender is considered. This is why liability would only arise when there is
dolo or culpa in the commission of the punishable act.

In crimes punished under special laws, the moral trait of the offender is not
considered; it is enough that the prohibited act was voluntarily done.

2.             As to use of good faith as defense

In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, good faith or lack of
criminal intent is a valid defense; unless the crime is the result of culpa

In crimes punished under special laws, good faith is not a defense

3.             As to degree of accomplishment of the crime

In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, the degree of accomplishment
of the crime is taken into account in punishing the offender; thus, there are
attempted, frustrated, and consummated stages in the commission of the crime.

In crimes punished under special laws, the act gives rise to a crime only when
it is consummated; there are no attempted or frustrated stages, unless the
special law expressly penalize the mere attempt or frustration of the crime.

4.             As to mitigating and aggravating circumstances

In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, mitigating and aggravating
circumstances are taken into account in imposing the penalty since the moral
trait of the offender is considered.

In crimes punished under special laws, mitigating and aggravating

circumstances are not taken into account in imposing the penalty.

5.             As to degree of participation

In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code, when there is more than one
offender, the degree of participation of each in the commission of the crime
is taken into account in imposing the penalty; thus, offenders are classified
as principal, accomplice and accessory.

In crimes punished under special laws, the degree of participation of the

offenders is not considered.  All who perpetrated the prohibited act are
penalized to the same extent.  There is no principal or accomplice or
accessory to consider.

Test to determine if violation of special law is malum prohibitum or malum in

se
Analyze the violation:  Is it wrong because there is a law prohibiting it or
punishing it as such?  If you remove the law, will the act still be wrong?
If the wording of the law punishing the crime uses the word “willfully”, then
malice must be proven.  Where malice is a factor, good faith is a defense.
In violation of special law, the act constituting the crime is a prohibited
act.  Therefore culpa is not a basis of liability, unless the special law
punishes an omission.
When given a problem, take note if the crime is a violation of the Revised
Penal Code or a special law.
Art. 1.  This Code shall take effect on January 1, 1932.
Art. 2.  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 preceding number;
4.  While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the
exercise of their functions; or(Some of these crimes are bribery, fraud
against national treasury, malversation of public funds or property, and
illegal use of public funds; e.g., A judge who accepts a bribe while in
Japan.)
 5.  Should commit any crimes against the national security and the law of
nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code. (These crimes include
treason, espionage, piracy, mutiny, and violation of neutrality)
 Rules as to crimes committed aboard foreign merchant vessels:
1. French Rule – Such crimes are not triable in the courts of that country,
unless their commission affects the peace and security of the territory
or the safety of the state is endangered.
1. English Rule – Such crimes are triable in that country, unless they
merely affect things within the vessel or they refer to the internal
management thereof. (This is applicable in the Philippines)
two situations where the foreign country may not apply its criminal law even
if a crime was committed on board a vessel within its territorial waters and
these are:
(1)           When the crime is committed in a war vessel of a foreign
country, because war vessels are part of the sovereignty of the country to
whose naval force they belong;
(2)           When the foreign country in whose territorial waters the crime
was committed adopts the French Rule, which applies only to merchant vessels,
except when the crime committed affects the national security or public order
of such foreign country.
 Requirements of “an offense committed while on a Philippine Ship or
Airship”
1. Registered with the Philippine Bureau of Customs
2. Ship must be in the high seas or the airship must be in international
airspace.
Under international law rule, a vessel which is not registered in accordance
with the laws of any country is considered a pirate vessel and piracy is a
crime against humanity in general, such that wherever the pirates may go,
they can be prosecuted.   
US v. Bull
A crime which occurred on board of a foreign vessel, which began when the ship
was in a foreign territory and continued when it entered into Philippine
waters, is considered a continuing crime. Hence within the jurisdiction of the
local courts.

As a general rule, the Revised Penal Code governs only when the crime
committed pertains to the exercise of the public official’s functions, those
having to do with the discharge of their duties in a foreign country.  The
functions contemplated are those, which are, under the law, to be performed
by the public officer in the Foreign Service of the Philippine government in
a foreign country.
 
Exception:  The Revised Penal Code governs if the crime was committed within
the Philippine Embassy or within the embassy grounds in a foreign country. 
This is because embassy grounds are considered an extension of sovereignty.
Paragraph 5 of Article 2, use the phrase “as defined in Title One of Book Two
of this Code.”
This is a very important part of the exception, because Title I of Book 2
(crimes against national security) does not include rebellion. 
Art 3.  Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies.
 Acts – an overt or external act
 Omission – failure to perform a duty required by law. Example of an
omission: failure to render assistance to anyone who is in danger of
dying or is in an uninhabited place or is wounded – abandonment.
 Felonies – acts and omissions punishable by the Revised Penal Code
 Crime – acts and omissions punishable by any law
What requisites must concur before a felony may be committed?

There must be (1) an act or omission; (2) punishable by the Revised Penal
Code; and (3) the act is performed or the omission incurred by means of dolo
or culpa.
 How felonies are committed:
1. by means of deceit (dolo) – There is deceit when the act is performed
with deliberate intent.
Requisites:
1. freedom
2. intelligence
3. intent
Examples: murder, treason, and robbery
Criminal intent is not necessary in these cases:
(1)           When the crime is the product of culpa or negligence, reckless
imprudence, lack of foresight or lack of skill;
(2)           When the crime is a prohibited act under a special law or what
is called malum prohibitum.
In criminal law, intent is categorized into two:
(1)           General criminal intent; and
(2)           Specific criminal intent. 
General criminal intent is presumed from the mere doing of a wrong act.  This
does not require proof.  The burden is upon the wrong doer to prove that he
acted without such criminal intent. 
Specific criminal intent is not presumed because it is an ingredient or
element of a crime, like intent to kill in the crimes of attempted or
frustrated homicide/parricide/murder.  The prosecution has the burden of
proving the same.
Distinction between intent and discernment
Intent is the determination to do a certain thing, an aim or purpose of the
mind.  It is the design to resolve or determination by which a person acts.
On the other hand, discernment is the mental capacity to tell right from
wrong.  It relates to the moral significance that a person ascribes to his
act and relates to the intelligence as an element of dolo, distinct from
intent. 
Distinction between intent and motive
Intent is demonstrated by the use of a particular means to bring about a
desired result – it is not a state of mind or a reason for committing a
crime.
On the other hand, motive implies motion.  It is the moving power which
impels one to do an act.  When there is motive in the commission of a crime,
it always comes before the intent.  But a crime may be committed without
motive. 
If the crime is intentional, it cannot be committed without intent.  Intent
is manifested by the instrument used by the offender.  The specific criminal
intent becomes material if the crime is to be distinguished from the
attempted or frustrated stage.
1. by means of fault  (culpa) – There is fault when the wrongful act
results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
1. Imprudence – deficiency of action; e.g. A was driving a truck along a
road.  He hit B because it was raining – reckless imprudence.
2. Negligence – deficiency of perception; failure to foresee impending
danger, usually involves lack of foresight
3. c.       Requisites:
1. Freedom
2. Intelligence
3. Imprudence, negligence, lack of skill or foresight
4. Lack of intent
The concept of criminal negligence is the inexcusable lack of precaution on
the part of the person performing or failing to perform an act.  If the
danger impending from that situation is clearly manifest, you have a case
of reckless imprudence.  But if the danger that would result from such
imprudence is not clear, not manifest nor immediate you have only a case
of simple negligence.
 Mistake of fact – is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person
who caused injury to another.  He is not criminally liable.
a. Requisites:
1. that the act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the
accused believed them to be;
2. intention of the accused is lawful;
3. mistake must be without fault of carelessness.
 Example:  United States v. Ah Chong.
Ah Chong being afraid of bad elements, locked himself in his room by placing a
chair against the door. After having gone to bed, he was awakened by somebody
who was trying to open the door.  He asked the identity of the person, but he
did not receive a response.  Fearing that this intruder was a robber, he
leaped out of bed and said that he will kill the intruder should he attempt to
enter.  At that moment, the chair struck him.  Believing that he was attacked,
he seized a knife and fatally wounded the intruder.

Mistake of fact would be relevant only when the felony would have been
intentional or through dolo, but not when the felony is a result of culpa. 
When the felony is a product of culpa, do not discuss mistake of fact. 
Art. 4.  Criminal liability shall be incurred:
            1.  By any person committing a felony, although the wrongful act
done be different from that which he intended.
Article 4, paragraph 1 presupposes that the act done is the proximate cause of
the resulting felony. It must be the direct, natural, and logical consequence
of the felonious act.

 Causes which produce a different result:

1. Mistake in identity of the victim – injuring one person who is mistaken
for another (this is a complex crime under Art. 48) e.g., A intended to
shoot B, but he instead shot C because he (A) mistook C for B.
         In error in personae, the intended victim was not at the scene of
the crime.  It was the actual victim upon whom the blow was directed, but he
was not really the intended victim. 
How does error in personae affect criminal liability of the offender?
Error in personae is mitigating if the crime committed is different from that
which was intended.  If the crime committed is the same as that which was
intended, error in personae does not affect the criminal liability of the
offender.
In mistake of identity, if the crime committed was the same as the crime
intended, but on a different victim, error in persona does not affect the
criminal liability of the offender.  But if the crime committed was different
from the crime intended, Article 49 will apply and the penalty for the lesser
crime will be applied.  In a way, mistake in identity is a mitigating
circumstance where Article 49 applies.  Where the crime intended is more
serious than the crime committed, the error in persona is not a mitigating
circumstance
2. Mistake in blow – hitting somebody other than the target due to lack of
skill or fortuitous instances (this is a complex crime under Art. 48)
e.g., B and C were walking together.  A wanted to shoot B, but he instead
injured C.
         In aberratio ictus, a person directed the blow at an intended
victim, but because of poor aim, that blow landed on somebody else.  In
aberratio ictus, the intended victim as well as the actual victim are both at
the scene of the crime.
     aberratio ictus, generally gives rise to a complex crime.   This being
so, the penalty for the more serious crime is imposed in the maximum period.
3. Injurious result is greater than that intended – causing injury graver
than intended or expected (this is a mitigating circumstance due to lack
of intent to commit so grave a wrong under Art. 13) e.g., A wanted to
injure B.  However, B died.
         praeter intentionem is mitigating, particularly covered by
paragraph 3 of Article 13.  In order however, that the situation may qualify
as praeter intentionem, there must be a notable disparity between the means
employed and the resulting felony
 In all these instances the offender can still be held criminally liable,
since he is motivated by criminal intent.
Requisites:
1. the felony was intentionally committed
2. the felony is the proximate cause of the wrong done
 Doctrine of Proximate Cause – such adequate and efficient cause as, in
the natural order of events, and under the particular circumstances
surrounding the case, which would necessarily produce the event.
Requisites:
1. the direct, natural, and logical cause
2. produces the injury or damage
3. unbroken by any sufficient intervening cause
4. without which the result would not have occurred
 Proximate Cause is negated by:
1. Active force, distinct act, or fact absolutely foreign from the
felonious act of the accused, which serves as a sufficient intervening
cause.
2. Resulting injury or damage is due to the intentional act of the victim.
      proximate cause does not require that the offender needs to actually
touch the body of the offended party. It is enough that the offender
generated in the mind of the offended party the belief that made him risk
himself.
 Requisite for Presumption blow was cause of the death – Where there has
been an injury inflicted sufficient to produce death followed by the
demise of the person, the presumption arises that the injury was the
cause of the death. Provided:
1. victim was in normal health
2. death ensued within a reasonable time
       The one who caused the proximate cause is the one liable.  The one
who caused the immediate cause is also liable, but merely contributory or
sometimes totally not liable.
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 on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.
 Requisites: (IMPOSSIBLE CRIME)
1. Act would have been an offense against persons or property
2. Act is not an actual violation of another provision of the Code or of a
special penal law
3. There was criminal intent
4. Accomplishment was inherently impossible; or inadequate or ineffectual
means were employed.
 Notes:
1. Offender must believe that he can consummate the intended crime, a man
stabbing another who he knew was already dead cannot be liable for an
impossible crime.
2. The law intends to punish the criminal intent.
3. There is no attempted or frustrated impossible crime.
 Felonies against persons: parricide, murder, homicide, infanticide,
physical injuries, etc.
 Felonies against property: robbery, theft, usurpation, swindling, etc.
 Inherent impossibility: A thought that B was just sleeping.  B was
already dead.  A shot B.  A is liable.  If A knew that B is dead and he
still shot him, then A is not liable.
When we say inherent impossibility, this means that under any and all
circumstances, the crime could not have materialized.  If the crime could
have materialized under a different set of facts, employing the same mean or
the same act, it is not an impossible crime; it would be an attempted felony.
 Employment of inadequate means: A used poison to kill B.  However, B
survived because A used small quantities of poison – frustrated murder.
 Ineffectual means: A aimed his gun at B.  When he fired the gun, no
bullet came out because the gun was empty.  A is liable.
          Whenever you are confronted with a problem where the facts suggest
that an impossible crime was committed, be careful about the question asked. 
If the question asked is: “Is an impossible crime committed?”, then you judge
that question on the basis of  the facts.  If really the facts constitute an
impossible crime, then you suggest than an impossible crime is committed,
then you state the reason for the inherent impossibility.
          If the question asked is “Is he liable for an impossible crime?”,
this is a catching question.  Even though the facts constitute an impossible
crime, if the act done by the offender constitutes some other crimes under
the Revised Penal Code, he will not be liable for an impossible crime.  He
will be prosecuted for the crime constituted so far by the act done by him.
          this idea of an impossible crime is a one of last resort, just to
teach the offender a lesson because of his criminal perversity.  If he could
be taught of the same lesson by charging him with some other crime
constituted by his act, then that will be the proper way.  If you want to
play safe, you state there that although an impossible crime is constituted,
yet it is a principle of criminal law that he will only be penalized for an
impossible crime if he cannot be punished under some other provision of the
Revised Penal Code.
Art 5.  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 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.
           When a person is charged in court, and the court finds that there
is no law applicable, the court will acquit the accused and the judge will
give his opinion that the said act should be punished.
 Paragraph 2 does not apply to crimes punishable by special law,
including profiteering, and illegal possession of firearms or drugs. 
There can be no executive clemency for these crimes.
Art. 6.  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.
There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony
directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which
should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his
own spontaneous desistance.
 Development of a crime
1. Internal acts – intent and plans; usually not punishable
2. External acts
1. Preparatory Acts – acts tending toward the crime
2. Acts of Execution – acts directly connected the crime

Stages of Commission of a Crime

Frustrate Consummate
Attempt d d

 Overt 
acts of
execution
are
started
 Not all
acts of
execution
are
present
 Due to
reasons
other than
the
spontaneou
s
desistance
of the
perpetrato
r
 All acts
of
execution
are
present
 Crime
sought to
be
 committed
is not
achieved
 Due to
intervenin
g causes
independen
t of the
will of
the
perpetrato
r
 All the
acts of
execution
are
present
 The
result
sought is
achieved

 Stages of a Crime does not apply in:

1. Offenses punishable by Special Penal Laws, unless the otherwise is
provided for.
2. Formal crimes (e.g., slander, adultery, etc.)
3. Impossible Crimes
4. Crimes consummated by mere attempt. Examples:attempt to flee to an enemy
country, treason, corruption of minors.
5. Felonies by omission
6. Crimes committed by mere agreement. Examples:      betting in sports
(endings in basketball), corruption of public officers.
Desistance
        Desistance on the part of the offender negates criminal liability in
the attempted stage.  Desistance is true only in the attempted stage of the
felony.  If under the definition of the felony, the act done is already in
the frustrated stage, no amount of desistance will negate criminal liability.
         The spontaneous desistance of the offender negates only the
attempted stage but not necessarily all criminal liability.  Even though
there was desistance on the part of the offender, if the desistance was made
when acts done by him already resulted to a felony, that offender will still
be criminally liable for the felony brought about his act
           In deciding whether a felony is attempted or frustrated or
consummated, there are three criteria involved:
(1)           The manner of committing the crime;
(2)           The elements of the crime; and
(3)           The nature of the crime itself.
 Applications:
1. A put poison in B’s food.  B threw away his food.  A is liable
– attempted murder.[1]
2. A stole B’s car, but he returned it.  A is liable –(consummated) theft.
3. A aimed his gun at B.  C held A’s hand and prevented him from shooting B
– attempted murder.
4. A inflicted a mortal wound on B.  B managed to survive – frustrated
murder.
5. A intended to kill B by shooting him.  A missed –attempted murder.
6. A doused B’s house with kerosene.  But before he could light the match,
he was caught – attempted arson.
7. A cause a blaze, but did not burn the house of B –frustrated arson.
8. B’s house was set on fire by A – (consummated) arson.
9. A tried to rape B.  B managed to escape.  There was no penetration
– attempted rape.
10. A got hold of B’s painting.  A was caught before he could leave B’s
house – frustrated robbery.[2]
           The attempted stage is said to be within the subjective phase of
execution of a felony.  On the subjective phase, it is that point in time
when the offender begins the commission of an overt act until that point
where he loses control of the commission of the crime already.  If he has
reached that point where he can no longer control the ensuing consequence,
the crime has already passed the subjective phase and, therefore, it is no
longer attempted.  The moment the execution of the crime has already gone to
that point where the felony should follow as a consequence, it is either
already frustrated or consummated.  If the felony does not follow as a
consequence, it is already frustrated.  If the felony follows as a
consequence, it is consummated.
        although the offender may not have done the act to bring about the
felony as a consequence, if he could have continued committing those acts but
he himself did not proceed because he believed that he had done enough to
consummate the crime, Supreme Court said the subjective phase has passed
NOTES ON ARSON;
         The weight of the authority is that the crime of arson cannot be
committed in the frustrated stage.  The reason is because we can hardly
determine whether the offender has performed all the acts of execution that
would result in arson, as a consequence, unless a part of the premises has
started to burn.  On the other hand, the moment a particle or a molecule of
the premises has blackened, in law, arson is consummated.  This is because
consummated arson does not require that the whole of the premises be burned. 
It is enough that any part of the premises, no matter how small, has begun to
burn.
ESTAFA VS. THEFT
         In estafa, the offender receives the property; he does not take
it.  But in receiving the property, the recipient may be committing theft,
not estafa, if what was transferred to him was only the physical or material
possession of the object.  It can only be estafa if what was transferred to
him is not only material or physical possession but juridical possession as
well.
          When you are discussing estafa, do not talk about intent to gain. 
In the same manner that when you are discussing the crime of theft, do not
talk of damage.
Nature of the crime itself
          In crimes involving the taking of human life – parricide,
homicide, and murder – in the definition of the frustrated stage, it is
indispensable that the victim be mortally wounded.  Under the definition of
the frustrated stage, to consider the offender as having performed all the
acts of execution, the acts already done by him must produce or be capable of
producing a felony as a consequence. The general rule is that there must be a
fatal injury inflicted, because it is only then that death will follow.
         If the wound is not mortal, the crime is only attempted.  The
reason is that the wound inflicted is not capable of bringing about the
desired felony of parricide, murder or homicide as a consequence; it cannot
be said that the offender has performed all the acts of execution which would
produce parricide, homicide or murder as a result. 
         An exception to the general rule is the so-called subjective
phase.  The Supreme Court has decided cases which applied the subjective
standard that when the offender himself believed that he had performed all
the acts of execution, even though no mortal wound was inflicted, the act is
already in the frustrated stage.
         The common notion is that when there is conspiracy involved, the
participants are punished as principals.  This notion is no longer absolute. 
In the case of People v. Nierra, the Supreme Court ruled that even though
there was conspiracy, if a co-conspirator merely cooperated in the commission
of the crime with insignificant or minimal acts, such that even without his
cooperation, the crime could be carried out as well, such co-conspirator
should be punished as an accomplice only.
Art. 7.  Light felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated
with the exception of those committed against persons or property.
  Examples of light felonies: slight physical injuries; theft; alteration
of boundary marks;  malicious mischief; and intriguing against honor.
 In commission of crimes against properties and persons, every stage of
execution is punishable but only the principals and accomplices are
liable for light felonies, accessories are not.
Art. 8.  Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the
cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefore.

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.
 Conspiracy is punishable in the following cases: treason, rebellion or
insurrection, sedition, and monopolies and combinations in restraint of
trade.
 Conspiracy to commit a crime is not to be confused with conspiracy as a
means of committing a crime. In both cases there is an agreement but mere
conspiracy to commit a crime is not punished EXCEPT in treason,
rebellion, or sedition. Even then, if the treason is actually committed,
the conspiracy will be considered as a means of committing it and the
accused will all be charged for treason and not for conspiracy to commit
treason.

Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit a

Crime

Conspiracy Proposal

Elements  Agreement 
among 2 or
more
persons to
commit a
crime
 They
decide to
commit it
 A person
has decided
to commit a
crime
 He
proposes
 its
commission
to another

1. Conspiracy
to commit
sedition
2. Conspiracy
to commit
rebellion
3. Conspiracy
to commit
treason
4. Proposal
to commit
treason
5. Proposal
to commit
Crimes
rebellion 6.

 Mere conspiracy in combination in restraint of trade (Art. 186), and

brigandage (Art. 306).
Two ways for conspiracy to exist:
(1)           There is an agreement.
(2)           The participants acted in concert or simultaneously which is
indicative of a meeting of the minds towards a common criminal goal or
criminal objective.  When several offenders act in a synchronized,
coordinated manner, the fact that their acts complimented each other is
indicative of the meeting of the minds.  There is an implied agreement.
Two kinds of conspiracy:
(1)           Conspiracy as a crime; and
(2)           Conspiracy as a manner of incurring criminal liability
         When conspiracy itself is a crime, no overt act is necessary to
bring about the criminal liability.  The mere conspiracy is the crime
itself.  This is only true when the law expressly punishes the mere
conspiracy; otherwise, the conspiracy does not bring about the commission of
the crime because conspiracy is not an overt act but a mere preparatory act. 
Treason, rebellion, sedition, and coup d’etat are the only crimes where the
conspiracy and proposal to commit to them are punishable.
         When the conspiracy is only a basis of incurring criminal
liability, there must be an overt act done before the co-conspirators become
criminally liable. For as long as none of the conspirators has committed an
overt act, there is no crime yet.  But when one of them commits any overt
act, all of them shall be held liable, unless a co-conspirator was absent
from the scene of the crime or he showed up, but he tried to prevent the
commission of the crime.
         As a general rule, if there has been a conspiracy to commit a crime
in a particular place, anyone who did not appear shall be presumed to have
desisted.  The exception to this is if such person who did not  appear was
the mastermind.
        For as long as none of the conspirators has committed an overt act,
there is no crime yet.  But when one of them commits any overt act, all of
them shall be held liable, unless a co-conspirator was absent from the scene
of the crime or he showed up, but he tried to prevent the commission of the
crime
        As a general rule, if there has been a conspiracy to commit a crime
in a particular place, anyone who did not appear shall be presumed to have
desisted.  The exception to this is if such person who did not  appear was
the mastermind.
       When the conspiracy itself is a crime, this cannot be inferred or
deduced because there is no overt act.  All that there is the agreement.  On
the other hand, if the co-conspirator or any of them would execute an overt
act, the crime would no longer be the conspiracy but the overt act itself.
        conspiracy as a crime, must have a clear and convincing evidence of
its existence.  Every crime must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. it must
be established by positive and conclusive evidence, not by conjectures or
speculations.
       When the conspiracy is just a basis of incurring criminal liability,
however, the same may be deduced or inferred from the acts of several
offenders in carrying out the commission of the crime.  The existence of a
conspiracy may be reasonably inferred from the acts of the offenders when
such acts disclose or show a common pursuit of the criminal objective.
         mere knowledge, acquiescence to, or approval of the act, without
cooperation or at least, agreement to cooperate, is not enough to constitute
a conspiracy. There must be an intentional participation in the crime with a
view to further the common felonious objective.
        When several persons who do not know each other simultaneously
attack the victim, the act of one is the act of all, regardless of the degree
of injury inflicted by any one of them.  All will be liable for the
consequences.  A conspiracy is possible even when participants are not known
to each other.  Do not think that participants are always known to each
other.
        Conspiracy is a matter of substance which must be alleged in the
information, otherwise, the court will not consider the same.
        Proposal is true only up to the point where the party to whom the
proposal was made has not yet accepted the proposal.  Once the proposal was
accepted, a conspiracy arises.  Proposal is unilateral, one party makes a
proposition to the other; conspiracy is bilateral, it requires two parties.
 SEDITION;    
Proposal to commit sedition is not a crime.  But if Union B accepts the
proposal, there will be conspiracy to commit sedition which is a crime under
the Revised Penal Code.
Composite crimes
          Composite crimes are crimes which, in substance, consist of more
than one crime but in the eyes of the law, there is only one crime.  For
example, the crimes of robbery with homicide, robbery with rape, robbery with
physical injuries.   
          In case the crime committed is a composite crime, the conspirator
will be liable for all the acts committed during the commission of the crime
agreed upon.  This is because, in the eyes of the law, all those acts done in
pursuance of the crime agreed upon are acts which constitute a single crime.
          As a general rule, when there is conspiracy, the rule is that the
act of one is the act of all. This principle applies only to the crime agreed
upon. 
         The exception  is if any of the co-conspirator would commit a crime
not agreed upon.  This happens when the crime agreed upon and the crime
committed by one of the co-conspirators are distinct crimes. 
         Exception to the exception:  In acts constituting a single
indivisible offense, even though the co-conspirator performed different acts
bringing about the composite crime, all will be liable for such crime.  They
can only evade responsibility for any other crime outside of that agreed upon
if it is proved that the particular conspirator had tried to prevent the
commission of such other act.
Art.  9.  Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital
punishment or penalties which in any of their are afflictive, in accordance
with Article 25 of this Code.

