CLJ103 Act. Joselle

NAME : JOSELLE A.
BAUTISTA
BS- CRIMINOLOGY 3-DELTA
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
ASSIGNMENT/ ACTIVITY NO:1
1. WHAT IS MISTAKE OF FACTS?

ANSWER:
Accordingly to what I’ve understand Mistakes of fact arise when a criminal defendant misunderstood
some fact that negates an element of the crime. For instance, if an individual is charged with larceny
but believed that the property he took was rightfully his, this misunderstanding negates any intent to
deprive another of the property. One important qualification, however, is that this mistake of fact
must be honest and reasonable. Thus, a defendant cannot later claim that he or she was mistaken
when he or she actually knew the situation. Likewise, the mistake must be one that would appear
reasonable to a judge or jury. If the same individual was repeatedly told that the property was not his,
and he could not take it, it would no longer be reasonable for him to mistakenly have believed that he
could rightfully take the property.Mistake is not a defense to a strict liability offense. For example,
Diana lives in a jurisdiction in which the sale of alcohol to minors is a strict liability offense. She does
her best to check identification whenever selling alcohol at her store. John, age 17, presents Diana
with a convincing fake I.D. and otherwise appears to be over 21. If Diana sells John alcohol, she could
be guilty of selling alcohol to a minor, even though she reasonably and honestly believed that John
was old enough to purchase it. Mistakes of fact may apply to a variety of crimes. Some crimes may set
forth that mistake of fact is a defense. Otherwise, if the criminal defendant can prove that the mistake
reasonably negated an element of the crime, the defense will usually be held to apply and absolve the
defendant of liability.Mistake of law is a defense that the criminal defendant misunderstood or was
ignorant of the law as it existed at the time. The onus is generally placed on individuals to be aware of
the laws of their state or community, and thus this defense only applies in very limited circumstances.
For example, while a defendant will not be able to claim that he was not aware that murder was a
crime, he may be able to argue that he was not aware of some obscure traffic law.
Specifically, mistake of law can be used as a defense in four limited circumstances:
 When the law has not been published;

 When the defendant relied upon a law or statute that was later overturned or deemed
unconstitutional;
 When the defendant relied upon a judicial decision that was later overruled; or
 When the defendant relied upon an interpretation by an applicable official.
Additionally, the defendant’s reliance on any of these sources must have been reasonable, much like
mistake of fact. Thus, a defendant cannot claim that he was relying on a case from 200 years ago
when it is apparent that there have been subsequent developments in the law.
It is also important to note that, while reliance on an interpretation of an official may include judges
or federal or state agencies, it does not include reliance on the statements of a private attorney. It is
therefore important to ensure that any attorney from whom you obtain advice is knowledgeable and
trustworthy.
2. WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF SUCCESSFULLY PUTTING UP THE DEFENSES OF JUSTIFYING

CIRCUMSTANCES?
ANSWER:
As what I’ve understand as our prof said during our class A. Justifying Circumstances- These are the
defenses in which the accused is deemed to have acted in accordance with the law and therefore the
act is lawful. Since the act is lawful, it follows that there is no criminal, no criminal liability and no civil
liability, This are those where the act of a person is said to be in accordance with the law, so that such
person is deemed not to have transgressed the law and is free from both civil and criminal liability.
The following are successfully Do not incure any criminal liability
NAME : JOSELLE A. BAUTISTA
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
1. There is no mens rea or criminal intent
2. The circumstances pertain to the act and not to the actor. Hence all who participated in the
act will be benefited. Thus if the principal is acquitted there will be no accomplices and
accessories.
3. These apply only to intentional felonies, not to acts by omissions or to culpable felonies or to
violations of special laws
4. They are limited to the 6 enumerated in Article 11.
The following are those that do not incure criinal liability
a. Defense of oneself (Self-defense)
b. Defense of a relatives
c. Defense of a stranger
d. State of necessity
e. Fulfillment of lawful duty/exercise of rights or office
f. Obedience to superior order
In Self-defense
 Must be proved with certainty by sufficient, satisfactory and convincing evidence that excludes
any vestige of criminal aggression on the part of the person invoking it.
 "burden of proof rest upon the accused"-his duty is to establish self-defense by CLEAR and
CONVINCING evidence.
 Must rely on the strength of his own evidence and
NOT the weakness of that for the prosecution.
Element of Self-defense
a. Unlawful aggression;
b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression; and
c. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself
INCLUDES: Defense of life, chastity, property and honor.
Unlawful aggression
 It must be actual, sudden, unexpected attack or imminent danger thereof, not merely a
threatening or intimidating attitude.
 The accused must present proof of positively strong act of real aggression.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
 Unlawful aggression must be such as to put in real peril the life or personal safety of the person
defending himself or of others being defended and not imagined threat.
 Unlawful Aggression is the primordial requisites which must at all time be present. When
unlawful aggression is absent, there is no self-defense.
 "indispensable" requisite (condition "sine qua non")-There can be no self defense, complete or
incomplete UNLESS the victim has committed an unlawful aggression against the person
defending himself.
 Unlawful aggression must be actual physical assault/force or actual use of weapon or at least a
threat to inflict a real injury.
 When there is no peril to one's life, limb, or right there is no aggression.
 Insulting words address to the accused, no matter how objectionable they may have been,
WITHOUT PHYSICAL ASSAULT, could not constitute unlawful aggression.
 A SLAP OF THE FACE is an unlawful aggression.
Reason: since the face represents a person and his dignity, slapping therefore, is a serious personal
attack as placing in real danger a person's dignity, rights and safety .
3. WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF SUCCESSFULLY PUTTING UP THE DEFENSE OF EXEMPTING