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 he
penalty of arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, or both is
provided.
 Capital punishment – death penalty.
 Penalties (imprisonment): Grave – six years and one day to reclusion
perpetua (life);  Less grave – one month and one day to six years;  Light
–arresto menor (one day to 30 days).
CLASSIFICATION OF FELONIES
This question was asked in the bar examination: How do you classify felonies
or how are felonies classified?
What the examiner had in mind was Articles 3, 6 and 9.  Do not write the
classification of felonies under Book 2 of the Revised Penal Code.  That was
not what the examiner had in mind because the question does not require the
candidate to classify but also to define.  Therefore, the examiner was after
the classifications under Articles 3, 6 and 9.
Felonies are classified as follows:
(1)                 According to the manner of their commission
Under Article 3, they are classified as, intentional felonies or those
committed with deliberate intent; and culpable felonies or those resulting
from negligence, reckless imprudence, lack of foresight or lack of skill.
(2)                 According to the stages of their execution
Under Article 6., felonies are classified as attempted felony when the
offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and
does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by
reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance;
frustrated felony when the offender commences the commission of a felony as a
consequence but which would produce the felony as a consequence but which
nevertheless do not produce the felony by reason of causes independent of the
perpetrator; and, consummated felony when all the elements necessary for its
execution are present.
(3)                 According to their gravity
Under Article 9, felonies are classified as grave felonies or those to which
attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in any of their periods
are afflictive; less grave felonies or those to which the law punishes with
penalties which in their maximum period was correccional; and light felonies
or those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty is
arresto menor.
Why is it necessary to determine whether the crime is grave, less grave or
light? 
To determine whether these felonies can be complexed or not, and to determine
the prescription of the crime and the prescription of the penalty.  In other
words, these are felonies classified according to their gravity, stages and
the penalty attached to them.  Take note that when the Revised Penal Code
speaks of grave and less grave felonies, the definition makes a reference
specifically to Article 25 of the Revised Penal Code.  Do not omit the phrase
“In accordance with Article 25” because there is also a classification of
penalties under Article 26 that was not applied.
If the penalty is fine and exactly P200.00, it is only considered a light
felony under Article 9.
If the fine is imposed as an alternative penalty or as a single penalty, the
fine of P200.00 is considered a correctional penalty under Article 26.
If the penalty is exactly P200.00, apply Article 26.  It is considered as
correctional penalty and it prescribes in 10 years.  If the offender is
apprehended at any time within ten years, he can be made to suffer the fine.
This classification of felony according to gravity is important with respect
to the question of prescription of crimes.
In the case of light felonies, crimes prescribe in two months.   If the crime
is correctional, it prescribes in ten years, except arresto mayor, which
prescribes in five years.
Art. 10.  Offenses which are or in the future may be punishable under special
laws are not subject to the provisions of this Code.  This Code shall be
supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should specially provide the
contrary.
 For Special Laws: Penalties should be imprisonment, and not reclusion
perpetua, etc.
 Offenses that are attempted or frustrated are not punishable, unless
otherwise stated.
 Plea of guilty is not mitigating for offenses punishable by special
laws.
 No minimum, medium, and maximum periods for penalties.
 No penalty for an accessory or accomplice, unless otherwise stated.
 
 Provisions of RPC applicable to special laws:
1. Art. 16 Participation of Accomplices
2. Art. 22 Retroactivity of Penal laws if favorable to the accused
3. Art. 45 Confiscation of instruments used in the crime
SUPPLETORY APPLICATION OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE
In Article  10,  there is a reservation “provision of the Revised Penal Code
may be applied suppletorily to special laws”.  You will only apply the
provisions of the Revised Penal Code as a supplement to the special law, or
simply correlate the violated special law, if needed to avoid an injustice. 
If no justice would result, do not give suppletorily application of the
Revised Penal Code  to that of special law.
For example,  a special law punishes a certain act as a crime.  The special
law is silent as to the civil liability of one who violates the same.  Here
is a person who violated the special law and he was prosecuted.  His
violation caused damage or injury to a private party.  May the court
pronounce that he is civilly liable to the offended party, considering that
the special law is silent on this point?  Yes, because Article 100 of the
Revised Penal Code may be given suppletory application to prevent an
injustice from being done to the offended party.  Article 100 states that
every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.  That
article shall be applied suppletory to avoid an injustice that would be
caused to the private offended party, if he would not be indemnified for the
damages or injuries sustained by him.
In People v. Rodriguez, it was held that the use of arms is an element of
rebellion, so a rebel cannot be further prosecuted for possession of
firearms.  A violation of a special law can never absorb a crime punishable
under the Revised Penal Code, because violations of the Revised Penal Code
are more serious than a violation of a special law.  But a crime in the
Revised Penal Code can absorb a crime punishable by a special law if it is a
necessary ingredient of the crime in the Revised Penal Code
In the crime of sedition, the use of firearms is not an ingredient of the
crime.  Hence, two prosecutions can be had: (1) sedition; and (2) illegal
possession of firearms.
But do not think that when a crime is punished outside of the Revised Penal
Code, it is already a special law.  For example, the crime of cattle-rustling
is not a mala prohibitum but a modification of the crime theft of large
cattle.  So Presidential Decree No. 533, punishing cattle-rustling, is not a
special law.  It can absorb the crime of murder.  If in the course of cattle
rustling, murder was committed, the offender cannot be prosecuted for
murder.  Murder would be a qualifying circumstance in the crime of qualified
cattle rustling.  This was the ruling in People v. Martinada.
The amendments of Presidential Decree No. 6425 (The Dangerous Drugs Act of
1972) by Republic Act No. 7659, which adopted the scale of penalties in the
Revised Penal Code, means that mitigating and aggravating circumstances can
now be considered in imposing penalties.  Presidential Decree No. 6425 does
not expressly prohibit the suppletory application of the Revised Penal Code. 
The stages of the commission of felonies will also apply since suppletory
application is now allowed.
Circumstances affecting criminal liability
There are five circumstances affecting criminal liability:

(1)                 Justifying circumstances;

(2)                 Exempting circumstances;

(3)                 Mitigating circumstances;

(4)                 Aggravating circumstances; and

(5)                 Alternative circumstances.

There are two others which are found elsewhere in the provisions of the
Revised Penal Code:
(1)                 Absolutory cause; and
(2)                 Extenuating circumstances.

In justifying and exempting circumstances, there is no criminal liability.

When an accused invokes them, he in effect admits the commission of a crime
but tries to avoid the liability thereof.  The burden is upon him to
establish beyond reasonable doubt the required conditions to justify or
exempt his acts from criminal liability.  What is shifted is only the burden
of evidence, not the burden of proof.
Justifying circumstances contemplate intentional acts and, hence, are
incompatible with dolo.  Exempting circumstances may be invoked in culpable
felonies.
Absolutory cause
The effect of this is to absolve the offender from criminal liability,
although not from civil liability.  It has the same effect as an exempting
circumstance, but you do not call it as such in order not to confuse it with
the circumstances under Article 12.
Article 20 provides that the penalties prescribed for accessories shall not
be imposed upon those who are such with respect to their spouses, ascendants,
descendants, legitimate, natural and adopted brothers and sisters, or
relatives by affinity within the same degrees with the exception of
accessories who profited themselves or assisting the offender to profit by
the effects of the crime.
Then, Article 89 provides how criminal liability is extinguished:
Death of the convict as to the personal penalties, and as to pecuniary
penalties, liability therefor is extinguished if death occurs before final
judgment;
Service of the sentence;
Amnesty;
Absolute pardon;
Prescription of the crime;
Prescription of the penalty; and
Marriage of the offended woman as provided in Article 344.
 
Under Article 247, a legally married person who kills or inflicts physical
injuries upon his or her spouse whom he surprised having sexual intercourse
with his or her paramour or mistress in not criminally liable.
Under Article 219, discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence of
the ward by their guardian is not penalized.
Under Article 332, in the case of theft, swindling and malicious mischief,
there is no criminal liability but only civil liability, when the offender
and the offended party are related as spouse, ascendant, descendant, brother
and sister-in-law living together or where in case the widowed spouse and the
property involved is that of the deceased spouse, before such property had
passed on to the possession of third parties. 
Under Article 344, in cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness,
and rape, the marriage of the offended party shall extinguish the criminal
action.
Absolutory cause has the effect of an exempting circumstance and they are
predicated on lack of voluntariness like instigation.  Instigation is
associated with criminal intent. Do not consider culpa in connection with
instigation. If the crime is culpable, do not talk of instigation. In
instigation, the crime is committed with dolo. It is confused with
entrapment.
Entrapment is not an absolutory cause.  Entrapment does not exempt the
offender or mitigate his criminal liability.  But instigation absolves the
offender from criminal liability because in instigation, the offender simply
acts as a tool of the law enforcers and, therefore, he is acting without
criminal intent because without the instigation, he would not have done the
criminal act which he did upon instigation of the law enforcers.
Difference between instigation and entrapment
In instigation, the criminal plan or design exists in the mind of the law
enforcer with whom the person instigated cooperated so it is said that the
person instigated is acting only as a mere instrument or tool of the law
enforcer in the performance of his duties.
 On the other hand, in entrapment, a criminal design is already in the mind
of the person entrapped. It did not emanate from the mind of the law enforcer
entrapping him. Entrapment involves only ways and means which are laid down
or resorted to facilitate the apprehension of the culprit.
The element which makes instigation an absolutory cause is the lack of
criminal intent as an element of voluntariness.
If the instigator is a law enforcer, the person instigated cannot be
criminally liable, because it is the law enforcer who planted that criminal
mind in him to commit the crime, without which he would not have been a
criminal.  If the instigator is not a law enforcer, both will be criminally
liable, you cannot have a case of instigation.  In instigation, the private
citizen only cooperates with the law enforcer to a point when the private
citizen upon instigation of the law enforcer incriminates himself.  It would
be contrary to public policy to prosecute a citizen who only cooperated with
the law enforcer.  The private citizen believes that he is a law enforcer and
that is why when the law enforcer tells him, he believes that it is a civil
duty to cooperate.
If the person instigated does not know that the person is instigating him is
a law enforcer or he knows him to be not a law enforcer, this is not a case
of instigation.  This is a case of inducement, both will be criminally
liable.
In entrapment, the person entrapped should not know that the person trying to
entrap him was a law enforcer.  The idea is incompatible with each other
because in entrapment, the person entrapped is actually committing a crime. 
The officer who entrapped him only lays down ways and means to have evidence
of the commission of the crime, but even without those ways and means, the
person entrapped is actually engaged in a violation of the law.
Instigation absolves the person instigated from criminal liability. This is
based on the rule that a person cannot be a criminal if his mind is not
criminal.  On the other hand, entrapment is not an absolutory cause.  It is
not even mitigating.
In case of somnambulism or one who acts while sleeping, the person involved
is definitely acting without freedom and without sufficient intelligence,
because he is asleep.  He is moving like a robot, unaware of what he is
doing.  So the element of voluntariness which is necessary in dolo and culpa
is not present.  Somnambulism is an absolutory cause.  If element of
voluntariness is absent, there is no criminal liability, although there is
civil liability, and if the circumstance is not among those enumerated in
Article 12, refer to the circumstance as an absolutory cause.
Mistake of fact is an absolutory cause.  The offender is acting without
criminal intent.  So in mistake of fact, it is necessary that had the facts
been true as the accused believed them to be, this act is justified.  If not,
there is criminal liability, because there is no mistake of fact anymore. 
The offender must believe he is performing a lawful act.
 
Extenuating circumstances

The effect of this is to mitigate the criminal liability of the offender.  In

other words, this has the same effect as mitigating circumstances, only you
do not call it mitigating because this is not found in Article 13.
 
Illustrations:
An unwed mother killed her child in order to conceal a dishonor.  The
concealment of dishonor is an extenuating circumstance insofar as the unwed
mother or the maternal grandparents is concerned, but not insofar as the
father of the child is concerned.  Mother killing her new born child to
conceal her dishonor, penalty is lowered by two degrees.  Since there is a
material lowering of the penalty or mitigating the penalty, this is an
extenuating circumstance.
The concealment of honor by mother in the crime of infanticide is an
extenuating circumstance but not in the case of parricide when the age of the
victim is three days old and above.
In the crime of adultery on the part of a married woman abandoned by her
husband,  at the time she was abandoned by her husband, is it necessary for
her to seek the company of another man.  Abandonment by the husband does not
justify the act of the woman. It only extenuates or reduces criminal
liability.  When the effect of the circumstance is to lower the penalty there
is an extenuating circumstance.
A kleptomaniac is one who cannot resist the temptation of stealing things
which appeal to his desire.  This is not exempting.  One who is a
kleptomaniac and who would steal objects of his desire is criminally liable. 
But he would be given the benefit of a mitigating circumstance analogous to
paragraph 9 of Article 13, that of suffering from an illness which diminishes
the exercise of his will power without, however, depriving him of the
consciousness of his act.  So this is an extenuating circumstance.  The
effect is to mitigate the criminal liability.
Distinctions between justifying circumstances and exempting circumstances
In justifying circumstances –
(1)                 The circumstance affects the act, not the actor;
(2)                 The act complained of is considered to have been done
within the bounds of law; hence, it is legitimate and lawful in the eyes of
the law;
(3)                 Since the act is considered lawful, there is no crime,
and because there is no crime, there is no criminal;
(4)                 Since there is no crime or criminal, there is no
criminal liability as well as civil liability.
In exempting circumstances –
(1)                 The circumstances affect the actor, not the act;
(2)                 The act complained of is actually wrongful, but the
actor acted without voluntariness.  He is a mere tool or instrument of the
crime;
(3)                 Since the act complained of is actually wrongful, there
is a crime.  But because the actor acted without voluntariness, there is
absence of dolo or culpa.  There is no criminal;
(4)                 Since there is a crime committed but there is no
criminal, there is civil liability for the wrong done.  But there is no
criminal liability.  However, in paragraphs 4 and 7 of Article 12, there is
neither criminal nor civil liability.
When you apply for justifying or exempting circumstances, it is confession
and avoidance and burden of proof shifts to the accused and he can no longer
rely on weakness of prosecution’s evidence.

                [1]The difference between murder and homicide will be

discussed in Criminal Law II.  These crimes are found in Articles 248 and 249,
Book II of the Revised Penal Code.
                [2] The difference between theft and robbery will be discussed
in Criminal Law II.  These crimes are found in Title Ten, Chapters  One and
Three, Book II of the Revised Penal Code.

LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 11-20

Art.  11:  Justifying Circumstances – those wherein the acts of the actor are
in accordance with law, hence, he is justified.  There is no criminal and
civil liability because there is no crime.
3. Self-defense

3. Reason for lawfulness of self-defense: because it would be impossible

for the State to protect all its citizens.  Also a person cannot just
give up his rights without any resistance being offered.

4. Rights included in self-defense:

1.  Defense of person

2.  Defense of rights protected by law

3. Defense of property:

a.  The owner or lawful possessor of a thing has a right to exclude any person
from the enjoyment or disposal thereof.  For this purpose, he may use such
force as may be reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an actual or
threatened unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of his property. (Art.
429, New Civil Code)
b.    defense of chastity

4. Elements:

 1.      Unlawful Aggression– is a physical act manifesting danger to

life or limb; it is either actual or imminent.

 Actual/real aggression – Real aggression presupposes an act

positively strong, showing the wrongful intent of the aggressor,
which is not merely threatening or intimidating attitude, but a
material attack.  There must be real danger to life a personal
safety.

 Imminent unlawful aggression – it is an attack that is impending

or on the point of happening.  It must not consist in a mere
threatening attitude, nor must it be merely imaginary.  The
intimidating attitude must be offensive and positively strong.

 Where there is an agreement to fight, there is no unlawful

aggression.  Each of the protagonists is at once assailant and
 assaulted, and neither can invoke the right of self-defense, because
aggression which is an incident in the fight is bound to arise from
one or the other of the combatants. Exception:  Where the attack is
made in violation of the conditions agreed upon, there may be
unlawful aggression.

 Unlawful aggression in self-defense, to be justifying, must exist

at the time the defense is made.  It may no longer exist if the
aggressor runs away after the attack or he has manifested a refusal
to continue fighting.  If the person attacked allowed some time to
elapse after he suffered the injury before hitting back, his act of
hitting back would not constitute self-defense, but revenge.

2. A light push on the head with the hand is not unlawful aggression, but a
slap on the face is, because his dignity is in danger.

3. A police officer exceeding his authority may become an unlawful

aggressor.

4. The nature, character, location, and extent of the wound may belie claim
of self-defense.

               2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or

repel it;
a.    Requisites:
2. Means were used to prevent or repel

3. Means must be necessary and there is no other way to prevent or repel it

4. Means must be reasonable – depending on the circumstances, but generally

proportionate to the force of the aggressor.

 The rule here is to stand your ground when in the right which may
invoked when the defender is unlawfully assaulted and the aggressor is
armed with a weapon.

 The rule is more liberal when the accused is a peace officer who, unlike
a private person, cannot run away.

 The reasonable necessity of the means employed to put up the defense.

3. The gauge of reasonable necessity is the instinct of self-preservation,

i.e. a person did not use his rational mind to pick a means of defense
but acted out of self-preservation, using the nearest or only means
available to defend himself, even if such means be disproportionately
advantageous as compared with the means of violence employed by the
aggressor.
 4. Reasonableness of the means depends on the nature and the quality of the
weapon used, physical condition, character, size and other circumstances.

3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.

 When no provocation at all was given to the aggressor by the person
defending himself.

 When even if provocation was given by the person defending himself, such
was not sufficient to cause violent aggression on the part of the
attacker, i.e. the amount of provocation was not sufficient to stir the
aggressor into the acts which led the accused to defend himself.

 When even if the provocation were sufficient, it was not given by the
person defending himself.

 When even if provocation was given by the person defending himself, the
attack was not proximate or immediate to the act of provocation.

 Sufficient means proportionate to the damage caused by the act, and

adequate to stir one to its commission.

 Kinds of Self-Defense

 Self-defense of chastity – to be entitled to complete self-defense

of chastity, there must be an attempt to rape, mere imminence
thereof will suffice.

 Defense of property – an attack on the property must be coupled

with an attack on the person of the owner, or of one entrusted with
the care of such property.

 Self-defense in libel – physical assault may be justified when the

libel is aimed at a person’s good name, and while the libel is in
progress, one libel deserves another.

*Burden of proof – on the accused (sufficient, clear and convincing evidence;

must rely on the strength of his own evidence and not on the weakness of the
prosecution).

2. Defense of Relative

A. Elements:
4. unlawful aggression

5. reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the

attack;

6. in case provocation was given by the person attacked, that the person
making the defense had no part in such provocation.
B. Relatives entitled to the defense:
2. spouse

3. ascendants

4. descendants

5. legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters

6. relatives by affinity in the same degree

7. relatives by consanguinity within the 4th civil degree.

4. The third element need not take place.  The relative defended may even
be the original aggressor.  All that is required to justify the act of
the relative defending is that he takes no part in such provocation.

5. General opinion is to the effect that all relatives mentioned must be

legitimate, except in cases of brothers and sisters who, by relatives by
nature, may be illegitimate.

6. The unlawful aggression may depend on the honest belief of the person
making the defense.

 Defense of Stranger

A. Elements
4. unlawful aggression

5. reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the

attack;

6. the person defending  be not induced by revenge, resentment or other

evil motive.

 A relative not included in defense of relative is included in defense of

stranger.

 Be not induced by evil motive means that even an enemy of the aggressor
who comes to the defense of a stranger may invoke this justifying
circumstances so long as he is not induced by a motive that is evil.

2. State of Necessity

3. Art. 11, Par. a provides:

Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does an act which causes
damage to another, provided that the following requisites are present:
First.  That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists;
            Second. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid
it; and
            Third. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of
preventing it.
4. A state of necessity exists when there is a clash between unequal
rights, the lesser right giving way to the greater right.  Aside from the
3 requisites stated in the law, it should also be added that the
necessity must not be due to the negligence or violation of any law by
the actor.

5. The person for whose benefit the harm has been prevented shall be
civilly liable in proportion to the benefit which may have been
received.  This is the only justifying circumstance which provides for
the payment of civil indemnity.  Under the other justifying
circumstances, no civil liability attaches.  The courts shall determine,
in their sound discretion, the proportionate amount for which law one is
liable

 Fulfillment of Duty or Lawful Exercise of a Right or Office

3. Elements:

 that the accused acted in the performance of a duty, or in the lawful

exercise  of a right or office;

 that the injury caused or offense committed be the necessary consequence

of the due performance of the duty, or the lawful exercise of such right
or office.

5. A police officer is justified in shooting and killing a criminal who

refuses to stop when ordered to do so, and after such officer fired
warning shots in the air.

 shooting an offender who refused to surrender is justified, but not a

thief who refused  to be arrested.

3. The accused must prove that he was duly appointed to the position he
claimed he was discharging at the time of the commission of the offense. 
It must be made to appear not only that the injury caused or the offense
committed was done in the fulfillment of a duty, or in the lawful
exercise of a right or office, but that the offense committed was a
necessary consequence of such fulfillment of duty, or lawful exercise of
a right or office.

4. A mere security guard has no authority or duty to fire at a thief,

resulting in the latter’s death.

 Obedience to a Superior Order

3. Elements:
  there is an order;

 the order is for a legal purpose;

 the means used to carry out said order is lawful.

5. The subordinate who is made to comply with the order is the party which
may avail of this circumstance.  The officer giving the order may not
invoke this.

6. The subordinate’s good faith is material here.  If he obeyed an order in

good faith, not being aware of its illegality, he is not liable. 
However, the order must not be patently illegal.  If the order is
patently illegal this circumstance cannot be validly invoked.

7. The reason for this justifying circumstance is the subordinate’s mistake

of fact in good faith.

8. Even if the order be patently illegal, the subordinate may yet be able
to invoke the exempting circumstances of having acted under the
compulsion of an irresistible force, or under the impulse of an
uncontrollable fear.
EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES

 Exempting circumstances (non-imputability) are those ground for

exemption from punishment because there is wanting in the agent of the
crime of any of the conditions which make the act voluntary, or
negligent.

 Basis: The exemption from punishment is based on the complete absence of

intelligence, freedom of action, or intent, or on the absence of
negligence on the part of the accused.

 A person who acts WITHOUT MALICE (without intelligence, freedom of

action or intent) or WITHOUT NEGLIGENCE (without intelligence, freedom of
action or fault) is NOT CRIMINALLY LIABLE or is EXEMPT FROM PUNISHMENT.

 There is a crime committed but no criminal liability arises from it

because of the complete absence of any of the conditions which constitute
free will or voluntariness of the act.

 Burden of proof: Any of the circumstances is a matter of defense and

must be proved by the defendant to the satisfaction of the court.

Art. 12.   CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY.  The following
are exempt from criminal liability:
1.  An imbecile or insane person, unless the latter has acted during a lucid
interval.
4. 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 on
one of the hospital or asylums established for persons thus afflicted. He
shall not be permitted to leave without first obtaining the permission of
the same court.

5. Requisites:

 Offender is an imbecile

 Offender was insane at the time of the commission of the crime

 IMBECILITY OR INSANITY

 An imbecile is exempt in all cases from criminal liability. 

The insane is not so exempt if it can be shown that he acted during a
lucid interval.  In the latter, loss of consciousness of ones acts and
not merely abnormality of mental faculties will qualify ones acts as
those of an insane.

 Procedure:  court is to order the confinement of such persons in the

hospitals or asylums established. Such persons will not be permitted to
leave without permission from the court.  The court, on the other hand,
has no power to order such permission without first obtaining the opinion
of the DOH that such persons may be released without danger.

 Presumption is always in favor of sanity.  The defense has the burden to

prove that the accused was insane at the time of the commission of the
crime.  For the ascertainment such mental condition of the accused, it is
permissible to receive evidence of the condition of his mind during a
reasonable period both before and after that time.  Circumstantial
evidence which is clear and convincing will suffice.  An examination of
the outward acts will help reveal the thoughts, motives and emotions of a
person and if such acts conform to those of people of sound mind.

 Insanity at the time of the commission of the crime and not that at the
time of the trial will exempt one from criminal liability.  In case of
insanity at the time of the trial, there will be a suspension of the
trial until the mental capacity of the accused is restored to afford him
a fair trial.

 Evidence of insanity must refer to the time preceding the act under
prosecution or to the very moment of its execution. Without such
evidence, the accused is presumed to be sane when he committed the
crime.  Continuance of insanity which is occasional or intermittent in
 nature will not be presumed.  Insanity at another time must be proved to
exist at the time of the commission of the crime.  A person is also
presumed to have committed a crime in one of the lucid intervals. 
Continuance of insanity will only be presumed in cases wherein the
accused has been adjudged insane or has been committed to a hospital or
an asylum for the insane.

 Instances of Insanity:

 Reyes:  Feeblemindedness is not imbecility because the offender can

distinguish right from wrong.  An imbecile and an insane to be exempted
must not be able to distinguish right from wrong.

 Relova:  Feeblemindedness is imbecility.

 Crimes committed while in a dream, by a somnambulist are embraced in the

plea of  insanity.  Hypnotism, however, is a debatable issue.

 Crime committed while suffering from malignant malaria is characterized

by insanity at times thus such person is not criminally liable.

 Basis:  complete absence of intelligence, and element of voluntariness.

 Definition : An imbecile is one who while advanced in age has a mental

development comparable to that of children between 2 and 7 years of age. 
An insane is one who acts with complete deprivation of
intelligence/reason or without the least discernment or with total
deprivation of freedom of the will.

 Dementia praecox is covered by the term insanity because homicidal

attack is common in such form of psychosis.  It is characterized by
delusions that he is being  interfered with sexually, or that his
property is being taken, thus the person has no control over his acts.

 Kleptomania or presence of abnormal, persistent impulse or tendency to

steal, to be considered   exempting, will still have to be investigated
by competent  psychiatrist to determine if the unlawful act is due to the
irresistible impulse produced by his mental defect,  thus loss of will-
power.  If such mental defect only diminishes the exercise of his
willpower and did not deprive him of the consciousness of his acts, it is
only mitigating.

 Epilepsy which is a chronic nervous disease characterized by convulsive

motions of the muscles and loss of consciousness may be covered by the
term insanity.  However, it must be shown that commission of the offense
is during one of those epileptic attacks.

2.  A person under nine years of age.

 3. MINORITY

4. Under nine years to be construed nine years or less.  Such was inferred
from the next subsequent paragraph which does not totally exempt those
over nine years of age if he acted with discernment.

5. Presumptions of incapability of committing  a crime is absolute.

6. Age is computed up to the time of the commission of the crime.  Age can
be established by the testimonies of families and relatives.

7. Senility or second childhood is only mitigating.

8. 4 periods of the life of a human being:

 Requisite: Offender is under 9 years of age at the time of the

commission of the crime. There is absolute criminal irresponsibility in
the case of a minor under 9-years of age.

 Basis:  complete absence of intelligence.

Age Criminal Responsibility

9 years
and below Absolute irresponsibility

Conditional responsibility

Between 9 Without discernment – no

and 15 liability  With Discernment
years old – mitigated liability

Between
15 and 18
years old Mitigated responsibility

Between
18 and 70
years old Full responsibility

Over 70
years old Mitigated responsibilit
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 article 80 of this Code.
When such minor is adjudged to be criminally irresponsible, the court, in
conformity 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 article 80.
 QUALIFIED MINORITY: Basis:  complete absence of intelligence

 Such minor over 9 years and under 15 years of age must have acted
without discernment to be exempted from criminal liability.  If with
discernment, he is criminally liable.

 Presumption is always that such minor has acted without discernment. 

The prosecution is burdened to prove if otherwise.

 Discernment means the mental capacity of a minor between 9 and 15 years

of age to fully appreciate the consequences of his unlawful act.  Such is
shown by: (1) manner the crime was committed (i.e. commission of the
crime during nighttime to avoid detection; taking the loot to another
town to avoid discovery), or (2) the conduct of the offender after its
commission (i.e. elation of satisfaction upon the commission of his
criminal act as shown by the accused cursing at the victim).

 Facts or particular facts concerning personal appearance which lead

officers or the court to believe that his age was as stated by said
officer or court should be stated in the record.

 If such minor is adjudged to be criminally liable, he is charged to the

custody of his family, otherwise, to the care of some institution or
person mentioned in article 80.  This is because of the court’s
presupposition that the minor committed the crime without discernment.

 Allegation of “with intent to kill” in the information is sufficient

allegation of discernment as such conveys the idea that he knew what
would be the consequences of his unlawful act.  Thus is the case wherein
the information alleges that the accused, with intent to kill, willfully,
criminally and feloniously pushed a child of 8 1/2 years of age into a
deep place. It was held that the requirement that there should be an
allegation that she acted with discernment should be deemed amply met.

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.

7. ACCIDENT: Basis: lack of negligence and intent.

 8. Elements:

9. Discharge of a firearm in a thickly populated place in the City of

Manila being prohibited by Art.  155 of the RPC is not a performance of a
lawful act when such led to the accidental hitting and wounding of 2
persons.

10. Drawing a weapon/gun in the course of self-defense even if such fired

and seriously injured the assailant is a lawful act and can be considered
as done with due care since it could not have been done in any other
manner.

11. With the fact duly established by the prosecution that the appellant was
guilty of negligence, this exempting circumstance cannot be applied
because application presupposes that there is no fault or negligence on
the part of the person performing the lawful act.

12. Accident happens outside the sway of our will, and although it comes
about some act of our will, lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable
consequences.

13. The accused, who, while hunting saw wild chickens and fired a shot can
be considered to be in the performance of a lawful act executed with due
care and without intention of doing harm when such short recoiled and
accidentally wounded  another.  Such was established because the deceased
was not in the direction at which the accused fired his gun.

14. The chauffeur, who while driving on the proper side of the road at a
moderate speed and with due diligence, suddenly and unexpectedly saw a
man in front of his vehicle coming from the sidewalk and crossing the
street without any warning that he would do so, in effect being run over
by the said chauffeur, was held not criminally liable, it being by mere
accident.

 A person is performing a lawful act

 Exercise of due dare

 He causes injury to another by mere accident

 Without fault or intention of causing it.

5.         Any person who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force.

11. IRRESISTIBLE FORCE: Basis:  complete absence of freedom, an element of

voluntariness

12. Elements:
 13. Force, to be irresistible, must produce such an effect on an individual
that despite of his resistance, it reduces him to a mere instrument and,
as such, incapable of committing a crime.  It compels his member to act
and his mind to obey.  It must act upon him from the outside and by a
third person.

14. Baculi, who was accused but not a member of a band which murdered some
American school teachers and was seen and compelled by the leaders of the
band to bury the bodies, was not criminally liable as accessory for
concealing the body of the crime.  Baculi acted under the compulsion of
an irresistible force.

15. Irresistible force can never consist in an impulse or passion, or

obfuscation.  It must consist of an extraneous force coming from a third
person.

 That the compulsion is by means of physical force

 That the physical force must be irresistible.

 That the physical force must  come from a third person

6.         Any person who acts under the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of
an equal or greater injury.
 UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR: Basis:  complete absence of freedom

 Elements

 that the threat which causes the fear is of an evil greater than, or at
least equal to that w/c he is required to commit

 that it promises an evil of such gravity and imminence that the ordinary
man would have succumbed to it.

 Duress, to be a valid defense, should be based on real, imminent or

reasonable fear for one’s life or limb. It should not be inspired by
speculative, fanciful or remote fear.

 Threat of future injury is not enough. The compulsion must leave no

opportunity to the accused for escape or self-defense in equal combat.

 Duress is the use of violence or physical force.

 There is uncontrollable fear is when the offender employs intimidation

or threat in compelling another to commit a crime, while irresistible
force is when the offender uses violence or physical force to compel
another person to commit a crime.

 “an act done by me against my will is not my act”

7.         Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when
prevented by some lawful or insuperable cause.
 LAWFUL OR INSUPERABLE CAUSE: Basis: acts without intent, the third
condition of voluntariness in intentional felony

 Elements:

7. That an act is required by law to be done

8. That a person fails to perform such act

9. That his failure to perform such act was due to some lawful or
insuperable cause

 Examples of lawful cause:

 To be an EXEMPTING circumstance – INTENT IS WANTING

 INTENT – presupposes the exercise of freedom and the use of intelligence

 Distinction between justifying and exempting circumstance:

 Priest can’t be compelled to reveal what was confessed to him

 No available transportation – officer not liable for arbitrary detention

 Mother who was overcome by severe dizziness and extreme debility,

leaving child to die – not liable for infanticide

 Exempting – there is a crime but there is no criminal. Act is not

justified but the actor is not criminally liable.

General Rule: There is civil liability

Exception: Par 4 (causing an injury by mere accident) and Par 7 (lawful cause)

b.  Justifying – person does not transgress the law, does not commit any crime
because there is nothing unlawful in the act as well as the intention of the
actor.

Distinction between Exempting and

Justifying Circumstances

Exempting Justifying
Circumstance Circumstance

Existence There is a There is no

of a crime but crime, the
 there is no
criminal,
the actor is
exempted
from
liability of act is
crime his act justified

 Absolutory Causes – are those where the act committed is a crime but for
some reason of public policy and sentiment, there is no penalty imposed.

 Exempting and Justifying Circumstances are absolutory causes.

 Other examples of absolutory causes:

1)      Art 6 – spontaneous desistance

2)      Art 20 – accessories exempt from criminal liability

3)      Art 19 par 1 – profiting one’s self or assisting offenders to profit

by the effects of the crime

4. Instigation v. Entrapment

INSTIGATION ENTRAPMENT

Instigator The ways and means

practically are resorted to
induces the would- for the purpose of
be accused into trapping and
the commission of capturing the
the offense and lawbreaker in the
himself becomes execution of his
co-principal criminal plan.

NOT a bar to
accused’s
Accused will be prosecution and
acquitted conviction

NOT an absolutory
Absolutory cause cause
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
 Definition – Those circumstance which reduce the penalty of a crime

 Effect – Reduces the penalty of the crime but does not erase criminal
liability nor change the nature of the crime

 Kinds of Mitigating Circumstance:

Privileged Ordinary

Mitigating Mitigating

Offset by Cannot be Can be

any offset by offset by a
aggravatin any generic
g aggravating aggravating
circumstan circumstanc circumstanc
ce e e

Has the If not

effect of offset, 
imposing has the
the penalty effect of
by 1 or 2 imposing
degrees the penalty
Effect on than that in the
the provided by minimum
penalty law period

Kinds Minority, Those

Incomplete circumstanc
Self- es
defense, enumerated
two or more in
mitigating paragraph 1
circumstanc to 10 of
es without Article 13
any
aggravating
circumstanc
e (has the
effect of
lowering
 the penalty
by one
degree)

Article  13.
1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter, when all the requisites necessary
to justify the act or to exempt from criminal liability in the respective
cases are not attendant
 Justifying circumstances

1. Self-defense/defense of relative/defense of stranger – unlawful

aggression must be present for Art 13 to be applicable. Other 2 elements
not necessary. If 2 requisites are present – considered a privileged
mitigating circumstance.

Example: Juan makes fun of Pedro. Pedro gets pissed off, gets a knife and
tries to stab Juan. Juan grabs his own knife and kills Pedro. Incomplete self-
defense because although there was unlawful aggression and reasonable means to
repel was taken, there was sufficient provocation on the part of Juan. But
since 2 elements are present, it considered as privileged mitigating.
b.  State of Necessity (par 4) avoidance of greater evil or injury; if any of
the last 2 requisites is absent, there’s only an ordinary Mitigating
Circumstance.
Example: While driving his car, Juan sees Pedro carelessly crossing the
street. Juan swerves to avoid him, thus hitting a motorbike with 2 passengers,
killing them instantly. Not all requisites to justify act were present because
harm done to avoid injury is greater. Considered as mitigating.
c. Performance of Duty (par 5)
Example: Juan is supposed to arrest Pedro. He thus goes to Pedro’s hideout.
Juan sees a man asleep. Thinking it was Pedro, Juan shot him. Juan may have
acted in the performance of his duty but the crime was not a necessary
consequence thereof. Considered as mitigating.
1. Exempting circumstance

a. Minority over 9 and under 15 – if minor acted with discernment, considered
mitigating
Example: 13 year old stole goods at nighttime. Acted with discernment as shown
by the manner in which the act was committed.
b.  Causing injury by mere accident – if 2nd requisite (due care) and 1st part
of 4th requisite (without fault – thus negligence only) are ABSENT, considered
as mitigating because the penalty is lower than that provided for intentional
felony.
 Example: Police officer tries to stop a fight between Juan and Pedro by firing
his gun in the air. Bullet ricocheted and killed Petra. Officer willfully
discharged his gun but was unmindful of the fact that area was populated.     
        c. Uncontrollable fear – only one requisite present, considered
mitigating
Example: Under threat that their farm will be burned, Pedro and Juan took
turns guarding it at night. Pedro fired in the air when a person in the
shadows refused to reveal his identity. Juan was awakened and shot the
unidentified person. Turned out to be a neighbor looking for is pet. Juan may
have acted under the influence of fear but such fear was not entirely
uncontrollable. Considered mitigating
2. That the offender is under 18 years of age or over 70 years. In the case of
a minor, he shall be proceeded against in accordance with the provisions of
Art 192 of PD 903
1. Applicable to:

a. Offender over 9, under 15 who acted with discernment

b. Offender over 15, under 18

c. Offender over 70 years

1. Age of accused which should be determined as his age at the date of

commission of crime, not date of trial

1. Various Ages and their Legal Effects

a. under 9 – exemptive circumstance

b. over 9, below 15 – exemptive; except if acted with discernment

c. minor delinquent under 18 – sentence may be suspended (PD 603)

d. under 18 – privileged mitigating circumstance

e. 18 and above – full criminal responsibility

f.  70 and above – mitigating circumstance; no imposition of death penalty;

execution g. of death sentence if already imposed is suspended and commuted.

3. That the offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that

committed (praeter intentionam)
1. Can be used only when the facts prove to show that there is a notable
and evident disproportion between means employed to execute the criminal
act and its consequences
2. Intention: as an internal act, is judged by the proportion of the means
employed to the evil produced by the act, and also by the fact that the
blow was or was not aimed at a vital part of the body.

3. Judge by considering (1) the weapon used, (2) the injury inflicted and
(3) the attitude of mind when the accuser attacked the other.

Example: Pedro stabbed Tomas on the arm. Tomas did not have the wound treated,
so he died from loss of blood.
1. Not applicable when offender employed brute force

Example: Rapist choked victim. Brute force of choking contradicts claim that
he had no intention to kill the girl.
1. Art 13, par 3 addresses itself to the intention of the offender at the
particular moment when he executes or commits the criminal act, not to
his intention during the planning stage.

2. In crimes against persons – if victim does not die, the absence of the
intent to kill reduces the felony to mere physical injuries. It is not
considered as mitigating. Mitigating only when the victim dies.

Example: As part of fun-making, Juan merely intended to burn Pedro’s clothes.

Pedro received minor burns. Juan is charged with physical injuries. Had Pedro
died, Juan would be entitled to the mitigating circumstance.
1. Not applicable to felonies by negligence. Why? In felonies through
negligence, the offender acts without intent. The intent in intentional
felonies is replaced by negligence, imprudence, lack of foresight or lack
of skill in culpable felonies. There is no intent on the part of the
offender which may be considered as diminished.

2. Basis of par 3: intent, an element of voluntariness in intentional

felony, is diminished

4. That the sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party
immediately preceded the act.
1. Provocation – any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended
party, capable of exciting, inciting or irritating anyone.

2. Basis: diminution of intelligence and intent

3. Requisites:

a. Provocation must be sufficient.

1. Sufficient – adequate enough to excite a person to commit the wrong and

must      accordingly be proportionate to its gravity.

2. Sufficiency depends on:

1. the act constituting the provocation

2. the social standing of the person provoked

3. time and place provocation took place

3. Example: Juan likes to hit and curse his servant. His servant thus killed
him.  There’s mitigating circumstance because of sufficient provocation.
4.  When it was the defendant who sought the deceased, the challenge to fight
by the deceased is NOT sufficient provocation.

b. It must originate from the offended party

1. Why? Law says the provocation is “on the part of the offended party”

2. Example: Tomas’ mother insulted Petra. Petra kills Tomas because of the
insults. No Mitigating Circumstance because it was the mother who insulted
her, not Tomas.

3. Provocation by  the  deceased  in  the first  stage  of  the fight  is not 
Mitigating

Circumstance when the accused killed him after he had fled because the
deceased from the moment he fled did not give any provocation for the accused
to pursue and attack him.

c. Provocation must be immediate to the act., i.e., to the commission of the

crime by the person who is provoked

1. Why? If there was an interval of time, the conduct of the offended party
could not have excited the accused to the commission of the crime, he
having had time to regain his reason and to exercise self-control.

2. Threat should not be offensive and positively strong because if it was,

the threat to inflict real injury is an unlawful aggression which may
give rise to self-defense and thus no longer a Mitigating Circumstance

5.  That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave offense
to the one committing the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants,
descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted brother or sisters, or relatives
by affinity within the same degree.
        1. Requisites:
1. there’s a grave offense done to the one committing the felony etc.

2. that the felony is committed in vindication of such grave offense.

 2. Lapse of time is allowed between the vindication and the one doing the
offense (proximate time, not just immediately after)

3. Example: Juan caught his wife and his friend in a compromising situation.
Juan kills his friend the next day – still considered proximate.

PROVOCATION VINDICATION

Grave offense may

Made directly only be also against
to the person the offender’s
committing the relatives
felony mentioned by law

Cause that brought Offended party

about the must have done a
provocation need grave offense to
not be a grave the offender or
offense his relatives

Necessary that
provocation or
threat immediately May be proximate.
preceded the act. Time interval
No time interval allowed

1. More lenient in vindication because offense concerns the honor of the

person. Such is more worthy of consideration than mere spite against the
one giving the provocation or threat.

2. Vindication of a grave offense and passion and obfuscation can’t be

counted separately and independently

6. That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to have

produced passion or obfuscation
1. Passion and obfuscation is mitigating: when there are causes naturally
producing in a person powerful excitement, he loses his reason and self-
control. Thereby dismissing the exercise of his will power.

2. PASSION AND OBFUSCATION are Mitigating Circumstances only when the same
arise from lawful sentiments (not Mitigating Circumstance when done in
the spirit of revenge or lawlessness)
3. Requisites for Passion & Obfuscation

a. The offender acted on impulse powerful enough to produce passion or

obfuscation

b. That the act was committed not in the spirit of lawlessness or revenge

c. The act must come from lawful sentiments

1. Act which gave rise to passion and obfuscation

a. That there be an act, both unlawful and unjust

b. The act be sufficient to produce a condition of mind

c. That the act was proximate to the criminal act

d. The victim must be the one who caused the passion or obfuscation

1. Example: Juan saw Tomas hitting his (Juan) son. Juan stabbed Tomas. Juan
is entitled to Mitigating Circumstance of P&O as his actuation arose from
a natural instinct that impels a father to rush to the rescue of his son.

2. The exercise of a right or a fulfillment of a duty is not the proper

source of P&O.

Example: A policeman arrested Juan as he was making a public disturbance on

the streets. Juan’s anger and indignation resulting from the arrest can’t be
considered passionate obfuscation because the policeman was doing a lawful
act.
1. The act must be sufficient to produce a condition of mind. If the cause
of the loss of self-control was trivial and slight, the obfuscation is
not mitigating.

Example: Juan’s boss punched him for not going to work he other day. Cause is
slight.
1. There could have been no Mitigating Circumstance of P&O when more than
24 hours elapsed between the alleged insult and the commission of the
felony, or several hours have passed between the cause of the P&O and the
commission of the crime, or at least ½ hours intervened between the
previous fight and subsequent killing of deceased by accused.

2. Not mitigating if relationship is illegitimate

3. The passion or obfuscation will be considered even if it is based only

on the honest belief of the offender, even if facts turn out to prove
that his beliefs were wrong.
4. Passion and obfuscation cannot co-exist with treachery since the means
that the offender has had time to ponder his course of action.

5. PASSION AND OBFUSCATION arising from one and the same cause should be
treated as only one mitigating circumstance

6. Vindication of grave offense can’t co-exist w/ PASSION AND OBFUSCATION

PASSION AND
OBFUSCATION IRRESITIBLE FORCE

Mitigating Exempting

No physical force Requires physical

needed force

From the offender Must come from a

himself 3rd person

Must come from

lawful sentiments Unlawful

PASSION AND
OBFUSCATION PROVOCATION

Produced by an
impulse which may
be caused by Comes from injured
provocation party

Offense, which Must immediately

engenders precede the
perturbation of commission of the
mind, need not be crime
immediate. It is
only required that
the influence
thereof lasts
until the crime is
 committed

Effect is loss of
reason and self-
control on the
part of the
offender Same

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.
1. 2 Mitigating Circumstances present:

a)      voluntarily surrendered

b)      voluntarily confessed his guilt

1. If both are present, considered as 2 independent mitigating

circumstances. Mitigate penalty to a greater extent

2. Requisites of voluntary surrender:

a)      offender not actually arrested

b)      offender surrendered to a person in authority or the latter’s agent

c)      surrender was voluntary

1. Surrender must be spontaneous – shows his interest to surrender

unconditionally to the authorities

2. Spontaneous – emphasizes the idea of inner impulse, acting without

external stimulus. The conduct of the accused, not his intention alone,
after the commission of the offense, determines the spontaneity of the
surrender.

Example: Surrendered after 5 years, not spontaneous anymore.

Example: Surrendered after talking to town councilor. Not V.S. because there’s
an external stimulus
1. Conduct must indicate a desire to own the responsibility

2. Not mitigating when warrant already served. Surrender may be considered

mitigating if warrant not served or returned unserved because accused
can’t be located.

3. Surrender of person required. Not just of weapon.

4. Person in authority – one directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as
an individual or as a member of some
court/government/corporation/board/commission. Barrio captain/chairman
included.

5. Agent of person in authority – person who by direct provision of law, or

be election, or by appointment by competent authority is charged with the
maintenance of public order and the protection and security of life and
property and any person who comes to the aid of persons in authority.

6. RPC does not make distinction among the various moments when surrender
may occur.

7. Surrender must be by reason of the commission of the crime for which

defendant is charged

8. Requisites for plea of guilty

a)      offender spontaneously confessed his guilt

b)      confession of guilt was made in open court (competent court)

c)      confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of evidence for
the prosecution

1. plea made after arraignment and after trial has begun does not entitle
accused to have plea considered as Mitigating Circumstance

2. plea in the RTC in a case appealed from the MTC is not mitigating  –
must make plea at the first opportunity

3. plea during the preliminary investigation is no plea at all

4. even if during arraignment, accused pleaded not guilty, he is entitled

to Mitigating Circumstance as long as withdraws his plea of not guilty to
the charge before the fiscal could present his evidence

5. plea to a lesser charge is not Mitigating Circumstance because to be

voluntary plea of guilty, must be to the offense charged

6. plea to the offense charged in the amended info, lesser than that
charged in the original info, is Mitigating Circumstance

7. present Rules of Court require that even if accused pleaded guilty to a

capital offense, its mandatory for court to require the prosecution to
prove the guilt of the accused being likewise entitled to present
evidence to prove, inter alia, Mitigating Circumstance
 8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering from some
physical defect w/c thus restricts his means of action, defense or
communication w/ his fellow beings.

1. Basis: one suffering from physical defect which restricts him does not
have complete freedom of action and therefore, there is diminution of
that element of voluntariness.

2. No distinction between educated and uneducated deaf-mute or blind

persons

3. The physical defect of the offender should restrict his means of action,
defense or communication with fellow beings,  this has been extended to
cover cripples, armless people even stutterers.

4. The circumstance assumes that with their physical defect, the offenders
do not have a complete freedom of action therefore diminishing the
element of voluntariness in the commission of a crime.

9. Such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the will-
power of the offender w/o depriving him of consciousness of his acts.

1. Basis: diminution of intelligence and intent

2. Requisites:

a)      illness of the offender must diminish the exercise of his will-power

b)      such illness should not deprive the offender of consciousness of his
acts

1. when the offender completely lost the exercise of will-power, it may be

an exempting circumstance

2. deceased mind, not amounting to insanity, may give place to mitigation

10. And any other circumstance of a similar nature and analogous to those
above-mentioned
1. Examples of “any other circumstance”:

a)      defendant who is 60 years old with failing eyesight is similar to a

case of one over 70 years old

b)      outraged feeling of owner of animal taken for ransom is analogous to

vindication of grave offense

c)      impulse of jealous feeling, similar to PASSION AND OBFUSCATION

 d)      voluntary restitution of property, similar to voluntary surrender

e)      extreme poverty, similar to incomplete justification based on state of

necessity

1. NOT analogous:

a)      killing wrong person

b)      not resisting arrest not the same as voluntary surrender

c)      running amuck is not mitigating

1. MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE which arise from:

a)      moral attributes of the offender

Example: Juan and Tomas killed Pedro. Juan acted w/ PASSION AND OBFUSCATION.
Only Juan will be entitled to Mitigating Circumstance
      b)   private relations with the offended party
Example: Juan stole his brother’s watch. Juan sold it to Pedro, who knew it
was stolen. The circumstance of relation arose from private relation of Juan
and the brother. Does not mitigate Pedro.
      c)   other personal cause
Example: Minor, acting with discernment robbed Juan. Pedro, passing by, helped
the minor. Circumstance of minority, mitigates liability of minor only.
1. Shall serve to mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and
accessories to whom the circumstances are attendant.

2. Circumstances which are neither exempting nor mitigating

a)      mistake in the blow

b)      mistake in the identity of the victim

c)      entrapment of the accused

d)      accused is over 18 years old

e)      performance of a righteous action

Example: Juan saved the lives of 99 people but caused the death of the last
person, he is still criminally liable
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
1. Definition – Those circumstance which raise the penalty for a crime
without exceeding the maximum applicable to that crime.
2. Basis: The greater perversity of the offense as shown by:

a)      the motivating power behind the act

b)      the place where the act was committed

c)      the means and ways used

d)      the time

e)      the personal circumstance of the offender

f)       the personal circumstance of the victim

1. Kinds:

a)      Generic – generally applicable to all crimes

b)      Specific – apply only to specific crimes (ignominy – for chastity

crimes; treachery – for persons crimes)

c)      Qualifying – those that change the nature of the crime (evident
premeditation – becomes murder)

d)      Inherent – necessarily accompanies the commission of the crime

(evident premeditation in theft, estafa)

QUALIFYING GENERIC
AGGRAVATING AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE CIRCUMSTANCE

Gives the proper

and exclusive
name, places the
author thereof in
such a situation Increase penalty
as to deserve no to the maximum,
other penalty than without exceeding
that specifically limit prescribed
prescribed by law by law
 Can’t be offset by May be compensated
Mitigating by Mitigating
Circumstance Circumstance

Need not be
alleged. May be
proved over the
objection of the
Must be alleged in defense.
the information. Qualifying if not
Integral part of alleged will make
the offense it generic

1. Aggravating Circumstances which DO NOT have the effect of increasing the

penalty:

1)      which themselves constitute a crime specifically punishable by law or

which are included in the law defining a crime and prescribing the penalty
thereof

Example: breaking a window to get inside the house and rob it

2)      aggravating circumstance inherent in the crime to such degree that it
must of necessity accompany the commission thereof

Example: evident premeditation inherent in theft, robbery, estafa, adultery

and concubinage
1. Aggravating circumstances are not presumed. Must be proved as fully as
the crime itself in order to increase the penalty.

Art 14. Aggravating circumstances. — The following are aggravating

circumstances:
1. 1.      That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position

1. Requisites:

1. The offender is a public officer

2. The commission of the crime would not have been possible without the
powers, resources and influence of the office he holds.

1. Essential – Public officer used the influence, prestige or ascendancy

which his office gives him as the means by which he realized his purpose.

2. Failure in official is tantamount to abusing of office

3. Wearing of uniform is immaterial – what matters is the proof that he
indeed took advantage of his position

1. 2.      That the crime be committed in contempt of or with insult to the

public authorities

1. Requisites:

1. The offender knows that a public authority is present

2. The public authority is engaged in the exercise of his functions

3. The public authority is not the victim of the crime

4. The public authority’s presence did not prevent the criminal act

1. Example: Juan and Pedro are quarrelling and the municipal mayor, upon
passing by, attempts to stop them. Notwithstanding the intervention and
the presence of the mayor, Juan and Pedro continue to quarrel until Juan
succeeds in killing Pedro.