CIRCUMSTANCES?
ANSWER:
I think that an Exempting Circumstances- These are defenses where in the accused committed a crime
but is not criminally liable. There is a crime, and there is civil liability but no criminal.
1. The basis is the lack of any of the elements which makes the act/omission voluntary, the exeption
of punishment is a complete absence of freedom, intelligence, intent or due care, absence of the
part of the accuse negligence.
2. These defenses pertain to the actor and not the act. They are personal to the accused in whom
they are present and the effects do not extend to the other participants. Thus if a principal is
acquitted, the other principals, accessories and accomplices are still liable.
3. They apply to both intentional and culpable felonies and they may be available in violations of
special laws.
4. They are limited to the 7 enumerated in Article 12.
In Exempting circumstances:
a. The circumstance affect the actor, not the act;
b. The act is felonious and hence a crime but the actor acted without voluntariness;
c. Although there is a crime, there is no criminal because the actor is regarded only
as an instrument of the crime;
d. There being a wrong done but no criminal.
Expempting circumstances
Non-imputability)meaning are those grounds for exemption from punishment because there is
wanting in the agent of the crime any of the conditions which make the act voluntary or negligent.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
IN EXEMPTING FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY
1. An imbecile or insane person (unless acted during lucid interval)
2. Under 9 years of age
3. Over 9 years under 15 (unless acted with discernment)-NEW LAW: 15 years under is exempt
4. Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes injury by mere accident
without fault or intention of causing it.
5.Any person who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force.
6. Any person who acts under impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater injury.
7. Any person who fails to perform an act required by law, when prevented by some lawful or
insuperable cause.
In exempting circumstances, I think there is a crime committed but NO CRIMINAL liability arises-
complete absence of any of the conditions which constitute free will or voluntariness of the act, no
criminal liability arise.
Any circumstances must be proved by the defendant to the
satisfaction of the court.
 IMBECILE OR INSANE PERSON

IMBECILE are exempt in all cases from criminal liability. One who while advanced in age, has a mental
development comparable to that of children between 2-7 years of age.
 INSANE are not so exempt if it can be shown that he acted during lucid interval.
BURDEN OF PROOF
The court has no power to permit the insane person to lear the asylum without first obtaining the
opinion of the Director of Health that he may be released
TO PROVE SANITY therefore, circumstantial evidence if clear and convincing will suffice,
WHEN THE DEFENSE ARE THE FOLLOWING:
1. Dementia
2. Kleptomania must be proved otherwise it will constitute a mitigating circumstance
3. Epilepsy
4.Feeblemindedness-not exempt because the offender can distinguish what is right and wrong
5. Paedophilia-not insanity
6. Amnesia-no defense to criminal charge unless it is shown by competent proof
7. Somnambulism or sleepwalking-the act is not voluntary (no intent while doing the act)
 PERSON UNDER 9 YEARS OLD

Age of absolute irresponsibility raised to 15 years of age. RA 9344 "Juvenile Justice and Welfare act of
2006", Sec. 6- at the time of commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability.
However, the child is subject to an intervention program (DSWD).
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
 PERSON OVER 9 AND UNDER 15
If such child acted with discernment- shall be subjected appropriate to proceedings in accordance
with this Act.
 ACTED WITH DISCERNMENT
EXCEPTION TO THE GENERAL RULE:
A minor under 18 years old but above 15 years old -must have acted with discernment to incure
criminal liability (wilfully, criminally and feloniously)
 IN PERFORMANCE OF LAWFUL ACT
ELEMENTS:
1. A person is performing a lawful act.
2. With due care
3. Causes an injury to another by mere accident
4. Without fault or intention of causing it
 EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE
• Accident presupposes lack of intention to commit wrong done. (refers to purely accidental case)--
person performing a lawful act must do so with DUE CARE, WITHOUT FAULT OR NEGLIGENT
4. WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF SUCCESSFULLY PUTTING UP THE DEFENSE OF