2. Person in authority – public authority who is directly vested with

jurisdiction, has the power to govern and execute the laws

3. Examples of Persons in Authority

1. Governor

2. Mayor

3. Barangay captain

4. Councilors

5. Government agents

6. Chief of Police

1. Rule not applicable when committed in the presence of a mere agent.

2. Agent – subordinate public officer charged with the maintenance of

public order and protection and security of life and property

Example: barrio vice lieutenant, barrio councilman

1. 3.      That the act be committed:

(1)   with insult or in disregard of the respect due to the offended party on

account of his (a) rank, (b) age, (c) sex or
(2)   that it be committed in the dwelling of the offended party, if the
latter has not given provocation.
1. circumstances (rank, age, sex) may be taken into account only in crimes
against persons or honor, it cannot be invoked in crimes against property
2. Rank – refers to a high social position or standing by which to
determine one’s pay and emoluments in any scale of comparison within a
position

3. Age – the circumstance of lack of respect due to age applies in case

where the victim is of tender age as well as of old age

4. Sex – refers to the female sex, not to the male sex; not applicable when

1. The offender acted w/ PASSION AND OBFUSCATION

2. there exists a relation between the offender and the victim (but in
cases of divorce decrees where there is a direct bearing on their child,
it is applicable)

3. the condition of being a woman is indispensable in the commission of the

crime (Ex. Parricide, rape, abduction)

1. Requisite of disregard to rank, age, or sex

1. Crimes must be against the victim’s person or his honor

2. There is deliberate intent to offend or insult the respect due to the

victim’s rank, age, or sex

1. Disregard to rank, age, or sex is absorbed by treachery or abuse of

strength

2. Dwelling – must be a building or structure exclusively used for rest and

comfort (combination house and store not included)

1. may be temporary as in the case of guests in a house or bedspacers

2. basis for this is the sanctity of privacy the law accords to human abode

1. dwelling includes dependencies, the foot of the staircase and the

enclosure under the house

2. Elements of the aggravating circumstance of dwelling

1. Crime occurred in the dwelling of the victim

2. No provocation on the part of the victim

1. Requisites for Provocation: ALL MUST CONCUR

1. given by the owner of the dwelling

2. sufficient

3. immediate to the commission of the crime

 When dwelling may and may not be
considered

When it may be When it may not

considered be considered

1. although the 8.
offender fired
the shot from
outside the
house, as long
as his victim
was inside

2. even if the
killing took
place outside
the dwelling, so
long as the
commission began
inside the
dwelling

3. when adultery
is committed in
the dwelling of
the husband,
even if it is
also the
dwelling of the
wife, it is
still
aggravating
because she and
her paramour
committed a
grave offense to
the head of the
house

4. In robbery with
violence against
persons, robbery
 with homicide,
abduction, or
illegal
detention

5. If the offended
party has given
provocation

6. If both the
offender and the
offended party
are occupants of
the same
dwelling

7. In robbery with
force upon
things, it is
inherent

4. That the act be committed with (1) abuse of confidence or (2) obvious
ungratefulness

Requisites of
Abuse of Requisite of Obvious
Confidence Ungratefulness

a)      a)     
Offended party ungratefulness must
has trusted the be obvious, that is,
offender there must be
something which the
b)     
offender should owe
Offender abused
the victim a debt of
such trust
gratitude for

c)      Abuse Note: robbery or

of confidence theft committed by a
facilitated the visitor in the house
commission of of the offended party
the crime is aggravated by
obvious
 ungratefulness

1. Example: A jealous lover, already determined to kill his sweetheart,

invited her for a ride and during that ride, he stabbed her

2. Abuse of confidence is inherent in:

1. malversation

2. qualified theft

3. estafa by conversion

4. misappropriation

5. qualified seduction

5. That the crime be committed in the palace of the Chief Executive, or in his
presence, or when public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their
duties, or in a place dedicated to religious worship.

1. Requirements of the aggravating circumstance of public office:

2. A polling precinct is a public office during election day

3. Nature of public office should be taken into account, like a police

station which is on duty 24 hrs. a day

4. place of the commission of the felony (par 5): if it is Malacañang

palace or a church is aggravating, regardless of whether State or
official; functions are being held.

5. as regards other places where public authorities are engaged in the

discharge of their duties, there must be some performance of public
functions

6. the offender must have intention to commit a crime when he entered the
place

7. Requisites for aggravating circumstances for place of worship:

1. The crime occurred in the public office

2. Public authorities are actually performing their public duties

1. The crime occurred in a place dedicated to the worship of God regardless

of religion

2. Offender must have decided to commit the crime when he entered the place
of worship
 When Paragraph 2 and 5 of Article 14
are applicable

Committed in the
presence of the
Chief Executive, in Committed in
the Presidential contempt of
Palace or a place Public Authority
of worship(Par. 5,
Art. 14) (Par. 2, Art 14)

Public authorities
are performing of
their duties when
the crime is
committed Same

When crime is
committed in the
public office, the
officer must be
performing his
duties, except in Outside the
the Presidential office (still
Palace performing duty)

Public authority Public authority

may be the offended is not be the
party offended party

6a. That the crime be committed (1) in the nighttime, or (2) in an uninhabited
place (3) by a band, whenever such circumstances may facilitate the commission
of the offense.
1. Nighttime, Uninhabited Place or By a Bang Aggravating when:

1. Impunity – means to prevent the accused’s being recognized or to

secure himself against detection or punishment

2. Nighttime begins at the end of dusk and ending at dawn; from sunset to
sunrise
3. Uninhabited Place – one where there are no houses at all, a place at a
considerable distance from town, where the houses are scattered at a
great distance from each other

1. it facilitated the commission of the crime

2. especially sought for by the offender to insure the commission of the

crime or for the purpose of impunity

1. when the offender took the advantage thereof for the purpose of impunity

2. commission of the crime must have began and accomplished at nighttime

1. commission of the crime must begin and be accomplished in the nighttime

2. when the place of the crime is illuminated by light, nighttime is not

aggravating

3. absorbed by Treachery

Requisites:
1. The place facilitated the commission or omission of the crime

2. Deliberately sought and not incidental to the commission or omission of

the crime

3. Taken advantage of for the purpose of impunity

1. what should be considered here is whether in the place of the commission

of the offense, there was a reasonable possibility of the victim
receiving some help

6b. – Whenever more than 3 armed malefactors shall have acted together in the
commission of an offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band.
1. Requisites:

2. if one of the four-armed malefactors is a principal by inducement, they

do not form a band because it is undoubtedly connoted that he had no
direct participation,

3. Band is inherent in robbery committed in band and brigandage

4. It is not considered in the crime of rape

5. It has been applied in treason and in robbery with homicide

1. Facilitated the commission of the crime

2. Deliberately sought

3. Taken advantage of for the purposes of impunity

4. There must be four or more armed men

7. That the crime be committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck,

earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune

1. Requisites:

1. Committed when there is a calamity or misfortune

1. Conflagration

2. Shipwreck

3. Epidemic

1. Offender took advantage of the state of confusion or chaotic condition

from such misfortune

1. Basis: Commission of the crime adds to the suffering by taking advantage

of the misfortune.

2. based on time

3. offender must take advantage of the calamity or misfortune

Distinction between Paragraphs 7 and

12 of Article 14

Committed during a Committed with the

calamity or use of wasteful
misfortune means

Crime is committed
BYusing fire,
Crime is committed inundation,
DURING any of the explosion or other
calamities wasteful means

8. That the crime be committed with the aid of (1) armed men or (2) persons
who insure or afford impunity
1. based on the means and ways

2. Requisites:

3. Exceptions:
1. that armed men or persons took part in the commission of the crime,
directly or indirectly

2. that the accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them when
the crime was committed

1. when both the attacking party and the party attacked were equally armed

2. not present when the accused as well as those who cooperated with him in
the commission of the crime acted under the same plan and for the same
purpose.

3. Casual presence, or when the offender did not avail himself of any of
their aid nor did not knowingly count upon their assistance in the
commission of the crime

WITH THE AID OF

ARMED MEN BY A BAND

Present even if Requires more than

one of the 3 armed
offenders merely malefactors who
relied on their all acted together
aid. Actual aid in the commission
is not necessary of an offense

1. if there are more than 3 armed men, aid of armed men is absorbed in the
employment of a band.

9. That the accused is a recidivist

1. Recidivist – 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 the RPC

2. Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as shown by his inclination to

commit crimes

3. Requisites:

4. What is controlling is the time of the trial, not the time of the
commission of the offense. At the time of the trial means from the
arraignment until after sentence is announced by the judge in open court.

5. When does judgment become final? (Rules of Court)

6. Example of Crimes embraced in the Same title of the RPC

7. Q: The accused was prosecuted and tried for theft, robbery and estafa.
Judgments were read on the same day. Is he a recidivist?

1. offender is on trial for an offense

2. he was previously convicted by final judgment of another crime

3. that both the first and the second offenses are embraced in the same
title of the RPC

4. the offender is convicted of the new offense

1. after the lapse of a period for perfecting an appeal

2. when the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied or served

3. defendant has expressly waived in writing his right to appeal

4. the accused has applied for probation

1. robbery and theft – title 10

2. homicide and physical injuries – title 8

A: No. Because the judgment in any of the first two offenses was not yet final
when he was tried for the third offense

1. Recidivism must be taken into account no matter how many years have
intervened between the first and second felonies

2. Pardon does not obliterate the fact that the accused was a recidivist,
but amnesty extinguishes the penalty and its effects

3. To prove recidivism, it must be alleged in the information and with

attached certified copies of the sentences rendered against the accused

4. Exceptions: if the accused does not object and when he admits in his
confession and on the witness stand.

10. That the offender has been previously punished for 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

1. Reiteracion or Habituality – it is essential that the offender be

previously punished; that is, he has served sentence.

2. Par. 10 speaks of penalty attached to the offense, not the penalty

actually imposed

REITERACION RECIDIVISM
 Necessary that
offender shall Enough that final
have served out judgment has been
his sentence for rendered in the
the first sentence first offense

Previous and
subsequent
offenses must not
be embraced in the
same title of the
Code Same title

Not always an
aggravating Always
circumstance aggravating

1. 4 Forms of Repetition

2. Habitual Delinquency – when a person within a period of 10 years from

the date of his release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or
less serious physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa or falsification
is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener.

3. Quasi-Recidivism – any person who shall commit a felony after having

been convicted by final judgment, before beginning to serve such
sentence, or while serving the same, shall be punished by the maximum
period of the penalty prescribed by law for the new felony

1. Recidivism – generic

2. Reiteracion or Habituality – generic

3. Multiple recidivism or Habitual delinquency – extraordinary aggravating

4. Quasi-Recidivism – special aggravating

11. That the crime be committed in consideration of a price, reward or

promise.
1. Requisites:

1. At least 2 principals

1. The principal by inducement

 2. The principal by direct participation

1. the price, reward, or promise should be previous to and in consideration

of the commission of the criminal act

1. Applicable to both principals.

12. That the crime be committed by means of inundation, fire, poison,

explosion, stranding a vessel or intentional damage thereto, or derailment of
a locomotive, or by use of any other artifice involving great waste or ruin.
1. Requisite: The wasteful means were used by the offender to accomplish a
criminal purpose

13. That the act be committed with evident premeditation

1. Essence of premeditation: the execution of the criminal act must be
preceded by cool thought and reflection upon the resolution to carry out
the criminal intent during the space of time sufficient to arrive at a
calm judgment

2. Requisites:

3. Conspiracy generally presupposes premeditation

4. When victim is different from that intended, premeditation is not

aggravating. Although it is not necessary that there is a plan to kill a
particular person for premeditation to exist (e.g. plan to kill first 2
persons one meets, general attack on a village…for as long as it was
planned)

5. The premeditation must be based upon external facts, and must be

evident, not merely suspected indicating deliberate planning

6. Evident premeditation is inherent in robbery, adultery, theft, estafa,

falsification, and etc.

1. the time when the offender determined to commit the crime

2. an act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his

determination

3. a sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution to

allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his act and to allow his
conscience to overcome the resolution of his will

14. That (1) craft, (2) fraud, or (3) disguise be employed

1. Craft – involves intellectual trickery and cunning on the part of the
accused.
 It is employed as a scheme in the execution of the crime (e.g. accused
pretended to be members of the constabulary, accused in order to perpetrate
rape, used chocolates containing drugs)

1. Fraud –involves insidious words or machinations used to induce victim to

act in a manner which would enable the offender to carry out his design.

2. as distinguished from craft which involves acts done in order not to

arouse the suspicion of the victim, fraud involves a direct inducement
through entrapping or beguiling language or machinations

1. Disguise – resorting to any device to conceal identity. Purpose of

concealing identity is a must.

Distinction between Craft, Fraud, and

Disguise

Craft Fraud Disguise

Involves the
use of Involves the Involves
intellectual use of the use
trickery and direct of
cunning to inducement devise
arouse by insidious to
suspicion of words or conceal
the victim machinations identity

1. Requisite: The offender must have actually taken advantage of craft,

fraud, or disguise to facilitate the commission of the crime.

2. Inherent in: estafa and falsification.

15. That (1) advantage be taken of superior strength, or (2) means be employed
to weaken the defense
1. To purposely use excessive force out of the proportion to the means of
defense available to the person attacked.

2. Requisite of Means to Weaken Defense

3. To weaken the defense – illustrated in the case where one struggling

with another suddenly throws a cloak over the head of his opponent and
while in the said situation, he wounds or kills him. Other means of
weakening the defense would be intoxication or disabling thru the senses
(casting dirt of sand upon another’s eyes)
1. Superiority may arise from aggressor’s sex, weapon or number as compared
to that of the victim (e.g. accused attacked an unarmed girl with a
knife; 3 men stabbed to death the female victim).

2. No advantage of superior strength when one who attacks is overcome with

passion and obfuscation or when quarrel arose unexpectedly and the fatal
blow was struck while victim and accused were struggling.

3. Vs. by a band : circumstance of abuse of superior strength, what is

taken into account is not the number of aggressors nor the fact that they
are armed but their relative physical might vis-à-vis the offended party

1. Means were purposely sought to weaken the defense of the victim to

resist the assault

2. The means used must not totally eliminate possible defense of the
victim, otherwise it will fall under treachery

16. That the act be committed with treachery (alevosia)

1. TREACHERY: when the offender commits any of the crime 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.

2. Requisites:

3. Treachery – can’t be considered when there is no evidence that the

accused, prior to the moment of the killing, resolved to commit to crime,
or there is no proof that the death of the victim was the result of
meditation, calculation or reflection.

4. Examples: victim asleep, half-awake or just awakened, victim grappling

or being held, stacks from behind

5. But treachery may exist even if attack is face-to-face – as long as

victim was not given any chance to prepare defense

1. that at the time of the attack, the victim was not in the position to
defend himself

2. that the offender consciously adopted the particular means, method or

form of attack employed by him

1. does not exist if the accused gave the deceased chance to prepare or
there was warning given or that it was preceded by a heated argument

2. there is always treachery in the killing of child

3. generally characterized by the deliberate and sudden and unexpected
attack of the victim from behind, without any warning and without giving
the victim an opportunity to defend himself

MEANS
ABUSE OF EMPLOYED TO
SUPERIOR WEAKEN
TREACHERY STRENGTH DEFENSE

Means,
methods or
forms are
employed by Offender
the does not
offender to employ Means are
make it means, employed
impossible methods or but it only
or hard for forms of materially
the attack, he weakens the
offended only takes resisting
party to advantage power of
put any of his the
sort of superior offended
resistance strength party

1. Where there is conspiracy, treachery is considered against all the

offenders

2. Treachery absorbs abuse of strength, aid of armed men, by a band and

means to weaken the defense

17. That the means be employed or circumstances brought about which add
ignominy to the natural effects of the acts

1. IGNOMINY – is a circumstance pertaining to the moral order, which adds

disgrace and obloquy to the material injury caused by the crime

Applicable to crimes against chastity (rape included), less serious physical

injuries, light or grave coercion and murder

1. Requisites:

2. Examples: accused embraced and kissed the offended party not out of lust
but out of anger in front of many people, raped in front of the husband,
raped successively by five men
3. tend to make the effects of the crime more humiliating

4. Ignominy not present where the victim was already dead when such acts
were committed against his body or person

1. Crime must be against chastity, less serious physical injuries, light or

grave coercion, and murder

2. The circumstance made the crime more humiliating and shameful for the
victim

18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry

1. Unlawful entry – when an entrance is effected by a way not intended for
the purpose.  Meant to effect entrance and NOT exit.

2. Why aggravating? One who acts, not respecting the walls erected by men
to guard their property and provide for their personal safety, shows
greater perversity, a greater audacity and hence the law punishes him
with more severity

3. Example: Rapist gains entrance thru the window

4. Inherent in: Trespass to dwelling, robbery with force upon things, and
robbery with violence or intimidation against persons.

19. That as a means to the commission of the crime, a wall, roof, door or
window be broken
1. Requisites:

2. Applicable only if such acts were done by the offender to effect

entrance.

3. Breaking is lawful in the following instances:

1. A wall, roof, window, or door was broken

2. They were broken to effect entrance

1. an officer in order to make an arrest may break open a door or window of

any building in which the person to be arrested is or is reasonably
believed to be;

2. an officer if refused admittance may break open any door or window to

execute the search warrant or liberate himself,

20. That the crime be committed (1) with the aid of persons under 15 years of
age, or (2) by means of motor vehicles, airships or other similar means.

1. Reason for #1: to repress, so far as possible, the frequent practice

resorted to by professional criminals to avail themselves of minors
 taking advantage of their responsibility (remember that minors are given
leniency when they commit a crime)

Example: Juan instructed a 14-year old to climb up the fence and open the gate
for him so that he may rob the house
1. Reason for #2: to counteract the great facilities found by modern
criminals in said means to commit crime and flee and abscond once the
same is committed. Necessary that the motor vehicle be an important tool
to the consummation of the crime (bicycles not included)

Example: Juan and Pedro, in committing theft, used a truck to haul the
appliances from the mansion.
21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately
augmented by causing other wrong not necessary for its commission

 
1. Cruelty: when the culprit enjoys and delights in making his victim
suffer slowly and gradually, causing him unnecessary physical pain in the
consummation of the criminal act. Cruelty cannot be presumed nor merely
inferred from the body of the deceased. Has to be proven.

1. mere plurality of words do not show cruelty

2. no cruelty when the other wrong was done after the victim was dead

1. Requisites:

1. that the injury caused be deliberately increased by causing other wrong

2. that the other wrong be unnecessary for the execution of the purpose of
the offender

IGNOMINY CRUELTY

Moral suffering –
subjected to Physical
humiliation suffering

Art 15. ALTERNATIVE CIRCUMSTANCES. Their concept. — Alternative circumstances

are those which must be taken into consideration as aggravating or mitigating
according to the nature and effects of the crime and the other conditions
attending its commission. They are the relationship, intoxication and the
degree of instruction and education of the offender.
The alternative circumstance of relationship shall be taken into consideration
when the offended party in the spouse, ascendant, descendant, legitimate,
 natural, or adopted brother or sister, or relative by affinity in the same
degrees of the offender.
            The intoxication of the offender shall be taken into consideration
as a mitigating circumstances when the offender has committed a felony in a
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, it
shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance.
1. Alternative Circumstances – those which must be taken into consideration
as aggravating or mitigating according to the nature and effects of the
crime and other conditions attending its commission.

2. They are:

1. relationship – taken into consideration when offended party is the

spouse, ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural or adopted brother or
sister, or relative by affinity in the same degree of the offender

2. intoxication – mitigating when the offender has committed a felony in

the state of intoxication, if the same is not habitual or subsequent to
the plan to commit the said felony. Aggravating if habitual or
intentional

3. degree of instruction and education of the offender

RELATIONSHIP

Mitigating Aggravating
Circumstance Circumstance

 In crimes against

persons – in cases
where the
offender, or when
the offender and
the offended party
are relatives of
the same level, as
killing a brother,
adopted brother or
In crimes against half-brother.
property (robbery,
usurpation, Always aggravating
fraudulent in crimes against
insolvency, arson) chastity.
 Exception: Art 332
of CC – no
criminal
liability, civil
liability only for
the crimes of
theft, swindling
or malicious
mischief committed
or caused mutually
by spouses,
ascendants,
descendants or
relatives by
affinity (also
brothers, sisters,
brothers-in-law or
sisters-in-law if
living together).
It becomes an
EXEMPTING
circumstance.

1. Relationship neither mitigating nor aggravating when relationship is an

element of the offense.

Example: parricide, adultery, concubinage.

INTOXICATION

MITIGATING AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE CIRCUMSTANCE

a)      if a)      if
intoxication is intoxication is
not habitual habitual – such
habit must be
b)      if
actual and
intoxication is
confirmed
not subsequent to
the plan to commit b)      if its
a felony intentional
(subsequent to the
 plan to commit a
felony)

1. Must show that he has taken such quantity so as to blur his reason and
deprive him of a certain degree of control

2. A habitual drunkard is given to inebriety or the excessive use of

intoxicating drinks.

3. Habitual drunkenness must be shown to be an actual and confirmed habit

of the offender, but not necessarily of daily occurrence.

DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION AND EDUCATION

MITIGATING AGGRAVATING
CIRCUMSTANCE CIRCUMSTANCE

Low degree of
instruction
education or the
lack of it.
Because he does High degree of
not fully realize instruction and
the consequences education –
of his criminal offender avails
act. Not just mere himself of his
illiteracy but learning in
lack of committing the
intelligence. offense.

1. Determined by: the court must consider the circumstance of lack of

instruction

2. Exceptions (not mitigating):

1. crimes against property

2. crimes against chastity (rape included)

3. crime of treason

Art 16.  Who are criminally liable. — The following are criminally liable for
grave and less grave felonies:
1.   Principals.

2. Accomplices.
 3. Accessories.
 

The following are criminally liable for light felonies:

      1.   Principals
      2.   Accomplices.
1. Accessories – not liable for light felonies because the individual
prejudice is so small that penal sanction is not necessary

2. Only natural persons can be criminals as only they can act with malice
or negligence and can be subsequently deprived of liberty. Juridical
persons are liable under special laws.

3. Manager of a partnership is liable even if there is no evidence of his

direct participation in the crime.

4. Corporations may be the injured party

5. General Rule: Corpses and animals have no rights that may be injured.

6. Exception: defamation of the dead is punishable when it blackens the

memory of one who is dead.

Art 17. Principals. — The following are considered principals:

1. 1.      Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act;

2. 2.      Those who directly force or induce others to commit it;

3. 3.      Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another

act without which it would not have been accomplished.

Principals by Direct Participation

Requisites for 2 or more to be principals by direct participation:
1. participated in the criminal resolution (conspiracy)

2. carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution by acts
which directly tended to the same end

1. Conspiracy –  Is unity of purpose and intention.

Establishment of Conspiracy
1. proven by overt act

2. Not mere knowledge or approval

3. It is not necessary that there be formal agreement.

4. Must prove beyond reasonable doubt

5. Conspiracy is implied when the accused had a common purpose and were
united in execution.

6. Unity of purpose and intention in the commission of the crime may be

shown in the following cases:

1. Spontaneous agreement at the moment of the commission of the crime

2. Active Cooperation by all the offenders in the perpetration of the

crime

3. Contributing by positive acts to the realization of a common

criminal intent

4. Presence during the commission of the crime by a band and lending

moral support thereto.

5. While conspiracy may be implied from the circumstances attending

the commission of the crime, it is nevertheless a rule that
conspiracy must be established by positive and conclusive evidence.

1. Conspirator not liable for the crimes of the other which is not the
object of the conspiracy or is not a logical or necessary consequence
thereof

2. Multiple rape – each rapist is liable for another’s crime because each
cooperated in the commission of the rapes perpetrated by the others

3. Exception: in the crime of murder with treachery – all the offenders

must at least know that there will be treachery in executing the crime or
cooperate therein.

Example: Juan and Pedro conspired to kill Tomas without the previous plan of
treachery. In the crime scene, Juan used treachery in the presence of Pedro
and Pedro knew such. Both are liable for murder. But if Pedro stayed by the
gate while Juan alone killed Tomas with treachery, so that Pedro didn’t know
how it was carried out, Juan is liable for murder while Pedro for homicide.

1. No such thing as conspiracy to commit an offense through negligence.

However, special laws may make one a co-principal. Example: Under the
Pure Food and Drug Act, a storeowner is liable for the act of his
employees of selling adulterated coffee, although he didn’t know that
coffee was being sold.

2. Conspiracy is negatived by the acquittal of co-defendant.

1. That the culprits “carried out the plan and personally took part in the
execution, by acts which directly tended to the same end”:
1. The principals by direct participation must be at the scene of the
crime, personally taking part, although he was not present in the scene
of the crime, he is equally liable as a principal by direct
participation.

2. One serving as guard pursuant to the conspiracy is a principal direct

participation.

1. If the second element is missing, those who did not participate in the
commission of the acts of execution cannot be held criminally liable,
unless the crime agreed to be committed is treason, sedition, or
rebellion.

Principals by Induction
a.    “Those who directly force or induce others to commit it”
1. Principal by induction liable only when principal by direct
participation committed the act induced

2. Requisites:

1. inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the

commission of the crime

2. such inducement be the determining cause of the commission of the crime

by the material executor

d. Forms of Inducements
1. By Price, reward or promise

2. By irresistible force or uncontrollable fear

3. Commander has the intention of procuring the commission of the crime

4. Commander has ascendancy or influence

5. Words used be so direct, so efficacious, so powerful

6. Command be uttered prior to the commission

7. Executor had no personal reason

1. Imprudent advice does not constitute sufficient inducement

2. Requisites for words of command to be considered inducement:

1. Words uttered in the heat of anger and in the nature of the command that
had to be obeyed do not make one an inductor.

PROPOSES TO COMMIT A
INDUCTOR FELONY
 Induce others Same

Punishable at once
when proposes to
commit rebellion or
treason. The person
to whom one proposed
should not commit
Liable only when the crime, otherwise
the crime is the latter becomes
executed an inductor

Covers only treason

Covers any crime and rebelli

 Effects of Acquittal of Principal by direct participation on liability of

principal by inducement
1. Conspiracy is negated by the acquittal of the co-defendant.

2. One can not be held guilty of instigating the commission of the crime
without first showing that the crime has been actually committed by
another. But if the one charged as principal by direct participation be
acquitted because he acted without criminal intent or malice, it is not a
ground for the acquittal of the principal by inducement.

Principals by Indispensable Cooperation

1. “Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act
without which it would not have been accomplished”

2. Requisites:

1. Participation in the criminal resolution

2. Cooperation through another act (includes negligence)

1. *there is collective criminal responsibility when the offenders are

criminally liable in the same manner and to the same extent. The penalty
is the same for all.

2. there is individual criminal responsibility when there is no conspiracy.

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.
1. Requisites:
2. Examples: a) Juan was choking Pedro. Then Tomas ran up and hit Pedro
with a bamboo stick. Juan continued to choke Pedro until he was dead.
Tomas is only an accomplice because the fatal blow came from Juan. b)
Lending a dagger to a killer, knowing the latter’s purpose.

3. An accomplice has knowledge of the criminal design of the principal and

all he does is concur with his purpose.

4. There must be a relation between the acts done by the principal and
those attributed to the person charges as accomplice

5. In homicide or murder, the accomplice must not have inflicted the mortal
wound.

1. there be a community of design (principal originates the design,

accomplice only concurs)

2. he cooperates in the execution by previous or simultaneous acts,

intending to give material and moral aid (cooperation must be knowingly
done, it must also be necessary and not indispensable

3. There be a relation between the acts of the principal and the alleged
accomplice

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:
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.
3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the principals of
the crime, provided the accessory acts with abuse of his 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.
1. Example of Par 1: person received and used property from another,
knowing it was stolen

2. Example of Par 2: placing a weapon in the hand of the dead who was
unlawfully killed to plant evidence, or burying the deceased who was
killed by the principals

3. Example of Par 3: a) public officers who harbor, conceal or assist in

the escape of the principal of any crime (not light felony) with abuse of
his public functions, b) private persons who harbor, conceal or assist in
 the escape of the author of the crime – guilty of treason, parricide,
murder or an attempt against the life of the President, or who is known
to be habitually guilty of some crime.

4. General Rule: Principal acquitted, Accessory also acquitted

5. Exception: when the crime was in fact committed but the principal is
covered by exempting circumstances.

Example: Minor stole a ring and Juan, knowing it was stolen, bought it. Minor
is exempt. Juan liable as accessory

1. Trial of accessory may proceed without awaiting the result of the

separate charge against the principal because the criminal
responsibilities are distinct from each other

2. Liability of the accessory – the responsibility of the accessory is

subordinate to that of a principal in a crime because the accessory’s 
participation therein is subsequent to its commission, and his guilt is
directly related to the principal. If the principal was acquitted by an
exempting circumstance the accessory may still be held liable.

1. Difference of accessory from principal and accomplice:

1. Accessory does not take direct part or cooperate in, or induce the
commission of the crime

2. Accessory does not cooperate in the commission of the offense by acts

either prior thereto or simultaneous therewith

3. Participation of the accessory in all cases always takes place after the
commission of the crime

4. Takes part in the crime through his knowledge of the commission of the
offense.

Art. 20.           Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability. — The
penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon those who are
such with respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendants, legitimate,
natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity within the
same degrees, with the single exception of accessories falling within the
provisions of paragraph 1 of the next preceding article.
1. Basis: Ties of blood and the preservation of the cleanliness of one’s
name which compels one to conceal crimes committed by relatives so near
as those mentioned.

2. Nephew and Niece not included

3. Accessory not exempt when helped a relative-principal by profiting from
the effects of the crime, or assisted the offender to profit from the
effects of the crime.

4. Only accessories covered by par 2 and 3 are exempted.

5. Public officer who helped his guilty brother escape does not incur
criminal liability as ties of blood constitutes a more powerful incentive
than the call of duty.

6. PENALTY – suffering inflicted by the State for the transgression of a

law.

7. 3 fold purpose:

8. Juridical Conditions of Penalty

1. retribution or expiation – penalty commensurate with the gravity of the

offense

2. correction or reformation – rules which regulate the execution of

penalties consisting of deprivation of liberty

3. social defense – inflexible severity to recidivists and habitual

delinquents

a. Must be productive of suffering – limited by the integrity of human

personality

b. Must be proportionate to the crime

c. Must be personal – imposed only upon the criminal

d. Must be legal – according to a judgment of fact and law

e. Must be equal – applies to everyone regardless of the circumstance

f.  Must bee correctional – to rehabilitate the offender

LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 21-30

Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. — No felony shall be punishable by any
penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission.
4. Guarantees that no act of a citizen will be considered criminal unless
the State has made it so by law and provided a penalty

5. Except:  When the penalty is favorable to the criminal.

Art. 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. — Penal Laws shall have a
retroactive effect insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony, who
is not a habitual criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of
this Code, although at the time of the publication of such laws a final
sentence has been pronounced and the convict is serving the same.
5. General Rule: Criminal laws are given prospective effects

6. Exception: Give retroactive effect when favorable to the accused.  Ex.

Special law made the penalty less severe – but must refer to the same
deed or omission penalized by the former statute

7. New law may provide that its provisions not to be applied to cases
already filed in court at the time of the approval of such law.

8. The favorable retroactive effect of a new law may find the defendant in
one of the 3 situations

9. Habitual criminal (person who within the pd of 10 years from date of

release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious
physical injuries, robbery, theft, estafa or falsification, he is found
guilty of any said crimes a third time or oftener) is NOT entitled to the
benefit of the provisions of the new favorable law.

10. Civil liabilities not covered by Art 22 because rights of offended

persons are not within the gift of arbitrary disposal of the State.

11. But new law increasing civil liability cannot be given retroactive
effect.

12. Retroactivity applicable also to special laws

13. The right to punish offenses committed under an old penal law is not
extinguished if the offenses are still punished in the repealing penal
law. However, if by re-enactment of the provisions of the former law, the
repeal is by implication and there is a saving clause, criminal liability
under the repealed law subsists.

14. No retroactive effect of penal laws as regards jurisdiction of the

court. Jurisdiction of the court is determined by the law in force at the
 time of the institution of the action, not at the time of the commission
of the crime.

15. Jurisdiction of courts in criminal cases is determined by the

allegations of the complaint or information, and not by the findings the
court may make after trial.

16. When a law is ex post facto

17. crime has been committed and the prosecution begins

18. sentence has been passed but service has not begun

19. sentence is being carried out.

a      Makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was
innocent when done, and punishes such an act.

b      Aggravates the crime or makes it greater than it was when committed.

c      Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law
annexed to the crime when committed.

d      Alters the legal rules of evidence and authorizes conviction upon less
or different testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of
the crime.

e      Assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect imposes
penalty or deprivation of a right for something which when done was lawful.

f       Deprives a person accused of a crime some lawful protection to which

he has become entitled, such as the protection of a former conviction or
acquittal or a proclamation of amnesty.

4. Bill of Attainder – a legislative act which inflicts punishment without

trial. Its essence is the substitution of a legislative for a judicial
determination of guilt.

5. Effect of change of Penal Law

a      With enactment of a penal law punishing the offense – the action is not
dismissed. The penalty in the new law if favorable to the accused.

b      Without enactment of a penal law punishing the offense  – the previous
offense is obliterated and the action is dismissed.

 
Art. 23. Effect of pardon by the offended party. — A pardon of the offended
party does not extinguish criminal action except as provided in Article 344 of
this Code; but civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured
party is extinguished by his express waiver.
5. Even if injured party already pardoned the offender – fiscal can still
prosecute. Not even considered a ground for dismissal of the information.
Exception: Art 344 – crimes of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of
lasciviousness – pardon must be expressed.

6. Basis: crime is an offense against the State. Aggrieved party only a

witness.

7. Only Chief Executive can pardon the offenders

8. Can’t compromise criminal liability, only civil liability – but it still

shall not extinguish the public action for the imposition of the legal
penalty.

9. Offended party in the crimes of adultery and concubinage can’t institute

criminal prosecution if he shall have consented or pardoned the
offenders.

10. Pardon in adultery and concubinage may be implied – continued inaction

after learning of the offense. Must pardon both offenders.

11. The pardon afforded the offenders must come BEFORE the institution of
the criminal proceedings. Complaint for any of the above-mentioned crimes
in Art 344 will still be prosecuted by the court on the ground that the
pardon (basis for the motion to dismiss) was given after the filing of
the complaint.

12. The only act that extinguishes the penal action, after the institution
of criminal action, is the marriage between the offender and the offended
party

13. Pardon under Art 344 is only a bar to criminal prosecution. It DOES NOT
extinguish criminal liability. It is not one of the causes that totally
extinguish criminal liability in Art 89.

14. Civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured party is
extinguished by his express waiver because personal injury may be
repaired through indemnity anyway. State has no reason to insist on its
payment.

15. Waiver must be express.

 
Art. 24. Measures of prevention or safety which are nor considered penalties.
— The following shall not be considered as penalties:
1. The arrest and temporary detention of accused persons, as well as their
detention by reason of insanity or imbecility, or illness requiring their
confinement in a hospital.
2. The commitment of a minor to any of the institutions mentioned in Article
80 and for the purposes specified therein.
3. Suspension from the employment of public office during the trial or in
order to institute proceedings.
4. Fines and other corrective measures which, in the exercise of their
administrative disciplinary powers, superior officials may impose upon their
subordinates.
5. Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the civil laws may
establish in penal form.
 Par 1 refers to the “accused persons” who are detained “by reason of
insanity or imbecility” not an insane or imbecile who has not been
arrested for a crime.

 They are not considered penalties because they are not imposed as a
result of judicial proceedings. Those in par 1, 3 and 4 are merely
preventive measures before the conviction of offenders.

 Commitment of a minor is not a penalty because it is not imposed by the

court in a judgment. The imposition of the sentence in such a case is
suspended.

 Fines in par 4 are not imposed by the court because otherwise, they
constitute a penalty

 
Art. 25. Penalties which may be imposed. — The penalties which may be imposed
according to this Code, and their different classes, are those included in the
following:
Scale
PRINCIPAL PENALTIES
Capital punishment:
                Death.
Afflictive penalties:
                Reclusion perpetua,
                Reclusion temporal,
                Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,
                Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,
                Prision mayor.
Correctional penalties:
                Prision correccional,
                Arresto mayor,
                Suspension,
                Destierro.
Light penalties:
                Arresto menor,
                Public censure.
Penalties common to the three preceding classes:
                Fine, and
                Bond to keep the peace.
ACCESSORY PENALTIES
Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification,
Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,
Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for the
profession or calling.
Civil interdiction,
Indemnification,
Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and proceeds of the offense,
Payment of costs.
5. Classification of penalties:

a      Principal  – art 25

b      Accessory – deemed included in the imposition of the principal

penalties

5. According to divisibility (principal)

a      divisible – those that have fixed duration and are divisible into 3
periods

b      indivisible – no fixed duration (death, RP, perpetual or absolute

disqualification)

 According  to subject matter

a      corporal – death

b      deprivation of freedom – reclusion, prision, arresto

c      restriction of freedom – destierro

d      deprivation of rights – disqualification and suspension

e      pecuniary – fine

5. According to gravity
a      capital

b      afflictive

c      correccional

d      light

 Public censure is a penalty, and being such, is not proper in acquittal.

But a competent court, while acquitting an accused may, with
unquestionable propriety express its disapproval or reprehension of those
acts to avoid the impression that by acquitting the accused it approves
or admires his conduct.

 Permanent and temporary absolute and permanent and temporary special

disqualification and suspension may be principal or accessory penalties
because they are found in 2 general classes.

Art. 26. When afflictive, correctional, or light penalty. — A fine, whether

imposed as a single of as an alternative penalty, shall be considered an
afflictive penalty, if it exceeds 6,000 pesos; a correctional penalty, if it
does not exceed 6,000 pesos but is not less than 200 pesos; and a light
penalty if it less than 200 pesos.
 Fines are imposed either as alternative (Art 144 punishing disturbance
of proceedings with arresto mayor or fine from 200 pesos to 1000 pesos)
or single (fine of 200 to 6000 pesos)

 Penalty cannot be imposed in the alternative since it’s the duty of the
court to indicate the penalty imposed definitely and positively. Thus,
the court cannot sentence the guilty person in a manner as such as “to
pay fine of 1000 pesos, or to suffer an imprisonment of 2 years, and to
pay the costs.”

 If the fine imposed by the law for the felony is exactly 200 pesos, it
is a light felony.

 Fines:

a      Afflictive – over 6000

b      Correctional – 201 to 6000

c      Light – 200 and less

 3. Note: The classification applies if the fine is imposed as a single or
alternative penalty. Hence, it does not apply if the fine imposed
together with another penalty.

4. Bond to keep the peace is by analogy:

a      Afflictive – over 6000

b      Correctional – 201 to 6000

c      Light – 200 and less

Distinction between classification of 

Penalties in Art. 9 and Art. 26

Article 9 Article 26

Applicable in
Applicable in determining the
determining the prescriptive
prescriptive period of
period of felonies penalties

DURATION AND EFFECT 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, 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.
7. 3 fold rule: the maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be
more than 3 times the length of time corresponding to the most severe of
the penalties imposed upon him.

8. the maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall in no case exceed

40 years

9. Temporary disqualification and suspension, when imposed as accessory

penalties, have different durations – they follow the duration of the
principal penalty

10. Destierro is imposed in the following circumstances:

a      serious physical injuries or death under exceptional circumstances

(spouse finding other spouse in pari delicto)

b      failure to give bond for good behavior ( a person making threat may be
required to give bond not to molest the person threatened, if not destierro)

c      penalty for the concubine

d      in cases where the reduction of the penalty by one or more degrees
results in destierro

8. Bond to keep the peace is not specifically provided as a penalty for any
felony and therefore cannot be imposed by the court. It is required in
Art 284 and not to be given in cases involving other crimes.

7. Summary:

a      Perpetual penalties – after 30 years, can be pardoned, except when he

is unworthy of pardon by reason of his conduct and some other serious cause,
it won’t exceed 40 years.

b      Reclusion Temporal – 12 yrs and 1 day to 20 yrs

c      Prision Mayor and temporary disqualification – 6 yrs and 1 day to 12

yrs; disqualification if accessory follows the duration of the principal
penalty

d      Prision Correccional, suspension and destierro – 6 mos and 1 day to 12

yrs; disqualification if accessory follows the duration of the principal
penalty
e      Arresto Mayor – 1 month and 1 day to 6 months

f       Arresto Menor – 1 day to 30 days

g      Bond to keep the peace – the period during which the bond shall be
effective is discretionary to the court

Capital and Afflictive Penalties

Reclusion Reclusion Prison

Death Perpetua Temporal Mayor

Term
of
Impris 20 days and 12 years 6 years and
on- 1 day to 40 and 1 day 1 day to 12
ment None years to 20 years years

-Temporary
absolute
disqualific
None, ation
unless -Perpetual
pardoned: special
-Civil -Civil
-Perpetual disqualific
Interdictio Interdictio
absolute ation from
n or during n or during
disqualific the right
his his
ation of suffrage
sentence sentence
which the
Access -Civil -Perpetual -Perpetual offender
ory interdictio absolute absolute suffers
Penalt n for 30 disqualific disqualific although
ies years ation ation pardoned

Correctional and Light Penalties

Prison Arresto Arresto

Correctional Mayor Menor

Impris 6 months and 1 month 1 day

on- 1 day to 6 and 1 to 30
 day to
6
ment years months days

- -
Suspens Suspens
ion of ion of
right right
-Suspension to hold to hold
from public office office
office - -
-Suspension Suspens Suspens
from the ion of ion of
right to the the
follow a right right
profession of of
or calling suffrag suffrag
e e
-Perpetual during during
special the the
Access disqualifica term of term of
ory tion on the the the
Penalt right of sentenc sentenc
ies suffrage e e

Art. 28. Computation of penalties. — If the offender shall be in prison, the

term of the duration of the temporary penalties shall be computed from the day
on which the judgment of conviction shall have become final.
If the offender be not in prison, the term of the duration of the penalty
consisting of deprivation of liberty shall be computed from the day that the
offender is placed at the disposal of the judicial authorities for the
enforcement of the penalty. The duration of the other penalties shall be
computed only from the day on which the defendant commences to serve his
sentence.
 Director of Prisons/warden to compute based on Art 28:

a      When the offender is in prison – the duration of the temporary

penalties (PAD, TAD, detention, suspension) is from the day on which the
judgment of conviction becomes final.
b      When the offender is not in prison – the duration of the penalty in
deprivation of liberty is from the day that the offender is placed at the
disposal of judicial authorities for the enforcement of the penalty

c      The duration of the other penalties – the duration is from the day on
which the offender commences to serve his sentence

7. Reason for rule (a) – because under Art 24, the arrest and temporary
detention of the accused is not considered a penalty

8. if in custody, the accused appealed, the service of the sentence should

commence from the date of the promulgation of the decision of the
appellate court, not from the date of the judgment of the trial court was
promulgated.

9. service of one in prison begins only on the day the judgment of

conviction becomes final.

10. In cases if temporary penalties, if the offender is under detention, as

when undergoing preventive imprisonment, rule (a) applies.

11. If not under detention (released on bail) rule (c) applies

12. Offender under preventive imprisonment, rule (c) applies not rule (a)

13. The offender is entitled to a deduction of full-time or 4/5 of the time

of his detention.

Art. 29. Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term of imprisonment.

— Offenders who have undergone preventive 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, except in the following
cases:
1. When they are recidivists or have been convicted previously twice or more
times of any crime; and
2. When upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence they have
failed to surrender voluntarily.
If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary
rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, he shall be credited in the service of
his sentence with four-fifths of the time during which he has undergone
preventive imprisonment. (As amended by Republic Act 6127, June 17, 1970).  cd
i
Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisonment for a period equal
to or more than the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to
which he may be sentenced and his case is not yet terminated, he shall be
released immediately without prejudice to the continuation of the trial
thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if the same is under review. In case the
maximum penalty to which the accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall
be released after thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment. (As amended by
E.O. No. 214, July 10, 1988).
 Accused undergoes preventive suspension if:

a      offense is non-bailable

b      bailable but can’t furnish bail

3. the full time or 4/5 of the time during which the offenders have
undergone preventive suspension shall be deducted from the penalty
imposed

4. preventive imprisonment must also be considered in perpetual penalties.

Article does not make any distinction between temporal and perpetual
penalties.

5. duration of RP is to be computed at 30 years, thus, even if the accused

is sentenced to life imprisonment, he is entitled to the full time or 4/5
of the time of preventive suspension

6. Credit is given in the service of sentences “consisting of deprivation

of liberty” (imprisonment and destierro). Thus, persons who had undergone
preventive imprisonment but the offense is punishable by a fine only
would not be given credit.

4. Destierro is considered a “deprivation of liberty”

5. If the penalty imposed is arresto menor to destierro, the accused who

has been in prison for 30 days (arresto menor to 30 days) should be
released because although the maximum penalty is destierro (6 mos 1 day
to 6 yrs), the accused sentenced to such penalty does not serve it in
prison.

6. Habitual Delinquents not entitled to the full time or 4/5 credit of time
under preventive imprisonment since he is necessarily a recidivist or has
been convicted previously twice or more times of any crime.

7. Example: X who was arrested for serious physical injuries, detained for
1 year and went out on bail but was later on found guilty. He was
consequently summoned for the execution of the sentence, but having
failed to appear, X will not be credited in the service of his sentence
for serious physical injuries w/ one year or 4/5 of one year preventive
imprisonment.
Art. 30. Effects of the penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute
disqualification. — The penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute
disqualification for public office shall produce the following effects:
1. The deprivation of the public offices and employments which the offender
may have held even if conferred by popular election.
2.The deprivation of the right to vote in any election for any popular office
or to be elected to such office.
3. The disqualification for the offices or public employments and for the
exercise of any of the rights mentioned.
In case of temporary disqualification, such disqualification as is comprised
in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this article shall last during the term of the
sentence.
4. The loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension for any office
formerly held.
6. The exclusion is a mere disqualification for protection and not for
punishment – the withholding of a privilege, not a denial of a right.

7. Perpetual absolute disqualification is effective during the lifetime of

the convict and even after the service of the sentence.

8. Temporary absolute disqualification is effective during the term of

sentence and is removed after the service of the same. Exception: (1)
deprivation of the public office or employment; (2) loss of all rights to
retirement pay or other pension for any office formerly held.

9. Effects of Perpetual and temporary absolute disqualification:

a      Deprivation of any public office or employment of offender

b      Deprivation of the right to vote in any election or to be voted upon

c      Loss of rights to retirement pay or pension

d      All these effects last during the lifetime of the convict and even
after the service of the sentence except as regards paragraphs 2 and 3 of the
above in connection with Temporary Absolute Disqualification.

LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 31-40

Art. 31. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special
disqualification. — The penalties of perpetual or temporal special
disqualification for public office, profession or calling shall produce the
following effects:
1. The deprivation of the office, employment, profession or calling affected;
2. The disqualification for holding similar offices or employments either
perpetually or during the term of the sentence according to the extent of such
disqualification.

Art. 32. Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special

disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage. — The perpetual or
temporary special disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage
shall deprive the offender perpetually or during the term of the sentence,
according to the nature of said penalty, of the right to vote in any popular
election for any public office or to be elected to such office. Moreover, the
offender shall not be permitted to hold any public office during the period of
his disqualification.
6. Temporary disqualification if imposed is an accessory penalty, its
duration is that of the principal penalty

7. Effects of Perpetual and Temporary Special Disqualification

a.  For public office, profession, or calling

20. Deprivation of the office, employment, profession or calling affected

21. Disqualification for holding similar offices or employment during the

period of disqualification

b. For the exercise of the right of suffrage

22. Deprivation of the right to vote or to be elected in an office.

23. Cannot hold any public office during the period of disqualification.

 
Art. 33. Effects of the penalties of suspension from any public office,
profession or calling, or the right of suffrage. — The suspension from public
office, profession or calling, and the exercise of the right of suffrage shall
disqualify the offender from holding such office or exercising such profession
or calling or right of suffrage during the term of the sentence.
The person suspended from holding public office shall not hold another having
similar functions during the period of his suspension.
6. Effects:
a      Disqualification from holding such office or the exercise of such
profession or right of suffrage during the term of the sentence.

b      Cannot hold another office having similar functions during the period
of suspension.

Art. 34. Civil interdiction. — Civil interdiction shall deprive the offender
during the time of his sentence of the rights of parental authority, or
guardianship, either as to the person or property of any ward, of marital
authority, of the right to manage his property and of the right to dispose of
such property by any act or any conveyance inter vivos.
16. Effects:

a.  Deprivation of the following rights:

 Parental rights

 Guardianship over the ward

 Martial authority

 Right to manage property and to dispose of the same by acts inter vivos

b. Civil Interdiction is an accessory penalty to the following principal

penalties

6. If death penalty is commuted to life imprisonment

7. Reclusion perpetua

8. Reclusion temporal

6. He can dispose of such property by will or donation mortis causa

Art. 35. Effects of bond to keep the peace. — It shall be the duty of any
person sentenced to give bond to keep the peace, to present two sufficient
sureties who shall undertake that such person will not commit the offense
sought to be prevented, and that in case such offense be committed they will
pay the amount determined by the court in the judgment, or otherwise to
deposit such amount in the office of the clerk of the court to guarantee said
undertaking.
The court shall determine, according to its discretion, the period of duration
of the bond.
Should the person sentenced fail to give the bond as required he shall be
detained for a period which shall in no case exceed six months, is he shall
have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed
thirty days, if for a light felony.
 Bond to keep the peace is different from bail bond which is posted for
the provisional release of a person arrested for or accused of a crime.
Bond to keep the peace or for good behavior is imposed as a penalty in
threats.

Art. 36. Pardon; its effect. — A pardon shall not work the restoration of the
right to hold public office, or the right of suffrage, unless such rights be
expressly restored by the terms of the pardon.
A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil
indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence.
6. Pardon by the President does not restore the right to public office or
suffrage except when both are expressly restored in the pardon. Nor does
it exempt from civil liability/from payment of civil indemnity.

7. Limitations to President’s power to pardon:

a      can be exercised only after final judgment

b      does not extend to cases of impeachment

c      does not extinguish civil liability – only criminal liability

 Pardon granted in general terms does not include accessory penalties.

 Exceptions:

 Pardon by the offended party – does not extinguish criminal liability,

may include offended party waiving civil indemnity and it is done before
the institution of the criminal prosecution and extended to both
offenders.

 if the absolute pardon us granted after the term of imprisonment has

expire, it removes all that is left of the consequences of conviction.
However, if the penalty is life imprisonment and after the service of 30
years, a pardon is granted, the pardon does not remove the accessory
penalty of absolute perpetual disqualification

 if the facts and circumstances of the case show that the purpose of the
President is to precisely restore the rights i.e., granting absolute
pardon after election to a post (mayor) but before the date fixed by law
 for assuming office to enable him to assume the position in deference to
the popular will

Art. 37. Cost. — What are included. — Costs shall include fees and indemnities
in the course of the judicial proceedings, whether they be fixed or
unalterable amounts previously determined by law or regulations in force, or
amounts not subject to schedule.
 Costs include:
 Costs (expenses of the litigation) are chargeable to the accused in vase
of conviction.
 In case of acquittal, the costs are de oficio, each party bearing is own
expense
 No costs allowed against the Republic of the Philippines until law
provides the contrary
1. fees
2. indemnities in the course of judicial proceedings

Art. 38. Pecuniary liabilities. — Order of payment. — In case the property of

the offender should not be sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary
liabilities, the same shall be met in the following order:
1.            The reparation of the damage caused.
2.            Indemnification of consequential damages.
3.            The fine.
4.            The cost of the proceedings.
9. Applicable “in case property of the offender should not be sufficient
for the payment of all his pecuniary liabilities.” Hence, if the offender
has insufficient or no property, there is no use for Art 38.

10. Order of payment is mandatory

11. Example:  Juan inflicted serious physical injuries against Pedro and
took the latter’s watch and ring. He incurred 500 worth of hospital bills
and failed to earn 300 worth of salary. Given that Juan only has 1000
pesos worth of property not exempt from execution, it shall be first
applied to the payment of the watch and ring which cannot be returned as
such is covered by “reparation of the damage caused” thus, no. 1 in the
order of payment. The 500 and 300 are covered by “indemnification of the
consequential damage” thus, no. 2 in the order of payment.

 
Art. 39. Subsidiary penalty. — If the convict has no property with which to
meet the fine mentioned in the paragraph 3 of the nest preceding article, he
shall be subject to a subsidiary personal liability at the rate of one day for
each eight pesos, subject to the following rules:
1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional or arresto and
fine, he shall remain under confinement until his fine referred to in the
preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his subsidiary imprisonment shall not
exceed one-third of the term of the sentence, and in no case shall it continue
for more than one year, and no fraction or part of a day shall be counted
against the prisoner.
2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the subsidiary
imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if the culprit shall have been
prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not exceed fifteen
days, if for a light felony.
3. When the principal imposed is higher than prision correccional, no
subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed upon the culprit.
4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by confinement in a
penal institution, but such penalty is of fixed duration, the convict, during
the period of time established in the preceding rules, shall continue to
suffer the same deprivations as those of which the principal penalty consists.
5. The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may have suffered by
reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him, from the fine in case his
financial circumstances should improve. (As amended by RA 5465, April 21,
1969.)
8. There is no subsidiary penalty for non-payment of reparation,
indemnification and costs in par 1, 2 and 4 of Art 38. It is only for
fines.

9. Art 39 applies only when the convict has no property with which to meet
the fine in par 3 of art 38. Thus, a convict who has property enough to
meet the fine and not exempted from execution cannot choose to serve the
subsidiary penalty instead of the payment of the fine.

10. Subsidiary imprisonment is not an accessory penalty. It is covered by

Art 40-45 of this Code. Accessory penalties are deemed imposed even when
not mentioned while subsidiary imprisonment must be expressly imposed.

 Rules:

LENGTH OF
PENALTY IMPOSED SUBSIDIARY PENALTY

Prision Not exceed 1/3 of

 term of sentence,
in no case more
than 1 year
correccional or fraction or part of
arresto and fine a day not counted.