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES?
ANSWER:
I think in my own understanding it is all about Lowering the penalty/shows lesser perversity.
Because the commission of the crime, do not entirely free the actor from criminal liability, but serve
only to reduce the penalty.
In Mitigating Circumstances- Those which when present results either to: (i) the penalty being
reduced by at least one degree or (ii) the penalty shall be imposed in its minimum period. They are
those enumerated in Article 13.In criminal law, mitigating circumstances are factors that help to
lessen the guilt of an offender and encourage the judge to be more lenient in their sentencing.
There are two types of criminal mitigation: positive mitigation and negative mitigation.
 When using positive mitigation, attorneys try to paint a positive, more holistic picture of the
defendant. To do so, they may speak of their devotion to family, hard work, or loyalty. This
strategy uses the defendant’s positive traits to show that their illegal actions were completely
out of character.
 Negative mitigation on the other hand attempts to highlight any hardships or difficult
circumstances that may have pushed the defendant to commit the crime. For instance, details
about growing up in an abusive household or a history of mental illness are examples of
mitigating circumstances that may be used to argue a lesser sentence.
 Other common mitigating circumstances include:
a) The defendant having no prior or significant criminal record
b) The defendant playing a minor role in the crime
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
c) The defendant recognizing the error of their ways

d) The defendant making restitution to the victim of their crime
e) The defendant acting out of necessity
f) The defendant having a difficult personal history
g) The defendant struggling with a drug or alcohol addiction.
 BASIS
Based on diminution of either freedom of action, intelligence, or intent, or on the lesser perversity of
the offender
 CLASSES OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE

ORDINARY MITIGATING- those that are enumerated in subsections 1-10 of Art. 13 of the RPC
can be offset by aggravating circumstances, if not offset by an aggravating circumstances, produces
only the effect of applying the penalty provided by law for the crime in its minimum period.
1. Incomplete justifying or exempting circumstance
2.Offender is under eighteen (18) years old or over seventy (70) years old. (minority or senility)
3. Offender had no intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed.
4. Sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party immediately preceded the act.
5. Immediate vindication of a grave offense
6. Passion or obfuscation (lawful sentiments)
7. Offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in authority or his agents, or that he had
voluntarily confessed his guilt
8. Voluntary plea of guilt
9. Deaf and dumb, and blind or other physical defect
10. Illness
11. Analogous circumstance
PRIVILEGE MITIGATING- Art. 68 (RA. 9344-Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act), Art. 69, Art. 64
cannot be offset by aggravating circumstance produces the effect of imposing upon the offender the
penalty lower by one or two degrees provided by the law for the crime
SPECIFIC MITIGATING-applies to specific felony like concealment of dishonour in case of abortion by
pregnant woman and could either be ordinary or privilege depending upon the extent of reduction of
penalty. Minority is always a privileged mitigating circumstance.
►The offender must be a minor under 18 at the time of the commission of the crime, If he were 18 or
over, he is no longer a minor in the eyes of the law.
Penal Laws should be liberally construed in favour of the offender.
 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES(MINORITY)
ELEMENTS:
1. Provocation must be sufficient

2. It must be immediate to the commission of the crime
3. It must originate from the offended party
 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES (SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION)

SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION (as a requisite of incomplete self-defense) is different from sufficient
provocation (as a mitigating circumstance). As an element of
 SEL-DEFENSE -requires ABSENCE on the part of the person defending himself. MITIGATING
CIRCUMSTANCE pertains to its PRESENCE on the part of the offended party.
►Offense need not be a crime. It may be an act or event which offends the accused causing mental
agony to him and moves him to vindicate himself in such offense.
►EXAMPLE:
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
1. Eloping with the offender's daughter
2. Insulting an old man
 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES (IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE)

IMMEDIATE means proximate, unlike in sufficient provocation, and allows an interval of time between
the commission of the offense and its vindication as long as the offender is still suffering from the
mental agony brought about by the offense to him
 Obfuscation is analogous to "jealousy". It is necessary to arose from the offender's lawful
sentiments
▸ There must be an act on the part of the offended which is unlawful and sufficient to excite passion
and obfuscation on the accused
EXAMPLE:
ART 332- Adulterous wife caught in flagrante delicto having sexual

intercourse with the paramour. (the act of the husband is legal and lawful)
 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES (PASSION AND OBFUSCATION)

Overreaction on the part of the accused, if done with revenge and lawlessness, there is no passion or
obfuscation will arise.
Voluntary surrender can be appreciated EVEN if the accused turned themselves one week after the
crime. The fact is they voluntarily surrendered to the police before arrest could be effected.
(Spontaneous purpose: 1. save expenses of the government in arresting, 2. admission of guilt)
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES (VOLUNTARY SURRENDER)

▸ ELEMENTS:
1 Plea was made in open court. (judicial confession)

2. It was spontaneous and unconditional
3 Made before presentation of the evidence by the prosecution.
NOTE: An extra-judicial confession is not mitigating because it is not made in open court.
 Confession of guilt made before the media is not within this provision Voluntary plea of guilt is
mitigating because it is an act of repentance and respect for the law
 Plea of guilt in capital offense must not be accepted with alacrity but the
accused must be made to understand fully the nature of his plea and its consequences
 Accused did not plead to a lesser offense but pleaded guilty to the offense charge -he should be
sentenced to the penalty to which he pleaded. (It is the essence of a plea of guilt that the
accused admits absolutely and unconditionally his guilt and responsibility for the offense
imputed to him)
 Physical defects must be related to the offense committed because the law requires that the
defects has the effect of restricting his means of action, defense, or communication to his fellow
beings.
 ▸ ILLNESS must only diminish and not deprive the offender of the consciousness of his acts
(otherwise he will be exempt from criminal liability)
I also think mitigating factors impact the outcome of a case when determining a felony or
misdemeanor sentence, judges assess these mitigating factors as well as any aggravating
circumstances that arise. In contrast to mitigating circumstances, aggravating circumstances increase
the defendant’s culpability and encourage heavier punishments. Some examples include a lack of
remorse, a leadership role in the crime, or history of criminal behavior.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
If a case’s mitigating circumstances outweigh the aggravating circumstances, the judge is likely to be
less aggressive in their ruling. Therefore, outlining the mitigating circumstances behind a crime can
become a vital tool when facing severe criminal charges, and in some cases could even be the
difference between life and death.
5. IS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION A CRIME?

ANSWER:
Acording from what I’ve understand about the law of human rights or Bill of rights YES off
course it is a crime because any violation of human rights that is punishable by the law is
considered a crime against human and against the law and it is because Human rights is a
law that was already an act. Serious human rights violations constitute crimes against
humanity provided that they present the following legal elements. Concerning objective or
material elements: i) chapeaux (contextual) elements: widespread or systematic attack
committed against a civilian population; and underlying conducts:such as murder,
extermination, torture, rape, persecution, etc. As to subjective or mental elements (mens
rea): awareness of the contextual elements; and mental element applicable to the specific
underlying conduct.
Bearing this in mind and under the ICC(INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT Statute), crimes
against humanity correspond to serious criminal behaviors such as murder, extermination,
torture or forced disappearance provided that these are “committed as part of a widespread
or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack”
Thus, if these legal elements are present and proven, the following acts constitute crimes
against humanity:
 Murder
 Extermination
 Enslavement
 Deportation or forcible transfer of population
 Imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty in violation of
fundamental rules of international law
 Torture;
 Rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, forced pregnancy, enforced
sterilization, or any other form of sexual violence of comparable gravity;
 Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial,
national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other
grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international
law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within
the jurisdiction of the Court;
 Enforced disappearance of persons;
 The crime of apartheid;
 Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering,
or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
 ACTIVITIES/ ASSIGNMENT NO.2

CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
1. Mr. A did spit from a window of the tall building yesterday, today a
law is enacted making the act of spitting from the window of a tall
building a crime. Mr. A is now being prosecuted based on his act
yesterday.
a. Is the law valid?

ANSWER:
NO. Because the law has no ex post facto effect or retro active effect on the incident
happended yesterday and the law was not yet enacted during the time and date of
the incident so the law cannot be valid or applied in this case of MR.A and this kind
of offense is conisdered as a misdemeaneor offense or infractions in the law ordince
depending on the area, place, country or city where he did it , that is why for
me ,which means the law is not valid and an ex post facto is prohibitted by the
general rule and contitution and there is a due process law and equal protection
which protects the rights and safety of MR.A. and also accordingly to : Nullum
crimen, nulla poena sine lege (There is no crime when there is no law
punishing the same) – which means 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.
b. can we successfully prosecute Mr. A?