Not to exceed 6
months if
prosecuted for
grave or less grave
felony, not to
exceed 15 days if
prosecuted for
Fine only light felony

Higher than
prision No subsidiary
correccional imprisonment

Same deprivations
Not to be as those of the
executed by principal penalty
confinement but under rules 1, 2
of fixed duration and 3 above

14. If financial circumstances improve, convict still to pay the fine even
if he has suffered subsidiary personal liability.

15. the penalty imposed must be PC, AM, Am, suspension, destierro and fine
only. – other than these (PM, RT, RP) court cannot impose subsidiary
penalty.

16. Even if the penalty imposed is not higher than PC, if the accused is a
habitual delinquent who deserves an additional penalty of 12 yrs and 1
day of RT, there is no subsidiary imprisonment.

Art. 40. Death — Its accessory penalties. — The death penalty, when it is not
executed by reason of commutation or pardon shall carry with it that of
perpetual absolute disqualification and that of civil interdiction during
thirty years following the date sentence, unless such accessory penalties have
been expressly remitted in the pardon.

LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 41-50

Art. 41. Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal. — Their accessory
penalties. — The penalties of reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal shall
carry with them that of civil interdiction for life or during the period of
the sentence as the case may be, and that of perpetual absolute
disqualification which the offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to
the principal penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in
the pardon.
 
Art. 42. Prision mayor — Its accessory penalties. — The penalty of prision
mayor, shall carry with it that of temporary absolute disqualification and
that of perpetual special disqualification from the right of suffrage which
the offender shall suffer although pardoned as to the principal penalty,
unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon.
 
Art. 43. Prision correccional — Its accessory penalties. — The penalty of 
prision correccional shall carry with it that of suspension from public
office, from the right to follow a profession or calling, and that of
perpetual special disqualification from the right of suffrage, if the duration
of said imprisonment shall exceed eighteen months. The offender shall suffer
the disqualification provided in the article although pardoned as to the
principal penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly remitted in the
pardon.

Art. 44. Arresto — Its accessory penalties. — The penalty of arresto shall
carry with it that of suspension of the right too hold office and the right of
suffrage during the term of the sentence.
 Outline of accessory penalties inherent in principal penalties
1. death – if not executed because of commutation or pardon
1. perpetual absolute disqualification
2. civil interdiction during 30 years (if not expressly remitted in the
pardon)
3. civil interdiction for life or during the sentence
4. perpetual absolute disqualification (unless expressly remitted in the
pardon)
5. temporary absolute disqualification
 6. perpetual absolute disqualification from suffrage (unless expressly
remitted in the pardon)
7. suspension from public office, profession or calling
8. perpetual special disqualification from suffrage if the duration of the
imprisonment exceeds 18 months (unless expressly remitted in the pardon)
2. RP and RT
3. PM
4. PC
 The accessory penalties in Art 40-44 must be suffered by the offender,
although pardoned as to the principal penalties. To be relieved of these
penalties, they must be expressly remitted in the pardon.
 No accessory penalty for destierro
 Persons who served out the penalty may not have the right to exercise
the right of suffrage. For a prisoner who has been sentenced to one year
of imprisonment or more for any crime, absolute pardon restores to him
his political rights. If the penalty is less than one year,
disqualification does not attach except if the crime done was against
property.
 The nature of the crime is immaterial when the penalty imposed is one
year imprisonment or more.
 The accessory penalties are understood to be always imposed upon the
offender by the mere fact that the law fixes a certain penalty for the
crime. Whenever the courts impose a penalty which by provision of law,
carries with it other penalties, it’s understood that the accessory
penalties are also imposed.
 the accessory penalties do not affect the jurisdiction of the court in
which the information is filed because they don’t modify or alter the
nature of the penalty provided by law. What determines jurisdiction in
criminal cases is the extent of the principal penalty w/c the law imposes
of the crime charged.
 the MTC has exclusive jurisdiction over offenses punishable with
imprisonment of not exceeding 4 years and 2 months or a fine of not more
than 4000 or both regardless of other imposable accessory or other
penalties.

Art. 45. Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or instruments of the

crime. — Every penalty imposed for the commission of a felony shall carry with
it the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the instruments or tools
with which it was committed.
Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and forfeited in
favor of the Government, unless they be property of a third person not liable
for the offense, but those articles which are not subject of lawful commerce
shall be destroyed.
  every penalty imposed carries with it the forfeiture of the proceeds of
the crime and the instruments or tools used in the commission of the
crime
 proceeds and instruments/tools of the crime are confiscated in favor of
the government
 3rd persons’ (not liable for the offense) property is not subject to
confiscation and forfeiture
 property not subject of lawful commerce (whether it belongs to accused
or 3rd person) shall be destroyed.
 can’t confiscate/forfeit unless there’s a criminal case filed and 
tried, and accused is acquitted.
 must indict 3rd person to order confiscation of his property
 instruments of the crime belonging to innocent 3rdperson may be
recovered
 confiscation can be ordered only if the property is submitted in
evidence or placed at the disposal of the court
 articles which are forfeited – when the order of forfeiture is already
final, can’t be returned even in case of an acquittal
 confiscation and acquittal are additional penalties. Where the penalty
imposed did not include the confiscation of the goods involved, the
confiscation & forfeiture of said goods would be an additional penalty
and would amount to an increase of the penalty already imposed, thereby
placing the accused in double jeopardy.
 when the accused has appealed, confiscation and forfeiture not ordered
by the trial court may be imposed by the appellate court
 the government can’t appeal the modification of a sentence if the
defendant did not appeal. But if the defendant appeals, it removes all
bars to the review and correction of the penalty imposed by the court
below, even if an increase thereof should be the result.
 

Art. 46. Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general. — The penalty

prescribed by law for the commission of a felony shall be imposed upon the
principals in the commission of such felony.
Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony is general terms, it shall
be understood as applicable to the consummated felony.
 The penalty prescribed by law in general terms shall be imposed:
a      upon the principals

b      for consummated felony

 Exception: when the law fixes a penalty for the frustrated or attempted
felony. Whenever it is believed that the penalty lower by one or two
 degrees corresponding to said acts of execution is not proportionate to
the wrong done, the law fixes a distinct penalty for the principal in the
frustrated or attempted felony.
 The graduation of penalties refers to:
a      stages of execution (consummated, frustrated, attempted)

b      degree of the criminal participation of the offender (principal,

accomplice, accessory)

 the division of a divisible penalty (min, med, max) refers to the proper
period of the penalty which should be imposed when aggravating or
mitigating circumstances attend the commission of the crime.
 

Art. 47. In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed. — The death
penalty shall be imposed in all cases in which it must be imposed under
existing laws, except in the following cases:
1.            When the guilty person be more than seventy years of age.
2.            When upon appeal or revision of the case by the Supreme court,
all the members thereof are not unanimous in their voting as to the propriety
of the imposition of the death penalty. For the imposition of said penalty or
for the confirmation of a judgment of the inferior court imposing the death
sentence, the Supreme Court shall render its decision per curiam, which shall
be signed by all justices of said court, unless some member or members thereof
shall have been disqualified from taking part in the consideration of the
case, in which even the unanimous vote and signature of only the remaining
justices shall be required.
 whenever the judgment of the lower court imposes the death penalty, the
case shall be determined by 10 justices of the court. When 10 justices
fail to reach a decision (as to the propriety of the imposition of  the
death penalty), the penalty next lower in degree than the death penalty
shall be imposed.
 Death penalty not imposed in the ff cases:
a)      when the person is more than 70 years old at time RTC sentenced him

b)      when upon appeal or revision of the case by the SC, 10 justices are
not unanimous in their voting

c)       when the offender is a minor under 18 yrs of age. Why? Because
minority is always a mitigating circumstance

 Justification for the death penalty: social defense and exemplarity. Not
considered cruel and unusual because does not involve torture or
lingering death.
  Crimes where death penalty is imposed:
a)      treason

b)      certain acts of espionage under Commonwealth Act 616

c)       correspondence w/ hostile country when it contains notice or

information and the intention of the offender is to aid the enemy

d)      qualified piracy

e)      certain violations of the Anti-subversion act

f)       parricide

g)      murder

h)      kidnapping and serious illegal detention

i)        robbery w/ homicide

j)        rape w/ homicide

k)      when death resulted from the commission of arson or other crime
involving destruction

 trial court must require the prosecution to present evidence, despite

plea of guilty, when the crime charged is punished by death. A sentence
of death is valid only if it is susceptible of a fair and reasonable
examination by the court. This is impossible if no evidence of guilt was
taken after a plea of guilty.
 
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.
 The 2 or more grave or less grave felonies must be the result of a
single act, or an offense must be a  necessary means to commit the crime.
 Complex crime – one crime only as there is only one criminal intent –
only one information need be filed.
 2 kinds of complex crimes:
a)      compound crime – single act constitutes 2 or more grave or less grave
felonies
Requisites:
1)      that only one single act is committed by the offender
2)      that the single act produces

a)      2 or more grave felonies

b)      one or more grave and one or more less grave felonies

c)       2 or more less grave felonies

b)      complex crime proper – when an offense is a necessary means for

committing another
Requisites:
1)      that at least 2 offenses are committed

2)      that one or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit the other

3)      that both or all the offenses must be punished under the same statute

 No single act in the following cases:

a)      When 2 persons are killed one after the other, by different acts,
although these 2 killings were the result of a single criminal impulse, the
different acts must be considered as distinct crimes.

b)      When the acts are wholly different, not only in themselves, but also
because they are directed against 2 different persons, as when one fires his
gun twice in succession, killing one and injuring the other.

 Light felonies produced by the same act should be treated and punished
as separate offenses or may be absorbed by the grave felony.
Examples:

a) several light felonies resulting from one single act – not complex

Juan hit Pedro’s car, resulting in several light injuries and light felony of
damage to property. No complex crime because the crime of slight physical
injuries and damage to property are light felonies. There are as many crimes
as there are persons injured w/ light physical injuries and as many penalties
as there are light felonies committed, even though they are produced by a
single act of the offender.

b) when the crime is committed by force or violence, slight physical injuries

are absorbed.

 Examples of complex crimes:

a)      Juan was a barangay captain who was killed while discharging his duty,
the crime is a complex crime of homicide w/ assault upon a person of
authority.

b)      Juan raped Petra, causing her physical injuries w/c required a month’s
worth of medical attention. This is a complex crime of rape w/ less serious
physical injuries. The injuries were necessary to the commission of the rape.

 when in obedience to an order, several accused simultaneously shot many

persons, without evidence how many each killed, there is only a single
offense, there being a single criminal impulse.
 when various acts are executed for the attainment of a single purpose
w/c constitutes an offense, such acts must be considered only as one
offense.
Example: Juan falsified 100 warehouse receipts from April to June which
enabled him to swindle the bank of 100 million. There’s only one complex crime
of estafa through multiple falsification of documents.

 There is no complex crime of arson w/ homicide

 Art 48 is applicable to crimes through negligence
Example: Juan lit a cigarette as he poured gas in the tank of his car in his
garage. The gas caught fire and the house burned. His sister died and the maid
suffered serious physical injuries. The crimes of arson, homicide, serious
physical injuries and damage to property constitute a complex crime. There is
only one penalty but there are 3 civil liabilities.

 No complex crime when one of the offenses is penalized by a special law

 Example of complex crime proper (at least 2 crimes must be committed):
Kidnapping the victim to murder him in a secluded place – ransom wasn’t paid
so victim was killed. Kidnapping was a necessary means to commit murder. But
where the victim was taken from his home for the sole purpose of killing him
and not for detaining him illegally or for the purpose of ransom, the crime is
simple murder.

 “Necessary means” does not mean “indispensable means”. Indispensable

would mean it is an element of the crime. The crime can be committed by
another mean. The means actually employed (another crime) was merely to
facilitate and insure the consummation of the crime.
 When in the definition of a felony, one offense is a means to commit the
other, there is no complex crime.
Ex. Murder committed by means of fire. Murder can be qualified by the
circumstance of fire so no complex crime even if Art 321 and 324 punishes
arson. It’s plain and simple murder.
  Not complex crime when trespass to dwelling is a direct means to commit
a grave offense. Like rape, there is no complex crime of trespass to
dwelling with rape. Trespass will be considered as aggravating (unlawful
entry or breaking part of a dwelling)
 No complex crime when one offense is committed to conceal another
Example: Juan set the school on fire after committing homicide. 2 crimes.

 When the offender had in his possession the funds w/c he

misappropriated, the falsification of a public or official document
involving said funds is a separate offense. But when the offender had to
falsify a public or official document to obtain possession of the funds
w/c he misappropriated, the falsification is a necessary means to commit
the malversation.
 There is no complex crime of rebellion with murder, arson, robbery or
other common crimes. They are mere ingredients of the crime of rebellion
– absorbed already.
 When 2 crimes produced by a single act are respectively within the
exclusive jurisdiction of 2 courts of different jurisdiction, the court
of higher jurisdiction shall try the complex crime.
Example: Although the forcible abduction which was supposedly commenced in
Manila was not proven, and although the rape which was proven was actually
committed in Cavite, still the RTC of Manila had jurisdiction to convict the
accused of rape. The complex crime of forcible abduction with rape was charged
in the complaint on the basis of which the case was tried.

 Art. 48 is intended to favor the culprit.

 The penalty for complex crime is the penalty for the most serious crime,
the same to be applied in its maximum period. If the different crimes
resulting from one single act are punished with the same penalty, the
penalty for any one of them shall be imposed, the same to be applied in
the maximum period. The same rule shall be observed when an offense is a
necessary means to commit the other.
 A complex crime of the second form may be committed by two persons.
 But when one of the offenses, as a means to commit the other, was
committed by one of the accused by reckless imprudence, the accused who
committed the crime by reckless imprudence is liable for his acts only.
Example: Juan cooperated in the commission of the complex offense of estafa
through falsification by reckless imprudence by acts without which it could
not have been accomplished, and this being a fact, there would be no reason to
exculpate him from liability. Even assuming he had no intention to defraud
Tomas if his co-defendants succeeded in attaining the purpose sought by the
culprits, Juan’s participation together w/ the participation of his co-
defendants in the commission of the offense completed all the elements
necessary for the perpetration of the complex crime of estafa through 
falsification of documents.

 When two felonies constituting a complex crime are punishable by

imprisonment and fine, respectively, only the penalty of imprisonment
shall be imposed.
 When a single act constitutes two grave or less grave or one grave and
another less grave, and the penalty for one is imprisonment while that
for the other is fine, the severity of the penalty for the more serious
crime should not be judged by the classification of each of the penalties
involved, but by the nature of the penalties.
Example: Even if the fine for damage to property through reckless imprudence
is P40,000, an afflictive penalty, and the penalty for the physical injuries
resulting from the same act is only 4 mos of arresto mayor, a correccional
penalty may be imposed.

 In the order of severity of the penalties, arresto mayor and arresto

menor are considered more severe than destierro and arresto menor is
higher in degree than destierro.
 Fine is not included in the list of penalties in the order of severity
and it is the last in the order.
 Art 48 applies only to cases where the Code doesn’t provide a specific
penalty for a complex crime.
 Art 48 doesn’t apply when the law provides one single penalty for single
complex crimes like the ff:
a)      robbery w/ homicide

b)      robbery w/ rape

c)       kidnapping w/ serious physical injuries

d)      rape w/ homicide

 When a complex crime is charged and one offense is not proven, the
accused can be convicted of the other.
 Plurality of crimes – consists in the successive execution by the same
individual of different criminal acts upon any of w/c no conviction has
yet been declared.
 Kinds of plurality of crimes:
a)      formal or ideal – only one criminal liability

b)      real or material – there are different crimes in law as well as in the
conscience of the offender, in such cases, the offender shall be punished for
each and every offense that he committed.
Example: Juan stabbed Pedro, then Juan stabbed Tomas too. There are 2
committed as 2 acts were performed.

PLURALITY OF
CRIMES RECIDIVISM

There must be
conviction by
No conviction of final judgment of
the crimes the first prior
committed offense

 Formal/ideal plural crimes are divided into 3 groups: (a person

committing multiple crimes is punished w/ one penalty in the ff cases)
a)      when the offender commits any of the complex crimes defined in art 48

b)      when the law specifically fixes a single penalty for 2 or more
offenses committed: robbery w/ homicide, kidnapping w/ serious physical
injuires

c)       when the offender commits continued crimes

 Continued crimes – refers to a single crime consisting of a series of

acts but all arising from one criminal resolution. Although there is a
series of acts, there is only one crime committed, so only one penalty
shall be imposed.
 Examples of continued crimes:
a)      a collector of a commercial firm misappropriates for his personal use
several amounts collected by him from different persons. There is only one
crime because the different and successive appropriations are but the
different moments during which one criminal resolution arises.

b)      Juan stole 2 books belonging to 2 different persons. He commits only

one crime because there is unity of thought in the criminal purpose of the
offender.

 A continued crime is not a complex crime as offender does not perform a

single act but a series of acts. Therefore:
a)      penalty not to be imposed in the maximum

b)      no actual provision punishing a continued crime – it’s a principle

applied in connection w/ 2 or more crimes committed w/ a single intention.
  Continued crime is different from a transitory crime.  Transitory crime
is “moving crime”.
Example: kidnapping someone for ransom and moving him to another venue. The
offenders can be prosecuted and tried in either of the 2 areas.

REAL/MATERAIAL
PLURALITY CONTINUED CRIME

There is a series
of acts performed
by the offender Same

Different acts
Each act performed constitute only
constitutes a one crime because
separate crime all of the acts
because each act is performed arise
generated by a from one criminal
criminal impulse resolution.

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:
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.
 Art 49 has reference to the provision in the 1st par of Art 4 which
provides that criminal liability shall be incurred “by any person
 committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different from that
which he intended”
 Art 49 applicable only in cases when there is a mistake in identity of
the victim of the crime and the penalty for the crime committed is
different from that for the crime intended to be committed.
 Art 49 also has no application where a more serious consequence not
intended by the offender befalls the same person.
Example: Juan only wanted to inflict a wound upon Pedro but because he lost
control of his right arm, he killed Pedro. Art 49 not applicable.

ART 49 ART 48

Penalty for the

Lesser penalty to more serious crime
be imposed in its shall be imposed
maximum pd in its maximum pd

Notes:
1. Art. 49 has reference to Art. 4(1). It applies only when there is error
in personae.
2. In Art. 49 (Paragraphs 1 and 2) the lower penalty in its maximum period
is always imposed.
3. In Par. 3 the penalty for the attempted or frustrated crime shall be
imposed in its maximum period. This rule is not necessary and may well be
covered by Art. 48, in view of the fact that the same act also
constitutes an attempt or a frustration of another crime.
 

Art. 50. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of a frustrated

crime. — The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the
consummated felony shall be imposed upon the principal in a frustrated felony.

LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 51-60

Art. 51. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of attempted crimes. — A
penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated
felony shall be imposed upon the principals in an attempt to commit a felony.
 

Art. 52. Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in consummated

crime. — The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the
consummated shall be imposed upon the accomplices in the commission of a
consummated felony.

Art. 53. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories to the commission of a

consummated felony. — The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by
law for the consummated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the
commission of a consummated felony.
 
Art. 54. Penalty to imposed upon accomplices in a frustrated
crime. — The penalty next lower in degree than prescribed by law for the
frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in the commission of a
frustrated felony.
 
Art. 55. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of a frustrated
crime. — The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the commission of a
frustrated felony.

Art. 56. Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in an attempted

crime. — The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for an
attempt to commit a felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in an attempt
to commit the felony.
 
Art. 57. Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of an attempted
crime. — The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
attempted felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the attempt to
commit a felony.

Application of Article 50 to 57

Participat Consumma Frustra Attempt

ion ted ted ed

Principal Penalty 1° less 2° less

imposed
 by law

Accomplice 1° less 2° less 3° less

Accessory 2° less 3° less 4° less

 Notes:
Art 50-57 not applicable when the law specifically prescribes the penalty for
the frustrated and attempted felony or that to be imposed upon the accomplices
and accessories.

Degree – one whole penalty, one entire penalty or one unit of the penalties
enumerated in the graduated scales provided for in Art 71

Period – one of 3 equal portions, min/med/max of a divisible penalty. A period

of a divisible penalty when prescribed by the Code as a penalty for a felony,
is in itself a degree.

Distinctions between Degree and Period

Degree Period

Refers to the
Refers to the duration of the
penalty imposable penalty consisting
for a felony of the maximum,
committed medium, and
considering the minimum, after
stages of considering the
execution and the presence or
degree of absence of
participation of aggravating
the offender circumstances

May refer to both

divisible and
indivisible Refers only to
penalties divisible penalty.
  The rules provided in Arts. 53, 55 and 57 do not apply if the felony is
light because accessories are not liable for the same
 Bases for imposition of the penalty under the RPC
1. Stage of the commission of the crime
2. Participation of the persons liable
3. Presence of aggravating or mitigating circumstances
 
Art. 58. Additional penalty to be imposed upon certain
accessories. — Those accessories falling within the terms of paragraphs 3 of
Article 19 of this Code who should act with abuse of their public functions,
shall suffer the additional penalty of absolute perpetual disqualification if
the principal offender shall be guilty of a grave felony, and that of absolute
temporary disqualification if he shall be guilty of a less grave felony.
 Art is limited only to grave and less grave felonies since it is not
possible to have accessories liable for light felonies. It is further
limited to those whose participation in the crime is characterized by the
misuse of public office or authority.
Example:     a)  A mayor aided in friend, a wanted criminal, in escaping

b)  A senator gives protection to his jueteng lord friend

 Additional Penalties for Public Officers who are accessories

1. Absolute perpetual disqualification, if the principal offender is guilty
of a grave felony.
2. Absolute temporary disqualification if the principal offender is guilty
of less grave felony.
Art. 59. Penalty to be imposed in case of failure to commit the crime because
the means employed or the aims sought are impossible. — When the person
intending to commit an offense has already performed the acts for the
execution of the same but nevertheless the crime was not produced by reason of
the fact that the act intended was by its nature one of impossible
accomplishment or because the means employed by such person are essentially
inadequate to produce the result desired by him, the court, having in mind the
social danger and the degree of criminality shown by the offender, shall
impose upon him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine from 200 to 500 pesos.
 Basis for the imposition of proper penalty in impossible crimes: sopcial
danger and degree of criminality shown by the offender.
Example: Juan fired a revolver at Pedro at the distance of 2 kilometers. This
shoes stupidity rather than danger. Juan should not be punished as there is no
social danger nor degree of criminality.

But if Juan was a convicted felon, act may be punished.

 Article limited to those cases of grave and less grave felonies.

 

Art. 60. Exception to the rules established in Articles 50 to 57. — The

provisions contained in Articles 50 to 57, inclusive, of this Code shall not
be applicable to cases in which the law expressly prescribes the penalty
provided for a frustrated or attempted felony, or to be imposed upon
accomplices or accessories.
 2 cases wherein the accomplice is punished w/ the same penalty imposed
upon the principal
a)      ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers and any person who by abuse
of authority or confidential relationship shall cooperate as accomplices in
the crimes of rape, acts of lasciviousness, seduction, corruption of minors,
white slave trade or abduction.

b)      one who furnished the place for the perpetration of the crime of
slight illegal detention.

 Accessory punished as principal: Art 142 – punishes an accessory for

knowingly concealed certain evil practices.
 Cases when instead of a penalty 2 degrees lower, one degree for
accessory:
a)      knowingly using counterfeited seal or forged signature or stamp of the
President

b)      illegal possession and use of false treasury or bank note

c)       using a falsified document

d)      using a falsified dispatch

LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 61-70

Art. 61. Rules for graduating penalties. — For the purpose of graduating the
penalties which, according to the provisions of Articles 50 to 57, inclusive,
of this Code, are to be imposed upon persons guilty as principals of any
frustrated or attempted felony, or as accomplices or accessories, the
following rules shall be observed:
1.            When the penalty prescribed for the felony is single and
indivisible, the penalty next lower in degrees shall be that immediately
following that indivisible penalty in the respective graduated scale
prescribed in Article 71 of this Code.
2.            When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of two
indivisible penalties, or of one or more divisible penalties to be impose to
their full extent, the penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately
following the lesser of the penalties prescribed in the respective graduated
scale.
3.            When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of one or
two indivisible penalties and the maximum period of another divisible penalty,
the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the medium and minimum
periods of the proper divisible penalty and the maximum periods of the proper
divisible penalty and the maximum period of that immediately following in said
respective graduated scale.
4.            when the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of several
periods, corresponding to different divisible penalties, the penalty next
lower in degree shall be composed of the period immediately following the
minimum prescribed and of the two next following, which shall be taken from
the penalty prescribed, if possible; otherwise from the penalty immediately
following in the above mentioned respective graduated scale. 
5.            When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in some manner not
especially provided for in the four preceding rules, the courts, proceeding by
analogy, shall impose corresponding penalties upon those guilty as principals
of the frustrated felony, or of attempt to commit the same, and upon
accomplices and accessories.
 The rules provided in this Art should also apply in determining the
minimum of the Indeterminate Sentence Law (ISL). It also applies in
lowering the penalty by one or two degrees by reason of the presence of
the privileged mitigating circumstance or when the penalty is divisible
and there are two or more mitigating circumstances.
Graduated Scale in Art 71
 Indivisible Penalties:
a)      Death

b)      Reclusion Perpetua

 Divisible Penalties:
a)      Reclusion Temporal

b)      Prision Mayor

c)       Prision Correccional

d)      Arresto Mayor

e)      Destierro

f)       Arresto Menor

g)      Public Censure

h)      Fine

 Rule No. 1:
When the penalty is single and indivisible (ex. RP), the penalty next lower
shall be reclusion temporal.

 Rule No. 2:
a) when the penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties

Ex. penalty for parricide is reclusion perpetua to death, the next lower
penalty is reclusion temporal

b) when the penalty is composed of one or more divisible penalties to be

imposed to their full extent

Ex. one divisible penalty is reclusion temporal. The penalty immediately

following RT is prision mayor. 2 divisible penalties are prision correccional
to prision mayor. The penalty immediately preceding the lesser of the
penalties of prision correccional to prision mayor is arresto mayor.

 Rule No. 3:
When the penalty is composed of 2 indivisible penalties and the maximum period
of a divisible penalty/ or when composed of one divisible penalty the maximum
of one divisible penalty

Ex. penalty for murder is reclusion temporal to death. The point of reference
will be on the proper divisible penalty which is reclusion temporal. Under the
3rd rule, the penalty next lower to reclusion temporal is composed of the
medium and minimum periods of reclusion temporal and the maximum of prision
mayor.
 Rule No.4:
When the penalty is composed of several periods

Ex. the “several” periods contemplated in this rule correspond to different

divisible penalties. A penalty of prision mayor in its medium period to
reclusion temporal in its minimum period is an example of such. The penalty
immediately following the minimum of the entire sentence, which is prision
mayor medium, is prision mayor in its minimum and the 2 periods next
following, which are prision correccional max and medium.