ANSWER:
No. Because there is no expost facto or retroactive effect on MR. A actions and to
the law and it’s also because his act is considered a misdemeanor act or it is
considered a violation of social norms or what we call infractions which is lesser
offense , lesser punishment and lesser penalty it cannot be apllied because it was
not yet enacted as an act during the time and date of the incident so there is no
criminal liability and there is no case that must be filed against him because only fg
2. A law was enacted making the act of spitting from a tall window as a
crime. Said law was kept inside the drawer of the President and was
not published. Mr. X is being prosecuted based on that law
but he argued that he cannot be prosecuted because he did not know
of the existence of said law. The government put up the defense of
ignorance of the law excuses no one and pursue the case against Mr.
X.
a. Is the law valid?
ANSWER:
NO. It is not valid because the law which is an ex post facto has no retro active effect
, and it was not published in the constitution alone by the president which means it
is not enacted and approved by the congress or by the cabinet members of the
supreme court of justice ,where in it is not legally processed in the 3 branches of the
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
government which is the executive branch, legislative branch and the Judicial
branched the only power that the president in law making is to execute law or give
or passed an order, but not legislative , it cannot be applied to procecute the
offenders or the violators and spitting is a misdemeanor act or infractions of the law
or public ordinance or infrastructure ordinance and it is considered an act against
social norms of the society or public rules which has lesser offense and lesser
punsihment but still Mr.X case has to be under gone in the due process which will
protect his rights and validate his defense and accordingly to general rule expost
facto is prohibitted by the constitution which means there is a due process.
b. Can Mr. X be successfully prosecuted based on the law?

ANSWER:
NO, it depends on the gravity of his offense , But with an excemption because there
are factor that needs to be considered an exemptions in criminal liability in this case
one is that mr. X has no proper knowledge about the law but the law excuses no one
, the law is not published or valid and release in public or exercise in jurisdiction
before because it was just kept by the president hidden from public that means
there is no expost facto or retro active effect on law , it does not also undergone in
the legal process of 3 branches which is the executive, legislative and judicial which
means it is not an act or bill znd it is not valid to use against MR.X . Yet or its is not an
official law and it is not also a legal law but then under any circumstances he can still
be punish through paying fines because the law excuse no one it just depends on
the city or area or public infrastructure ordinance which validate his actions as a
violation where he commits the act. Or ommision. His acts was considered a
misdemeanor or infraction.
3.The act of male individual urinating on the street is made criminal

under Law
1. Is the law valid?
ANSWER:
YES, off course the law is valid because this male individual commit an offense or
violations agains the law , his act or offense which is considered a Criminal offense
for Urinating in Public. State law usually classifies disorderly conduct and similar
crimes as misdemeanors , which are less serious than felonies. Penalties for a
misdemeanor can include:
 Incarceration in county jail. Usually, courts can order up to a year, but people
don't often go to jail for a year for peeing in public (especially for a first offense),
and sometimes they do no jail time.
 Payment of a fine. The amount of the fine varies from state to state and locality
to locality.
 Community service. The court can require volunteer work at a charity, for
example.
Instead of or in addition to jail, the court can place the defendant on probation
(usually for two or three years).
Penalties can be more severe if you've been convicted of prior offenses; you could
be less likely to get probation and more likely to do jail time and pay higher fines.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
 ACTIVITIES/ ASSIGNMENT NO: 3
1. Is the act of illegally possessing an unlicensed firearm mala inse or mala

prohibita?
ANSWER:
Accordingly to what I’ve understand this act or offense is considered a Crimes
punishable by Special Penal Laws, standing alone, are considered as Mala Prohibita.
An example of such act is Illegal Possession of Firearms it is also because Mala
Prohibita are acts or omissions that are not wrong or evil in essence, but they are
wrong or evil because they are prohibited. Possession of an unlicensed firearm by a
person, who is under death threat, is not inherently wrong. And yet, he can be held
liable for illegal possession of a loose firearm since RA No. 10591 prescribes a
penalty for it. Possession of a loose firearm is a crime not because it is inherently
wrong but simply because the offender has disregarded the law mandating firearm
owners to obtain a license before possessing it.
2. Presidential Decree 532 punishes the act of piracy on internal waters of the
Philippines. is this in the nature of mala inse or mala prohibita crime?
ANSWER:
Personally in my own opinion,These acts are inherently wrong and although they are
punishable under special laws,The act themselves are mala in se; thus good faith or
lack of criminal iintent is a defense. Distinction between crimes punished under the
Revised Penal Code and crimes punished under special laws . 1st .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. 2nd As to use of good faith as defense In crimes
punished under the RevisedPenal Code, good faith or lack of criminal intent is a valid
defense;unless the crime is the result of culpa. In crimes punished underspecial laws,
good faith is not a defense. 3rd 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; there fore, 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 penalizes a mere attempt or frustration of the crime.4th As to mitigating
and aggravating circumstances In crimes punished under the Revised Penal Code,
mitigating and aggravating circumstances are taken into account 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.5th 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
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
the commission of the crime is taken into account in imposing the penalty; thus,
offenders are classified asprincipal, 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 accessory to consider that is why it is MALA-INSE. Piracy. Any attack
upon or seizure of any vessel, or the taking away of the whole or part thereof or its
cargo, equipment, or the personal belongings of its complement or passengers,
irrespective of the value thereof, by means of violence against or intimidation of
persons or force upon things, committed by any person, including a passenger or
member of the complement of said vessel, in Philippine waters, shall be considered
as piracy. The offenders shall be considered as pirates and punished as hereinafter
provided .The penalty on piracy of reclusion temporal in its medium and maximum
periods shall be imposed. If physical injuries or other crimes are committed as a
result or on the occasion thereof, the penalty of reclusion perpetua shall be
imposed. If rape, murder or homicide is committed as a result or on the occasion of
piracy, or when the offenders abandoned the victims without means of saving
themselves, or when the seizure is accomplished by firing upon or boarding a vessel,
the mandatory penalty of death shall be imposed.Presidential Decree No. 532
punishes piracy in Philippine waters and the special law punishing brigandage
in the highways. These acts are inherently wrong and although they are
punished under special law, the acts themselves are mala in se; thus, good
faith or lack of criminal intent is a defense.
3.Distinguish intent from motive.

ANSWER:
I think for me Intent refers to a person’s conscious decision to commit an act that
violates state or federal laws. Intent can be specific or general. Specific intent
focuses on the act, the social policy underlying the offence and the complexity of the
reasoning process, while general intent focuses only on the act. It can be difficult to
discern the difference between specific and general intent but
General intent is a lower mens rea than specific intent. General intent only requires
a conscious doing of the prohibited act. General intent distinguishes “intentional”
actions from “accidental” actions.
For example, if a man is riding on a subway and he intentionally touches a woman’s
breast, he has intentionally touched that woman. On the other hand, if a man is
riding on a subway that comes to an abrupt stop and the man falls over and
accidentally touches a woman’s breast while he falls over, he did not intentionally
touch that woman.
In the first case, the man could be guilty of sexual assault. In the second case,
although the man committed the actus reus of sexual assault, he did not possess the
mens rea for sexual assault as he did not intend to touch the woman’s breast.
While Specific intent requires the conscious doing of the prohibited act coupled with
a specific state of mind. Specific intent had been used in three different senses. First,
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
when a particular state of mind compounded with a prohibited conduct constitutes

an offence. Second, as an “ulterior intent”, when a state of mind contemplates
consequences beyond those defined in the actus reus. Third is the specific intent as
intention applied to acts in relation to their purposes where the crime is one of
‘specific intent’ the prosecution must in general prove that the purpose for the
commission of the act extends to the intent expressed or implied in the definition of
the crime.
For example, the offence of attempted murder is a specific intent offence. the
Criminal Code states that “Every person who attempts by any means to commit
murder is guilty of an indictable offence.” This means that to be guilty of attempted
murder the Crown must prove that the accused had the “specific intent to kill.” No
lesser mens rea will suffice.
Motive
Motive focuses on the reason for someone’s actions – what prompted the person to
act. Motive is distinct from purpose, which is the “thing intended.” Criminal law has
little interest for the motive behind a person’s actions. This is because focusing on
the motive behind the person’s actions would not eliminate the actus reus or mens
rea of the offence. Motive simply provides context to why an individual acted in a
certain way.
For example, consider a fight between two individuals – Mark and Antony. Mark and
Antony used to be best friends. Then Mark found out that his wife was having an
affair with Antony. This infuriated Mark. As soon as he learned about the affair, he
drove over to Antony’s house to confront him. When Mark arrived, Antony was
mowing his front lawn. A verbal altercation transpired which ultimately culminated
in a fist fight. Mark threw the first punch and ended up being charged with assaulting
Antony.
To get a conviction, all the Crown needs to prove is that Mark intentionally punched
Antony. Mark’s reason for doing so although relevant in providing context to the
nature of the assault is not relevant when it comes to proving the elements of the
offence.
To distinguish intent and motive in example. One evening, a stockbroker receives

insider information that the value of ABC Stock is going to plummet in three days
after news about an environmental scandal is released. The stockbroker is on the
verge of receiving a promotion, all he needs is one more “big move.” The next
morning, the stockbroker sells all of ABC Stock.
In this case, the stockbroker’s general intention was to sell ABC Stock. The
stockbroker’s specific intention was to rely on the insider information to sell ABC
stock. The stockbroker’9--s motive for selling the stock was to get a promotion.
IN OTHER WORDS Motive deals with an individual's underlying reasons for
committing a crime, whereas intent is concerned with their willingness to carry out
specific actions related to the offense
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
4.What is culpa?
ANSWER:
As what I’ve understand If it is committed by means of fault, then it is culpa or
otherwise known as culpable felonies such as reckless imprudence resulting in
damage to properties. Culpa criminal simply means negligence arising from a
criminal act and Culpa aquiliana is simply quasi-delicti or civil damages due to
negligence. There is culpable felony if the offender, in doing the act or in comitting to
do an act, has done so with FREEDOM, INTELLIGENCE, and IMPRUDENCE,
NEGLIGENCE, LACK of FORESIGHT or LACK OF SKILL.
1. Imprudence – It usually involves lack of skill. A deficiency of action or failure to