 Rule No.5:
When the penalty has only 2 periods

Ex. Abduction punishable by prision correccional in its medium and minimum.

The next penalty following is formed by 2 periods to be taken from the same
penalty if possible or from the periods of the penalty numerically following
the lesser of the penalties prescribed. The penalty next following prision
correccional in its med and min shall be arresto mayor in its med and max.

 Mitigating and Aggravating circumstances are first disregarded in the

application of the rules for graduating penalties. It is only after the
penalty next lower in degree is already determined that the mitigating
and aggravating circumstances should be considered.
Art. 62. Effect of the attendance of mitigating or aggravating circumstances
and of habitual delinquency. — Mitigating or aggravating circumstances and
habitual delinquency shall be taken into account for the purpose of
diminishing or increasing the penalty in conformity with the following rules:
1.            Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a crime
specially punishable by law or which are included by the law in defining a
crime and prescribing the penalty therefor shall not be taken into account for
the purpose of increasing the penalty.
2.            The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating
circumstance inherent in the crime to such a degree that it must of necessity
accompany the commission thereof.
3.            Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the
moral attributes of the offender, or from his private relations with the
offended party, or from any other personal cause, shall only serve to
aggravate or mitigate the liability of the principals, accomplices and
accessories as to whom such circumstances are attendant.
4.            The circumstances which consist in the material execution of the
act, or in the means employed to accomplish it, shall serve to aggravate or
mitigate the liability of those persons only who had knowledge of them at the
time of the execution of the act or their cooperation therein.
5.            Habitual delinquency shall have the following effects.
(a)          Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be sentenced to the
penalty provided by law for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to
the additional penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods;
(b)          Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall be sentenced to the
penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found guilty and to the
additional penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium periods; and
(c)           Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the culprit shall be
sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be found
guilty and to the additional penalty of  prision mayor in its maximum period
to reclusion temporal in its minimum period.
Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the total of the two penalties
to be imposed upon the offender, in conformity herewith, shall in no case
exceed 30 years.
For the purpose of this article, a person shall be deemed to be habitual
delinquent, is within a period of ten years from the date of his release or
last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries,
robo, hurto estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes
a third time or oftener.
 Par 1: Aggravating circumstances are not to be taken into account when:
a)      they themselves constitute a crime

Ex. by “means of fire” – arson

b)      they are included by law in the definition of a crime

 Par 2: Same rules applies when the aggravating circumstance is inherent

in the crime
 Par 3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances arising from any of the
ff affect only those to whom such circumstances are attendant:
a)      from the moral attributes of the offender

b)      from his private relations w/ the offended party

c)       from any other personal cause

 Par 4: the circumstances w/c consist of the ff shall serve to aggravate

and mitigate the liability only of those who had knowledge of them at the
time of the commission of the offense
a)      material execution of the act

b)      means employed to accomplish the crime

 Par 5: Habitual Delinquent is a person who within the period of 10 years

from the date of his (last) release or last conviction of the crimes of:
a)      serious or less serious physical injuries

b)      robbery

c)       estafa

d)      falsification

is found guilty of any of the said crimes a third time or oftener.

 Ten year period to be computed from the time of last release or

conviction
 Subsequent crime must be committed after conviction of the former crime.
Cases still pending are not to be taken into consideration.
HABITUAL
DELINQUENCY RECIDIVISM

Crimes to be
committed are
specified Same title

No time fixed by
W/ in 10 years law

Must be found
guilty 3rdtime or
oftener Second conviction

Is not offset by
Additional penalty MC, increases
is imposed penalty to maximum

 Rulings on Habitual Delinquency:

a)      the law on habitual delinquency does not contemplate the exclusion
from the computation of prior conviction those falling outside the 10 yr pd
immediately preceding the crime for w/c the defendant is being tried

b)      ten yr pd is counted not from the date of commission of the subsequent
offense but to the date of conviction thereof in relation to the date of his
last release or last conviction

c)       when an offender has committed several crimes mentioned in the

definition of habitual delinquent, without being first convicted of any of
them before committing the others, he is not a habitual delinquent

d)      convictions on the same day or at about the same time are considered
as one only (days, weeks..)

e)      crimes committed on the same date, although convictions on different

dates are considered as one

f)       previous convictions are considered every time a new offense is

committed

g)      commissions of those crimes need not be consummated

h)      habitual delinquency applies to accomplice and accessories as long as
in the crimes specified

i)        a crime committed in the minority of the offender is not counted

j)        imposition of additional penalty is mandatory and constitutional

k)      modifying circumstances applicable to additional penalty

l)        habitual delinquency is not a crime, it is simply a fact or

circumstance which if present gives rise to the imposition of additional
penalty

m)    penalty for habitual delinquency is a real penalty that determines

jurisdiction

n)      a habitual delinquent is necessarily a recidivist

 o)      in imposing the additional penalty, recidivism is not

aggravating. The additional penalty must be imposed in its minimum
p)      an offender can be a habitual delinquent w/o being a recidivist

Notes:
 In no case shall be the total penalties imposed  upon the offender
exceed 30 years
 The law does not apply to crimes described in Art. 155
 The imposition of the additional penalties on habitual delinquents are
constitutional, it is simply a punishment on future crimes on account of
the criminal propensities of the accused.
 The imposition of such additional penalties are mandatory.
 Habitual delinquency applies at any stage of the execution because
subjectively, the offender reveals the same degree of depravity or
perversity as the one who commits a consummated crime.
 Habitual delinquency applies to all participants because it reveals
persistence in them of the inclination to wrongdoing and of the
perversity of character that led them to commit the previous crime.
 Cases where the attending aggravating or mitigating circumstances are
not considered in the imposition of penalties.
 Penalty that is single and indivisible
 Felonies through negligence
 Penalty is a fine
 Penalty is prescribed by a special law
Art. 63. Rules for the application of indivisible penalties. — In all cases in
which the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty, it shall be applied by
the courts regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances that may
have attended the commission of the deed.
In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of two indivisible
penalties, the following rules shall be observed in the application thereof:
1.            When in the commission of the deed there is present only one
aggravating circumstance, the greater penalty shall be applied.
2.            When there are neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances
and there is no aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be applied.
3.            When the commission of the act is attended by some mitigating
circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty
shall be applied.
4.            When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances attended the
commission of the act, the court shall reasonably allow them to offset one
another in consideration of their number and importance, for the purpose of
applying the penalty in accordance with the preceding rules, according to the
result of such compensation.
 Art 63 applies only when the penalty prescribed by the Code is either
one indivisible penalty or 2 indivisible penalties
 When the penalty is composed of 2 indivisible penalties, the penalty
cannot be lowered by one degree no matter how many mitigating
circumstances are present
 Exception: in cases of privileged mitigating circumstances
 Par.4: the moral value rather than the numerical weight shall be taken
into account
 Rules for the application of indivisible penalties
 Penalty is single and indivisible – applied regardless of the
presence of aggravating and mitigating circumstances
 Penalty composed of two indivisible penalties
1. One aggravating circumstance present – higher penalty
2. One mitigating circumstance present – lower penalty
3. Some mitigating circumstances present and no aggravating – lower penalty
4. Mitigating and Aggravating Circumstance are present – basis in number
and importance
Art. 64. Rules for the application of penalties which contain three periods. —
In cases in which the penalties prescribed by law contain three periods,
whether it be a single divisible penalty or composed of three different
penalties, each one of which forms a period in accordance with the provisions
of Articles 76 and 77, the court shall observe for the application of the
penalty the following rules, according to whether there are or are not
mitigating or aggravating circumstances:
1.            When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances,
they shall impose the penalty prescribed by law in its medium period.
2.            When only a mitigating circumstances is present in the
commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its minimum period.
3.            When an aggravating circumstance is present in the commission of
the act, they shall impose the penalty in its maximum period.
4.            When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are present,
the court shall reasonably offset those of one class against the other
according to their relative weight.
5.            When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no
aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall impose the penalty next
lower to that prescribed by law, in the period that it may deem applicable,
according to the number and nature of such circumstances.
6.            Whatever may be the number and nature of the aggravating
circumstances, the courts shall not impose a greater penalty than that
prescribed by law, in its maximum period.
7.            Within the limits of each period, the court shall determine the
extent of the penalty according to the number and nature of the aggravating
and mitigating circumstances and the greater and lesser extent of the evil
produced by the crime.
 Art 64 applies when the penalty has 3 periods because they are
divisible. If the penalty is composed of 3 different penalties, each
forms a period according to Art 77
 Par 4: the mitigating circumstances must be ordinary, not privileged.
The aggravating circumstances must be generic or specific, not qualifying
or inherent.
Example: a qualifying circumstance (treachery) cannot be offset by a generic
mitigating circumstance (voluntary circumstance)

 The court has discretion to impose the penalty within the limits fixed
by law
 Art 64 not applicable when the penalty is indivisible or prescribed by
special law or a fine
 Rules for the application of divisible penalties
 No aggravating and no mitigating circumstances – medium period
 One mitigating circumstance – minimum period
 One aggravating circumstance – maximum period
 Mitigating and aggravating circumstance o offset each other and
according to relative weight
 2 or more mitigating without any aggravating circumstance – on
degree lower
Art. 65. Rule in cases in which the penalty is not composed of three periods.
— In cases in which the penalty prescribed by law is not composed of three
periods, the courts shall apply the rules contained in the foregoing articles,
dividing into three equal portions of time included in the penalty prescribed,
and forming one period of each of the three portions.
 

COMPUTATIONS:
A. Example: Prision Mayor (6 yrs, 1 day to 12 yrs)
1)      subtract the minimum (disregard 1 day) from the maximum
12yrs – 6yrs = 6 yrs

2)      divide the difference by 3

6 yrs / 3 = 2 yrs

3)      use the minimum (6 yrs and 1 day) as the minimum of the minimum
period. Then add the 2 yrs (disregarding the 1 day) to the minimum to get the
maximum of the minimum
6 yrs (minimum of the minimum)

+             2 yrs (difference)

——————————————-

8 yrs (maximum of the minimum).

Therefore, minimum period of prision mayor; 6 yrs 1 day to 8 yrs

4)      use the maximum of the minimum period as the minimum of the medium
period and add 1 day to distinguish from the minimum period. Then add 2 years
to the minimum of the medium (disregarding the 1 day) to get the maximum of
the medium period.
8 yrs (minimum of the medium)

+             2 yrs (difference)

——————————————-

10 yrs (maximum of the medium)

Therefore, medium period of prision mayor; 8 yrs 1 day to 10 yrs

5)      use the maximum of the medium period as the minimum of the maximum pd,
add 1 day to distinguish it from the medium period. Then add 2 yrs to the
minimum of the maximum pd (disregarding the 1 day) to get the maximum of the
maximum period)
10 yrs (maximum of the medium)

+               2 yrs (difference)

———————————————-

12 yrs (maximum of the maximum)

Therefore, maximum period of prision mayor; 10 yrs 1 day to 12 yrs

 Computation above applicable to all others except arresto mayor

B. Example: Prision Mayor minimum (6 yrs 1 day to 8 yrs) only

1)      Subtract minimum from the maximum

8yrs – 6yrs = 2 yrs

2)      Divide the difference by 3

2yrs / 3 = 8 months

3)      Use the minimum of the given example as the minimum period. Then to
get to get the maximum of the minimum, add the 8 months
6 yrs + 8 months = 6 yrs and 8 months

Therefore, minimum of prision mayor minimum; 6 yrs 1 day to 6 yrs 8 months

4)      Use the maximum of the minimum as the minimum of the medium period.
Add 1 day to distinguish it from the maximum of the minimum. Add the 8 months
and this becomes the maximum of the medium
6 yrs 8 months + 8 months = 7 yrs 4 months

Therefore, the medium period of prision mayor minimum; 6 yrs 8 mos 1 day to 7
yrs 4 mos

5)      Use the maximum of the medium as the minimum period of the maximum
period and add 1 day to distinguish. Add the 8 months to get the maximum of
this maximum
7 yrs 4 mos + 8 mos = 8 yrs

Therefore, maximum of prision mayor; 7 yrs 4 mos 1 day to 8 yrs

Art. 66. Imposition of fines. — In imposing fines the courts may fix any
amount within the limits established by law; in fixing the amount in each case
attention shall be given, not only to the mitigating and aggravating
circumstances, but more particularly to the wealth or means of the culprit.
 Court must consider the following in imposing the fine:
a)      mitigating and aggravating circumstances

b)      the wealth and means of the culprit

  When the minimum of the fine is not fixed, the court shall have the
discretion provided it does not exceed the amount authorized by law
Art. 67. Penalty to be imposed when not all the requisites of exemption of the
fourth circumstance of Article 12 are present.— When all the conditions
required in circumstances Number 4 of Article 12 of this Code to exempt from
criminal liability are not present, the penalty of arresto mayor in its
maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed
upon the culprit if he shall have been guilty of a grave felony, and arresto
mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if of a less grave felony.
 Requisites of Art 12 par 4
a)      act causing the injury must be lawful

b)      act performed w/ due care

c)       injury was caused by mere accident

d)      no fault or intention to cause injury

 if these conditions are not all present, then the ff penalties shall be
imposed:
a)      grave felony – arresto mayor max to prision correccional min

b)      less grave felony – arresto mayor min to arresto mayor med

Art. 68. Penalty to be imposed upon a person under eighteen years of age. —
When the offender is a minor under eighteen years and his case is one coming
under the provisions of the paragraphs next to the last of Article 80 of this
Code, the following rules shall be observed:
1.            Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years of age, who is
not exempted from liability by reason of the court having declared that he
acted with discernment, a discretionary penalty shall be imposed, but always
lower by two degrees at least than that prescribed by law for the crime which
he committed.
2.            Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years of age the
penalty next lower than that prescribed by law shall be imposed, but always in
the proper period.
Notes:
 Art. 68 applies to such minor if his application for suspension of
sentence is disapproved or if while in the reformatory institution he
becomes incorrigible in which case he shall be returned to the court for
the imposition of the proper penalty.
 Art. 68 provides for 2 privileged mitigating circumstances
If the act is attended by two or more mitigating circumstance and no
aggravating circumstance, the penalty being divisible a minor over 15 but
under 18 may still get a penalty two degrees lower.

 under 15 but over 9 and has acted w/ discretion: 2 degrees lower

 under 18 but over 15: 1 degree lower
Art. 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.
 Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not wholly excusable
 1 or 2 degrees lower if the majority of the conditions for
justification or exemption in the cases provided in Arts. 11 and 12
are present.
Art. 70. Successive service of sentence. — When the culprit has to serve two
or more penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously if the nature of the
penalties will so permit otherwise, the following rules shall be observed:
In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their respective severity
shall be followed so that they may be executed successively or as nearly as
may be possible, should a pardon have been granted as to the penalty or
penalties first imposed, or should they have been served out.
For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next preceding paragraph the
respective severity of the penalties shall be determined in accordance with
the following scale:
1.            Death,
2.            Reclusion perpetua,
3.            Reclusion temporal,
4.            Prision mayor,
5.            Prision correccional,
6.            Arresto mayor,
7.            Arresto menor,
8.            Destierro,
9.            Perpetual absolute disqualification,
10           Temporal absolute disqualification.
11.          Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted
for, the right to follow a profession or calling, and
12.          Public censure.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, the maximum
duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than three-fold the
length of time corresponding to the most severe of the penalties imposed upon
him. No other penalty to which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the
sum total of those imposed equals the same maximum period.
Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years.
In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of perpetual penalties
( pena perpetua) shall be computed at thirty years. (As amended).
 Maximum duration of the convict’s sentence: 3 times the most severe
penalty
 Max period shall not exceed 40 years
 Subsidiary imprisonment – this shall be excluded in computing for the
maximum duration
Example: Juan has 10 sentences of 6 months and 1 day each and a fine of 1000.
He was not able to pay the fine. Therefore, he must serve subsidiary penalty
after 18 months and 3 days in jail.

LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 71-80

Art. 71. Graduated scales. — In the case in which the law prescribed a penalty
lower or higher by one or more degrees than another given penalty, the rules
prescribed in Article 61 shall be observed in graduating such penalty.
The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale in which
is comprised the given penalty.
The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty, shall observe the
following graduated scales:
SCALE NO. 1
1.            Death,
2.            Reclusion perpetua,
3.            Reclusion temporal,
4.            Prision mayor,
5.            Prision correccional,
6.            Arresto mayor,
7.            Destierro,
8.            Arresto menor,
9.            Public censure,
10.          Fine.
SCALE NO. 2
1.            Perpetual absolute disqualification,
2.            Temporal absolute disqualification
3.            Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be
                voted for, the right to follow a profession or calling,
4.            Public censure,
5.            Fine.
 
Art. 72. Preference in the payment of the civil liabilities. — The civil
liabilities of a person found guilty of two or more offenses shall be
satisfied by following the chronological order of the dates of the judgments
rendered against him, beginning with the first in order of time.
8. the penalties shall be satisfied according to the scale of Art 70

Art. 73. Presumption in regard to the imposition of accessory

penalties. — Whenever the courts shall impose a penalty which, by provision of
law, carries with it other penalties, according to the provisions of Articles
40, 41, 42, 43 and 44 of this Code, it must be understood that the accessory
penalties are also imposed upon the convict.
24. subsidiary penalties are deemed imposed. However, the subsidiary
imprisonment must be expressly stated in the decision.

Art. 74. Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua in certain cases. — In cases
in which the law prescribes a penalty higher than another given penalty,
without specially designating the name of the former, if such higher penalty
should be that of death, the same penalty and the accessory penalties of
Article 40, shall be considered as the next higher penalty.
25. if the decision or law says higher than RP or 2 degrees than RT, then
the penalty imposed is RP or RT as the case may be. Death must be
designated by name. However, for the other penalties, this does not
apply.

Example: the penalty for crime X is 2 degrees lower than RP. The penalty
imposed is prision mayor.

Art. 75. Increasing or reducing the penalty of fine by one or more degrees. —
Whenever it may be necessary to increase or reduce the penalty of fine by one
or more degrees, it shall be increased or reduced, respectively, for each
degree, by one-fourth of the maximum amount prescribed by law, without
however, changing the minimum.
The same rules shall be observed with regard of fines that do not consist of a
fixed amount, but are made proportional.
7. To get the lower degree:

1. Max: reduce by one-fourth

2. Min: the same

Art. 76. Legal period of duration of divisible penalties. — The legal period
of duration of divisible penalties shall be considered as divided into three
parts, forming three periods, the minimum, the medium, and the maximum in the
manner shown in the following table:

Art. 77. When the penalty is a complex one composed of three distinct
penalties. — In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of three
distinct penalties, each one shall form a period; the lightest of them shall
be the minimum the next the medium, and the most severe the maximum period.
Whenever the penalty prescribed does not have one of the forms specially
provided for in this Code, the periods shall be distributed, applying by
analogy the prescribed rules.
17. if there are 3 distinct penalties; there shall be a minimum, a medium
and a maximum

Example: Reclusion temporal max to death

Art. 78.                 When and how a penalty is to be executed. — No

penalty shall be executed except by virtue of a final judgment.
A penalty shall not be executed in any other form than that prescribed by law,
nor with any other circumstances or incidents than those expressly authorized
thereby.
In addition to the provisions of the law, the special regulations prescribed
for the government of the institutions in which the penalties are to be
suffered shall be observed with regard to the character of the work to be
performed, the time of its performance, and other incidents connected
therewith, the relations of the convicts among themselves and other persons,
the relief which they may receive, and their diet.
The regulations shall make provision for the separation of the sexes in
different institutions, or at least into different departments and also for
the correction and reform of the convicts.
 Only penalty by final judgment can be executed. Judgment is final if the
accused has not appealed within 15 days or he has expressly waived in
writing that he will not appeal.

9. There could be no subsidiary liability if it was not expressly ordered

in the judgment

Art. 79.                 Suspension of the execution and service of the

penalties in case of insanity. — When a convict shall become insane or an
imbecile after final sentence has been pronounced, the execution of said
sentence shall be suspended only with regard to the personal penalty, the
provisions of the second paragraph of circumstance number 1 of article 12
being observed in the corresponding cases.
If at any time the convict shall recover his reason, his sentence shall be
executed, unless the penalty shall have prescribed in accordance with the
provisions of this Code.
The respective provisions of this section shall also be observed if the
insanity or imbecility occurs while the convict is serving his sentence
7. Cases of insanity:

a)      after final sentence, suspend the sentence regarding the personal
penalties

b)      if he recovers, the sentence is executed unless it has prescribed

c)       the payment of civil of pecuniary liabilities shall not be suspended

 Art 80 (as amended by PD 603: Child and Youth Welfare Code)

a)      youthful offender – over 9 but under 18 at time of the commission of

the offense

b)      a youthful offender held for examination or trial who cannot furnish
bail will be committed to the DSWD/local rehab center or detention home

c)       judgment of the court shall not be pronounced but suspended except
for the ff cases:

8. those who previously enjoyed a suspension of sentence

9. those convicted of death or life imprisonment

10. those convicted for an offense by the military tribunals

d)      the DSWD may dismiss the case if the youth behaves properly

e)      the records of the proceeding shall be privileged and shall not be
disclosed

f)       the civil liability of the youthful offender may be voluntary assumed
by a relative or a friend

g)      the parent or guardian of the child is liable when he aids, abets or
connives w/ the commission of the crime or does an act producing, promoting or
contributing to the child’s being a juvenile delinquent.
h)      The penalties for the parent or guardian: Fine not exceeding 500
and/or imprisonment not exceeding 2 years

LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 81-90

Art. 81.                 When and how the death penalty is to be executed. —
The death sentence shall be executed with reference to any other and shall
consist in putting the person under sentence to death by electrocution. The
death sentence shall be executed under the authority of the Director of
Prisons, endeavoring so far as possible to mitigate the sufferings of the
person under sentence during electrocution as well as during the proceedings
prior to the execution.
If the person under sentence so desires, he shall be anaesthetized at the
moment of the electrocution.
 
Art. 82.                 Notification and execution of the sentence and
assistance to the culprit. — The court shall designate a working day for the
execution but not the hour thereof; and such designation shall not be
communicated to the offender before sunrise of said day, and the execution
shall not take place until after the expiration of at least eight hours
following the notification, but before sunset. During the interval between the
notification and the execution, the culprit shall, in so far as possible, be
furnished such assistance as he may request in order to be attended in his
last moments by priests or ministers of the religion he professes and to
consult lawyers, as well as in order to make a will and confer with members of
his family or persons in charge of the management of his business, of the
administration of his property, or of the care of his descendants.
9. Designate a working day w/c shall not be communicated to the offender
before the sunrise of said day. The execution shall not take place until
after the expiration of at least 8 hrs following such notification.

10. He can execute a will.

Art. 83.                 Suspension of the execution of the death sentence. —

The death sentence shall not be inflicted upon a woman within the three years
next following the date of the sentence or while she is pregnant, nor upon any
person over seventy years of age. In this last case, the death sentence shall
be commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the accessory penalties
provided in Article 40.
26. Death sentence commuted to RP:

a)      woman, within 3 years, following the date of sentence

b)      woman, while pregnant

c)       person over 70 years old.

Art. 84.                 Place of execution and persons who may witness the
same. — The execution shall take place in the penitentiary of Bilibid in a
space closed to the public view and shall be witnessed only by the priests
assisting the offender and by his lawyers, and by his relatives, not exceeding
six, if he so request, by the physician and the necessary personnel of the
penal establishment, and by such persons as the Director of Prisons may
authorize.
 
Art. 85.                 Provisions relative to the corpse of the person
executed and its burial. — Unless claimed by his family, the corpse of the
culprit shall, upon the completion of the legal proceedings subsequent to the
execution, be turned over to the institute of learning or scientific research
first applying for it, for the purpose of study and investigation, provided
that such institute shall take charge of the decent burial of the remains.
Otherwise, the Director of Prisons shall order the burial of the body of the
culprit at government expense, granting permission to be present thereat to
the members of the family of the culprit and the friends of the latter. In no
case shall the burial of the body of a person sentenced to death be held with
pomp.
 
Art. 86.                 Reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal, prision
mayor, prision correccional and arresto mayor. — The penalties of reclusion
perpetua, reclusion temporal, prision mayor, prision correccional and arresto
mayor, shall be executed and served in the places and penal establishments
provided by the Administrative Code in force or which may be provided by law
in the future.
 
Art. 87.                 Destierro. — Any person sentenced to destierro shall
not be permitted to enter the place or places designated in the sentence, nor
within the radius therein specified, which shall be not more than 250 and not
less than 25 kilometers from the place designated.
27. Destierro shall be imposed in the ff cases:

a)      death or serious physical injuries is caused or are inflicted under

exceptional circumstance

b)      person fails to give bond for god behavior

c)       concubine’s penalty for the crime of concubinage

d)      lowering the penalty by degrees

8. Execution of Distierro

a)      Convict shall not be permitted to enter the place designated in the
sentence nor within the radius specified, which shall not be more than 250 and
not less than 25 km from the place designated.

b)      If the convict enters the prohibited area, he commits evasion of

sentence

Art. 88.                 Arresto menor. — The penalty of arresto menor shall
be served in the municipal jail, or in the house of the defendant himself
under the surveillance of an officer of the law, when the court so provides in
its decision, taking into consideration the health of the offender and other
reasons which may seem satisfactory to it.
18. Served where:

19. In the municipal jail

20. In the house of the offender, but under the surveillance of an officer
of the law whenever the court so provides in the decision due to the
health of the offender. But the reason is not satisfactory just because
the offender is a respectable member of the community

 
Art. 89.                 How criminal liability is totally extinguished. —
Criminal liability is totally extinguished:
(1) By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties and as to
pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of
the offender occurs before final judgment.
 Extinguishment of criminal liability is a ground of motion to quash

 Criminal liability whether before or after final judgment is

extinguished upon death because it is a personal penalty

 Pecuniary penalty is extinguished only when death occurs before final

judgement.

 The death of the offended party however does not extinguish criminal
liability of the accused because it is a crime against the state.

(2) By service of the sentence

 10. Crime is a debt, hence extinguished upon payment

11. Service does not extinguish civil liability

12. Amnesty – is an act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or general

pardon. It wipes all traces and vestiges of the crime but does not
extinguish civil liability.