take necessary precaution to avoid injury or damage such as when a driver fails to
check and determine the road worthiness of his vehicle before hitting the road
where thereafter he had a brake failure which caused him to run over a pedestrian.
Such may have been avoided if he had prudently checked his vehicle.
2. Negligence – It usually involves lack of foresight. A deficiency of perception or
failure to pay proper attention and to use diligence to avoid a foreseeable damage or
injury such as example of this when a cop indiscriminately fires his gun in the air
during New Year’s Eve which caused injury to another. had the cop foreseen that
firing his gun in open air might injure someone the incident would not have
happened.
5.Who are Principals, Accomplices, and Accessories? Explain.

ANSWER:
As what I’ve remembered in our class discussion about who are the criminal liable I
think For Grave and Less Grave Felonies they are the principals, accomplices and
accessories. For light felonies they are the principals and accomplices only.
Accessories are not liable.The classification into principals, accomplices and
accessories is based on the Degree of Participation in the commission of a crime
where at least two persons participated. This classification does not apply to
violations of special laws where the violators are referred to plainly as offenders,
violators, culprits or criminals,to be guilty of a crime, one must commit the crime
himself (principal) or if committed by another, he must, in some manner, participate
either in its commission ( accomplice) or in the fruits thereof ( accessory).
 KINDS OF PRINCIPALS
1. PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION - personally takes part in the execution of
the act constituting the crime REQUISITES:
a) That they participated in the criminal resolution;
b) That they carried out their plan and personally took part in its execution by
acts which directly tended to the same end
2. PRINCIPAL BY INDUCTION - the principal by induction becomes liable only when
the principal by direct participation committed the act induced.
TWO WAYS OF BECOMING A PRINCIPAL BY INDUCTION:
1. Directly forcing another to commit a crime,

CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
Two ways of directly forcing another to commit a crime:

 by using irresistible force
 by causing uncontrollable fear
2. Directly inducing another to commit a crime.

Two ways of directly inducing another to commit a crime:
 by giving price, or offering reward or promise.
 by using words of command
 (Principal by inducement, through giving price, etc): In order that a person

maybe convicted as a principal by inducement, the following requisites must be
present-
1. that the inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring
the commission of the crime; and
2. that such inducement be the determining cause of the commission of the crime by
the material executor.
 (Principal by inducement, through words of command): In order that a person

using words of command maybe held liable, the following requisites must be
present.
1. That the one uttering the words of command must have the intention of procuring
the commission of the crime
2. . That the one who made the command must have an ascendancy or influence
over the person who acted
3. That the words used must be so direct, so efficacious, so powerful as to amount to
physical or moral coercion
4. The words of command must be uttered prior to the commission of the crime
5. The material executor of the crime has no personal reason to commit the crime.
PRINCIPLE BY INDUCEMENT - Becomes liable only when the crime is committed by

the principal by direct participation, Inducement involves any crime, Offender who
made Proposal to Commit a Felony- The mere proposal to commit a felony is
punishable in treason or rebellion; the person to whom the proposal is made should
not commit the crime, otherwise, the proponent becomes a principal by
inducement,
The proposal must involve only treason or rebellion.
3. PRINCIPALS BY INDISPENSABLE COOPERATION REQUISITES:

1. Participation in the criminal resolution, that is, there is either anterior conspiracy
or unity of criminal purpose and intention immediately before the commission of the
crime charged; and
2. Cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing another act, without
which it would not have been accomplished.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
EFFECT OF ACQUITTAL OF ONE OF THE CO-CONSPIRATORS TO THE OTHER CO-