(3) By absolute pardon

8. Pardon – an act of grace proceeding from the power entrusted w/ the
execution of laws, which exempts the individual from the punishment the
law inflicts for the crime.

AMNESTY PARDON

Extended to
classes of persons
who may be guilty Exercised
of political individually by
offenses the president

Exercised even
before trial or Exercised when one
investigation is convicted

Looks forward and

Looks backward and relieves the
abolishes the offender of the
offense itself consequences

Does not
extinguish civil
liability Same

A public act that

needs the
declaration of the
president with the
concurrence of A private act of
Congress the president
Courts should take Must be pleaded
judicial notice and proved

(4)    By prescription of the crime

 When the crime prescribes, the state loses the right to prosecute

 Prescription of a crime – is the loss/forfeiture of the right of the

state to prosecute the offender after the lapse of a certain time.

(5)    By prescription of the penalty

11. means the loss/forfeiture of the right of government to execute the
final sentence after the lapse of a certain time. Conditions: there must
be final judgement and the period has elapsed.

(6)    By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Art 344 of this
Code
 

Art. 90.                 Prescription of crime. — Crimes punishable by death,

reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal shall prescribe in twenty years.
Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in fifteen
years.
Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall prescribe in ten years; with
the exception of those punishable by arresto mayor, which shall prescribe in
five years.
The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year.
The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in six
months.
Light offenses prescribe in two months.
When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one, the highest penalty shall be
made the basis of the application of the rules contained in the first, second
and third paragraphs of this article. (As amended by RA 4661, approved June
19, 1966.)
 In computing for the period, the first day is excluded and the last day
included. Subject to leap years

 When the last day of the prescriptive period falls on a Sunday or a

legal holiday, the info can no longer be filed the ff day

 Simple slander prescribes in 2 months and grave slander in 6 months

 Since destierro is a correctional penalty, it prescribes in 10 years.

Afflictive penalties, 15 years.

 If compound penalty, basis will be the highest penalty

  If fine is an alternative penalty (imposed together w/ a penalty lower
than the fine), fine shall be the basis

 Prescription begins to run from the discovery thereof. Interrupted when

proceedings are instituted and shall begin to run again when the
proceedings are dismissed.

 If an accused fails to move to quash before pleading, he is deemed to

have waived all objections.

 Prescription does not take away the court’s jurisdiction but only
absolves the defendant and acquits him.

LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 91-100

Art. 91.                 Computation of prescription of offenses. — The period
of prescription shall commence to run from the day on which the crime is
discovered by the offended party, the authorities, or their agents, and shall
be interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information, and shall
commence to run again when such proceedings terminate without the accused
being convicted or acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not
imputable to him.
The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent from the
Philippine Archipelago.
11. If there is nothing concealed (appears in a public document), the crime
commences to run on the date of the commission

12. Period of prescription for crimes that is continuing never runs

13. Crime needs to be discovered by:

a)      offended party

b)      authorities

c)       their agents

28. If a person witnesses the crime but only tells the authorities 25 years
later, prescription commences on the day the authorities were told.

29. What interrupts prescription?

a)      preliminary examination or investigation w/c is similar to judicial

proceeding

b)      filing the proper complaint w/ the fiscal’s office and the prosecutor.
Police not included.

c)       Filing complaint with the court that has proper jurisdiction
 9. When the period commences to run again

a)      When the proceeding is terminated without the accused being convicted
or acquitted

b)      When the proceeding is unjustifiably stopped for a reason not

imputable to the offender

21. “when such proceedings terminate” – termination that is final; an

unappealed conviction or acquittal

22. “unjustifiably stopped for any reason” – example: accused evades arrest,
proceedings must be stopped

23. Art 91 applies to a special law when said law does not provide for the
application but only provides for the period of prescription

Art. 92.                 When and how penalties prescribe. — The penalties
imposed by final sentence prescribe as follows:
1.            Death and reclusion perpetua, in twenty years;
2.            Other afflictive penalties, in fifteen years;
3.            Correctional penalties, in ten years; with the exception of the
penalty of arresto mayor, which prescribes in five years;
4.            Light penalties, in one year.
 Note that final sentence must be imposed

 If a convict can avail of mitigating circumstances and the penalty is

lowered, it is still the original penalty that is used as the basis for
prescription. However, if the convict already serves a portion of his
sentence and escapes after, the penalty that was imposed (not the
original) shall be the basis for prescription

 Fines less than 200 fall under light penalty. Those above are
correccional.

Art. 93.                 Computation of the prescription of penalties. — The

period of prescription of penalties shall commence to run from the date when
the culprit should evade the service of his sentence, and it shall be
interrupted if the defendant should give himself up, be captured, should go to
some foreign country with which this Government has no extradition treaty, or
should commit another crime before the expiration of the period of
prescription.
13. Elements:
a)      penalty is final

b)      convict evaded the sentence

c)       convict has not given himself up

d)      penalty has prescribed because of lapse of time from the date of the
evasion of the service of the sentence

9. Interruption of the period

1. If the defendant surrenders

2. If he is captured

3. If he should go into a foreign country with which the Philippines

has no extradition treaty

4. If he should commit another crime before the expiration of the

period of prescription

5. Acceptance of a conditional pardon(People v. Puntilos)

10. If a government has an extradition treaty w/ the country to w/c a

convict escaped and the crime is not included in the treaty, the running
of the prescription is interrupted

11. Sentence evasion clearly starts the running of the prescription. It does
not interrupt it. Acceptance of the conditional pardon interrupts the
prescriptive period.

12. Rolito Go case: since he was captured, he is only supposed to serve the
remainder of his sentence. Reason: during the period he escaped, his
existence is one of fear and discomfort

Art. 94.                 Partial Extinction of criminal liability. — Criminal

liability is extinguished partially:
1.            By conditional pardon;
2.            By commutation of the sentence; and
3.            For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he
is serving his sentence.
Conditional pardon – contract between the sovereign power of the executive and
the convict
 Convict shall not violate any of the penal laws of the Philippines

 Violation of conditions:
  Offender is re-arrested and re-incarcerated

 Prosecution under Art. 159

Commutation – change in the decision of the court by the chief regarding the
(1)    degree of the penalty;

(2)    by decreasing the length of the imprisonment or fine

12. Commutation allowed when:

a)      person over 70 yrs old

b)      10 justices fail to reach a decision affirming the death penalty

 Consent not necessary in commutation

 Prisoner is also allowed special time allowance for loyalty w/c is 1/5
deduction of the period of his sentence.

Parole – consists in the suspension of the sentence of a convict after serving

the minimum term of the indeterminate penalty, without granting pardon,
prescribing the terms upon which the sentence shall be suspended. In case his
parole conditions are not observed, a convict may be returned to the custody
and continue to serve his sentence without deducting the time that elapsed.

CONDITIONAL PARDON PAROLE

Given after
Given after final service of the
judgement minimum penalty

Granted by Chief Given by the Bd of

Executive Pardons and Parole

For violation, For violations,

convict may not be may be rearrested,
prosecuted under convict serves
159 remaining sentence

·         Good conduct allowance during confinement

Deduction for the term of sentence for good behavior

Art. 95.                 Obligation incurred by person granted conditional

pardon. — Any person who has been granted conditional pardon shall incur the
obligation of complying strictly with the conditions imposed therein
otherwise, his non-compliance with any of the conditions specified shall
result in the revocation of the pardon and the provisions of Article 159 shall
be applied to him.
5. Condition of pardon is limited to unserved portion of the sentence,
unless an intention to extend it beyond the time is manifest

Art. 96.                 Effect of commutation of sentence. — The commutation

of the original sentence for another of a different length and nature shall
have the legal effect of substituting the latter in the place of the former.
 
Art. 97.                 Allowance for good conduct. — The good conduct of any
prisoner in any penal institution shall entitle him to the following
deductions from the period of his sentence:
1.            During the first two years of his imprisonment, he shall be
allowed a deduction of five days for each month of good behavior;
2.            During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of his
imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of eight days for each month of
good behavior;
3.            During the following years until the tenth year, inclusive, of
his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of ten days for each month
of good behavior; and
4.            During the eleventh and successive years of his imprisonment, he
shall be allowed a deduction of fifteen days for each month of good behavior.
11. Allowance for good conduct not applicable when prisoner released under
conditional pardon.

12. Good conduct time allowance is given in consideration of good conduct of

prisoner while he is serving sentence.

Allowances for Good conduct per year

Years Allowance

5 days per month

First 2 years of good behavior

8 days per month

3rd to 5th years of good behavior
Following years up 10 days per month
to 10thyear of good behavior

11th year and 15 days per month

successive years of good behavior

Art. 98.                 Special time allowance for loyalty. — A deduction of

one-fifth of the period of his sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who,
having evaded the service of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned in
article 58 of this Code, gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours
following the issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing away of the
calamity or catastrophe to in said article.
12. Special time allowance for loyalty of prisoners:

1. The article applies only to prisoners who escaped

2. deduction of 1/5 of the period of sentence of prisoner who having

evaded the service of his sentence during the calamity or
catastrophe mentioned in Art 158, gives himself up to the
authorities w/in 48 hrs ff the issuance of the proclamation by the
President announcing the passing away of the calamity or catastrophe

3. deduction based on the original sentence and not on the unexpired

portion

11. Art 158 provides for increased penalties:

– a convict who has evaded the service of his sentence by leaving the penal
institution on the occasion of disorder resulting from conflagration,
earthquake or similar catastrophe or during mutiny in which he did not
participate is liable to an increased penalty (1/5 of the time still remaining
to be served – not to exceed  6 months), if he fails to give himself up to the
authorities w/in 48 hrs ff the issuance of a proclamation by the President
announcing the passing away of the calamity.

Art. 99.                 Who grants time allowances. — Whenever lawfully

justified, the Director of Prisons shall grant allowances for good conduct.
Such allowances once granted shall not be revoked.
a) authority to  grant time allowance for good conduct is exclusively vested
in the Dir (e.g. provincial warden cannot usurp Director’s authority)
b) it is not an automatic right and once granted, cannot be revoked by him

CIVIL LIABILITY
2 classes:
a) social injury – produced by disturbance and alarm w/c are the outcome of
the offense
b) personal injury – caused by the victim who may have suffered damage, either
to his person, property, honor or chastity
 
Art. 100.               Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. — Every
person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.
Basis:
obligation to repair or to make whole the damage caused to another by reason
of an act or omission, whether done intentionally or negligently and whether
or not punishable by law

Dual character of the crime as against:

a)      the state because of the disturbance of peace and order

b)      the private person injured unless it involves the crime of treason,
rebellion, espionage, contempt and others where no civil liability arises on
the part of the offender either because there are no damages or there is no
private person injured by the crime

Damage that may be recovered in criminal cases:

 Crimes against persons, like crime of physical injuries – whatever he
spent for treatment of wounds, doctor’s fees, medicines as well as salary
or wages unearned

 Moral Damages: seduction, abduction, rape or other lascivious acts,

adultery or concubinage, illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest,
illegal search, libel, slander or any other form of defamation, malicious
prosecution

 Exemplary Damages: imposed when crime was committed with one or more
aggravating circumstances

a)      If there is no damage caused by the commission of the crime, offender

is not civilly liable

b)      Dismissal of the info or the crime action does not affect the right of
the offended party to institute or continue the civil action already
instituted arising from the offense, because such dismissal does not carry
with it the extinction of the civil one.
c)       When accused is acquitted on ground that his guilt has not been
proven beyond reasonable doubt, a civil action for damages for the same act or
omission may be instituted

d)      Exemption from criminal liability in favor of an imbecile or insane

person, and a person under 9 yrs, or over 9 but under 15 who acted w/
discernment and those acting under the impulse of irresistible force or under
the impulse of an uncontrolable fear of an equal or greater injury does not
include exemption from civil liability.

e)      Acquittal in the crim action for negligence does not preclude the
offended party from filing a civil action to recover damages, based on the
theory that the act is quasi-delict

f)       When the court found the accused guilty of crim negligence but failed
to enter judgement of civil liability, the private prosecutor has a right to
appeal for the purposes of the civil liability of the accused. The appellate
court may remand the case to the trial court for the latter to include in its
judgement the civil liability of the accused

g)      Before expiration of the 15-day of for appealing, the trial court can
amend the judgement of conviction by adding a provision for the civil
liability of the accused, even if the convict has started serving the
sentence.

h)      An independent civil action may be brought by the injured party during
the pendency of the criminal case provided the right is reserved. Reservation
is necessary in the ff cases:

17. any of the cases referred to in Art 32 (perpetual or temporary

disqualification for exercise of the right of suffrage)

18. defamation, fraud and physical injury (bodily injury and not the crime
of physical injury)

19. civil action is against a member of a city or municipal  police force

for refusing or failing to render aid or protection to any person in case
of danger to life or property

20. in an action for damage arising from fault or negligence and there is no
pre-existing contractual relation between the parties (quasi-delict)

i)        Prejudicial Question – one w/c arises in a case, the resolution of

which is a logical antecedent of the issue involved in said case and the
cognizance of which pertains to another tribunal.
  For the principle to apply, it is essential that there be 2 cases
involved, a civil and a criminal case. Prejudicial questions may be
decided before any criminal prosecution may be instituted or may proceed.

 An independent civil action may be brought by the injured party during

the pendency of the criminal case, provided that the right is reserved

 Extinction of the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of
the civil, unless the extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final
judgement that the fact from which the civil might arise did not exist

LAW 1- BOOK 1 ARTICLE 101-113

Art. 101.               Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases. —
The exemption from criminal liability established in subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 5
and 6 of article 12 and in subdivision 4 of article 11 of this Code does not
include exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced subject to the
following rules:
First.  In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of Article 12, the civil
liability for acts committed by an imbecile or insane person, and by a person
under nine years of age, or by one over nine but under fifteen years of age,
who has acted without discernment, shall devolve upon those having such person
under their legal authority or control, unless it appears that there was no
fault or negligence on their part.
Should there be no person having such insane, imbecile or minor under his
authority, legal guardianship or control, or if such person be insolvent, said
insane, imbecile, or minor shall respond with their own property, excepting
property exempt from execution, in accordance with the civil law.
Second.  In cases falling within subdivision 4 of Article 11, the persons for
whose benefit the harm has been prevented shall be civilly liable in
proportion to the benefit which they may have received.
The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, the proportionate amount for
which each one shall be liable.
When the respective shares cannot be equitably determined, even approximately,
or when the liability also attaches to the Government, or to the majority of
the inhabitants of the town, and, in all events, whenever the damages have
been caused with the consent of the authorities or their agents,
indemnification shall be made in the manner prescribed by special laws or
regulations.
Third.  In cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of Article 12, the
persons using violence or causing the fears shall be primarily liable and
secondarily, or, if there be no such persons, those doing the act shall be
liable, saving always to the latter that part of their property exempt from
execution.
General Rule: exemption from criminal liability does not include exemption
from civil liability

Exception: no civil liability in par 4 and 7of art 12. Par 1,2,3,5 and 6 are
NOT exempt from civil liability although exempt from criminal liability

Who are civilly liable for:

a. acts of insane or minor exempt from criminal liability

14. primarily devolve upon perosns having legal authority or control over
him, if at fault or negligent (except if proven that they acted w/o fault
or w/ due diligence)

15. if no fault or negligence, or even w/ fault but is insolvent and there

are no persons having legal authority over them, the property of the
insane, minor or imbecile not exempt from execution shall be held liable.

16. over 15 but under 18 w. discernment

1. civil code says parent (dad then mom)_

2. guardians

3. minors own property where a guardian ad litem shall be appointed

*final release of a child based on good conduct does not remove his civil
liability for damages.

30. persons acting under an irresistible force or uncontrollable fear

1. persons using violence or causing the fear are primarily liable

2. if there are none, those doing the act

31. no civil liability in justifying circumstances EXCEPT: par 4 of Art 11,

the one benefited by the act is civilly liable.

10. civil liability in case of state of necessity

Those who benefited by the act and court shall determine the proportionate
amount for which each shall be liable. If the government or majority of the
inhabitants are liable, such will be determined by special laws or
regulations.

Art. 102.               Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers,

tavernkeepers and proprietors of establishments. — In default of the persons
criminally liable, innkeepers, tavernkeepers, and any other persons or
corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes committed in their
establishments, in all cases where a violation of municipal ordinances or some
general or special police regulation shall have been committed by them or
their employees.
Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods taken by
robbery or theft within their houses from guests lodging therein, or for the
payment of the value thereof, provided that such guests shall have notified in
advance the innkeeper himself, or the person representing him, of the deposit
of such goods within the inn; and shall furthermore have followed the
directions which such innkeeper or his representative may have given them with
respect to the care and vigilance over such goods. No liability shall attach
in case of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons unless
committed by the innkeeper’s employees.
Elements of Par 1:
24. That the innkeeper of the establishment or his employee committed a
violation of municipal ordinance or some general or special police
regulation

25. A crime is committed in such establishment

26. Person criminally liable is insolvent

 when all these are present, the innkeeper and the like are subsidiarily
liable

Elements of Par 2:
14. guests notified in advance the innkeeper of the deposit of such goods
w/in the inn

15. guests followed the directions of the innkeeper w/ respect to the care
and vigilance over the such goods

3.  such goods of the guest lodging therein were taken by robbery w/ force
upon things or theft

13. When all these are present, the innkeeper is subsidiarily liable

14. No civil liability in case of robbery w/ violence against or

intimidation of person, unless committed by the innkeeper’s employees

15. Actual deposit of the things of the guest to the innkeeper is not
necessary, it is enough that they were within the inn.

Art. 103.               Subsidiary civil liability of other persons. — The

subsidiary liability established in the next
preceding article shall also apply to employers, teachers, persons, and
corporations engaged in any kind of industry for felonies committed by their
servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices, or employees in the discharge of their
duties.
Elements
 employer, teacher, person or corporation is engaged in any kind of
industry

Industry – any department or branch of art, occupation or business; especially

one w/c employs so much labor and capital is a distinct branch of trade

13. any of their servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices of employees commits

a felony while in the discharge of his duties

14. the said employee is insolvent and has not satisfied his civil liability

 Hospitals are not engaged in industry; hence nit subsidiarily liable for
acts of nurses

 Private persons w/o business or industry, not subsidiarilly liable

 
Art. 104.               What is included in civil liability. — The civil
liability established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of this Code
includes:
1.            Restitution;
2.            Reparation of the damage caused;
3.            Indemnification for consequential damages.
 First remedy granted by law is no. 1, in case this is not possible no.
2.

 In either case, no. 3 may be required

 Restitution – in theft, the culprit is duty bound to return the property

stolen

 Reparation – in case of inability to return the property stolen, the

culprit must pay the value of the property stolen.

 In case of physical injuries, the reparation of the damage cause would

consist in the payment of hospital bills and doctor’s fees to the
offended party

 Indemnification – the lost of salary or earnings

PECUNIARY
CIVIL LIABILITIES LIABILITIES
Includes reparation
and indemnification Same

No restitution
Includes as the
restitution (return liabilities are
property taken), to paid out of
nothing to pay in the property of
terms of money the offender

Includes fines
No fines and costs and costs of
of proceedings proceedings

Art. 105.               Restitution. — How made. — The restitution of the

thing itself must be made whenever possible, with allowance for any
deterioration, or diminution of value as determined by the court.
The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be found in the possession
of a third person who has acquired it by lawful means, saving to the latter
his action against the proper person, who may be liable to him.
This provision is not applicable in cases in which the thing has been acquired
by the third person in the manner and under the requirements which, by law,
bar an action for its recovery.
6. The convict cannot by way of restitution, give to the offended party a
similar thing of the same amount, kind or species and quality. The very
thing should be returned.

7. If the property stolen while in the possession of the third party

suffers deterioration due to his fault, the court will assess the amount
of the deterioration and, in addition to the return of the property, the
culprit will be ordered to pay such amount

8. General Rule: the owner of the property illegally taken by the offender
can recover it from whomsoever is in possession thereof. Thus, even if
the property stolen was acquired by a 3rd person by purchase w/o knowing
that it has been stolen, such property will be returned to the owner.

9. If the thing is acquired by a person knowing that it was stolen, then he

is an accessory and therefore criminally liable
 10. The third party who acquired the stolen property may be reimbursed w/
the price paid therefor if it be acquired at (a) a public sale and (b) in
good faith

11. Circumstances which bar an action for recovery:

13. Torrens title

14. When sale is authorized

13. When the liability to return a thing arises from a contract, not from a
criminal act, the court cannot order its return in the criminal case.

14. Restitution may be ordered, even if accused is acquitted, provided the

offense is proved and it is shown that the thing belongs to someone else

15. When crime is not against property, no restitution or reparation of the

thing can be done

16. Payment of salary of an employee during the period of suspension cannot,

as a general rule, be properly decreed by the court in a judgement of
acquittal. It devolves upon the head of the department concerned

17. The court has authority to order the reinstatement of the accused
acquitted of a crime punishable by the penalty of perpetual or temporary
disqualification

 
Art. 106.               Reparation. — How made. — The court shall determine
the amount of damage, taking into consideration the price of the thing,
whenever possible, and its special sentimental value to the injured party, and
reparation shall be made accordingly.
Notes:
12. Reparation will be ordered by the court if restitution is not possible

13. Reparation shall be

a)    the price of the thing

b)    its sentimental value

 If there is no evidence as to the value of the thing unrecovered,

reparation cannot be made

 Payment by the insurance company does not relive the offender of his
obligation to repair the damage caused

 The damages shall be limited to those caused by the crime

  Accused is liable for the damages caused as a result of the destruction
of the property after the crime was committed either because it was lost
or destroyed by the accused himself or that of any other person or as a
result of any other cause or causes

 
Art. 107.               Indemnification — What is included. — Indemnification
for consequential damages shall include not only those caused the injured
party, but also those suffered by his family or by a third person by reason of
the crime.
21. Indemnity refers to crimes against persons; reparation to crimes against
property

22. Indemnity for medical services still unpaid may be recovered

23. Contributory negligence on the part of the offended party reduces the
civil liability of the offender

24. The civil liability may be increased only if it will not required an
aggravation of the decision in the criminal case on w/c it is based

25. The amount of damages for death shall be at least 50,000, even though
there may have been mitigating circumstances.

26. In addition:

 payment for the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased

 if the deceased was obliged to give support, the recipient who is not an
heir, may demand support from the defendant

 the spouse, illegitimate and illegitimate descendants and ascendants of

the deceased may demand for moral damages.

7. Moral damages may be recovered in the ff:

8. physical injuries

9. seduction, abduction, rape

10. adultery, concubinage

11. illegal or arbitrary detention

12. illegal search

13. libel, slander, defamation

14. malicious prosecution

 10. Exemplary damages may be imposed when the crime was committed with one
or more aggravating circumstances; cannot be recovered as a matter of
right, the court will decide whether they should be adjudicated.

 
Art. 108.               Obligation to make restoration, reparation for
damages, or indemnification for consequential damages and actions to demand
the same — Upon whom it devolves. — The obligation to make restoration or
reparation for damages and indemnification for consequential damages devolves
upon the heirs of the person liable.
The action to demand restoration, reparation, and indemnification likewise
descends to the heirs of the person injured.
 The heirs of the person liable has no obligation if restoration is not
possible and the deceased left no property

 Civil liability is possible only when the offender dies after final
judgement.

 If the death of the offender took place before any final judgement of
conviction was rendered against him, the action for restitution must
necessarily be dismissed.

 
Art. 109.               Share of each person civilly liable. — If there are
two or more persons civilly liable for a felony, the courts shall determine
the amount for which each must respond.
In case of insolvency of the accomplices, the principal shall be subsidiarily
liable for their share of the indemnity and in case of the insolvency of the
principal, the accomplices shall be subsidiarily liable, jointly and severally
liable, for the indemnity due from said principal

Art. 110.               Several and subsidiary liability of principals,

accomplices and accessories of a felony — Preference in payment. —
Notwithstanding the provisions of the next preceding article, the principals,
accomplices, and accessories, each within their respective class, shall be
liable severally (in solidum) among themselves for their quotas, and
subsidiaries for those of the other persons liable.
The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first against the property of the
principals; next, against that of the accomplices, and, lastly, against that
of the accessories.
Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary liability has been
enforced, the person by whom payment has been made shall have a right of
action against the others for the amount of their respective shares.
 4. Example: an indemnity of 100,000 has been sentenced, 50,000 will go to
the principal and 20,000 to the accomplice

5. Subsidiary liability will be enforced on:

 first, against the property of the principal

 second, against that of the accomplice

 third, against that of the accessories

Art. 111.               Obligation to make restitution in certain cases. — Any

person who has participated gratuitously in the proceeds of a felony shall be
bound to make restitution in an amount equivalent to the extent of such
participation.
Notes:
6. This refers to a person who has participated gratuitously in the
commission of a felony and he is bound to make restitution in an amount
equivalent to the extent of such participation

7. The third person must be innocent of the commission of the crime

otherwise he would be liable as an accessory and this article will apply

Art. 112.               Extinction of civil liability. — Civil liability

established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of this Code shall be
extinguished in the same manner as obligations, in accordance with the
provisions of the Civil Law.
 Civil liability is extinguished by:

5. payment or performance

6. loss of the thing due

7. condonation or remission of the debt

8. confusion or merger of the rights of creditor and debtor

9. compensation

10. novation

 Other causes of extinguishment of obligations such as annulment,

rescission, fulfillment of a resolutory condition and prescription are
governed elsewhere in this code

 Civil liability may arise from

 4. Crime – RPC

5. Breach of contract – CC

6. Tortious act – CC

 The civil liability from any of these is extinguished by the same causes
enumerated above

 The accused shall still be liable for the payment of the thing stolen
even if it is lost or destroyed

Art. 113.               Obligation to satisfy civil liability. — Except in

case of extinction of his civil liability as provided in the next preceding
article the offender shall continue to be obliged to satisfy the civil
liability resulting from the crime committed by him, notwithstanding the fact
that he has served his sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty or other
rights, or has not been required to serve the same by reason of amnesty,
pardon, commutation of sentence or any other reason.
Notes:
9. Unless extinguished, civil liability subsists even if the offender has
served sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty or other rights or
has served the same, due to amnesty, pardon, commutation of the sentence
or any other reason.

10. Under the law as amended, even if the subsidiary imprisonment is served
for non-payment of fines, this pecuniary liability of the defendant is
not extinguished.

11. while amnesty wipes out all traces and vestiges of the crime, it does
not extinguish the civil liability of the offender. A pardon shall in no
case exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity imposed
upon him by the sentence

12. probation affects only the criminal aspect of the crime.