CONSPIRATORS:As a rule, the acquittal of one of the co-conspirators redounds to
the benefit of the other co-conspirators EXCEPT when the acquittal is due to
circumstances personal to the accused.
COLLECTIVE CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY (WHEN THERE IS CONSPIRACY)There is
collective criminal responsibility when the offenders are criminally liable in the same
manner and to the same extent. The penalty to be imposed must be the same for
all.
INDIVIDUAL CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY (WHEN THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY)The
criminal responsibility arising from different acts directed against one and the same
person is individual and not collective, and each of the participants is liable only for
the act committed by him.
 ACCOMPLICES
(COMMUNITY COOPERATES previous supply RELATION)
1. That there be community of design;
2. that is, knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct participation, he
concurs with the latter in his purpose;
3. That he cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous
acts, but does not render him a principal by direct participation or by indispensable
cooperation; and
4. That there be a relation between the acts done by the principal and those
attributed to the person charged as accomplice.
 ACCESSORIES
An accessory must have knowledge of the commission of the crime and having
knowledge that he took part subsequent to its commission.
SPECIFIC ACTS OF ACCESSORIES:(CODE: PROFIT, CONCEAL, HARBOR)
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 to prevent its discovery.
3. By harboring, concealing or assisting in the escape of the principal of the crime
(2 CLASSES OF ACCESSORIES CONTEMPLATED IN PAR. 3 OF ART. 19 example
HARBORING, etc):
a) Public officers who harbor, conceal or assist in the escape of the principal of any
crime (not light felony) with abuse of his 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 other crime.
Under paragraphs 1 and 2, the accomplice and the accessory may be tried and
convicted even before the principal is found guilty. However, under paragraph 3
(harboring), the crime committed by and the identity of the principal must be
established in a trial.
ACCESSORY VS. PRINCIPAL AND ACCOMPLICE

CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
1. The accessory does not take part or cooperate in, or induce, the commission of
the crime;
2. The accessory does not cooperate in the commission of the offense by acts prior
there to or simultaneous there with;
3. The participation of the accessory in all cases always takes place after the
commission of the crime.
6. Explain the following stages in the commission of crimes;

a. Attempted stage
b. Frustrated stage
c. Consummated stage
ANSWER:
 As what I’ve remembered there are three stages in the commission of a crime:
Consummated- if the crime is executed and accomplished, such as when you hit
the victim with a piece of hardwood and killed him. when all the elements
necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present therefore it is
consumated.
 Frustrated- such as when you hit him and he could have died from the injuries
that you inflicted were it not for the timely intervention of the doctors, he
accused has performed all the acts of execution necessary to produce the felony
but the crime is not produced by reason of causes independent of the will of the
accused. The accused has passed the subjective phase and is now in the
objective phase, or that portion in the commission of the crime where the
accused has performed the last act necessary to produce the intended crime
and where he has no more control over the results of his acts.
The non-production of the crime should not be due to the acts of the accused
himself, for if it were he would be liable not for the frustrated stage of the
intended crime, but possibly for another offense.
Elements of frustrated crime:

a. offender performs all acts of execution
b. all these acts would produce the felony as a consequence
c. BUT the felony is NOT produced
d. by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator
 Attempted-such as when you hit the victim but you could not finish him off
because a policeman arrived and subdued you.
The punishment for an attempted crime is lower than that of a frustrated crime,
which is lower than that of a consummated one.the accused commences the
commission of a felonious act directly by overt acts but does not perform all the acts
of execution due to some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
desistance” The attempt which the Penal Code punishes is that which has a
connection to a particular, concrete offense, that which is the beginning of the
execution of the offense by overt acts of the perpetrator, leading directly to its
realization and commission, Overt or external act is some physical deed or activity,
indicating the intention to commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
preparation, which if carried out to is complete termination following its natural

course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the voluntary
desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete
offense.
For example: 1. The accused pressed a chemically -soaked cloth on the mouth of the
woman to induce her to sleep, while he lay on top of her and pressed his body to
her. The act is not the overt act that will logically and necessarily ripen into rape.
They constitute unjust vexation. ( Note: it would be attempted rape if he tried to
undress the victim or touch her private parts)
A.)One found inside a house but no article was found on him, is liable for trespass
and not for attempted theft or robbery even if he is a notorious robber
B.)One found removing the glass window panes or making a hole in the wall is not
liable for attempted robbery but for attempted trespass.
C) The accused has not yet passed the subjective phase or that phase encompassed
from the time an act is executed which begins the commission of the crime until the
time of the performance of the last act necessary to produce the crime, but where
the accused has still control over his actions and their results.
D.)The accused was not able to continue performing the acts to produce the crime.
He was prevented by external forces and not because he himself choose not to
continue. Such as when his weapon was snatched, or his intended victim managed to
escape, or he was overpowered or arrested.
E. ) If the accused voluntarily desisted example he himself decided not to continue

with his criminal purpose, then he is not liable.
My Reason: This is an absolutory cause by way of reward to those who, having set
one foot on the verge of crimes, heed the call of their conscience and return to the
path of righteousness. .
2. The reason for the desistance is immaterial
3. Excemptions: when the accused is liable despite his desistance
a). when the act performed prior to the desistance already constituted the
attempted stage of the intended felony. For example: the accused, with intent to kill,
shot at the victim but missed after which he “desisted”, his acts already constituted
attempted homicide
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
b). When the acts performed already gave rise to the intended felony. The decision
not to continue is not a legal but factual desistance. As in the case of a thief who
returned what he stole.
c). When the acts performed constitute a separate offense. Pointing a gun at another
and threatening to kill, and then desisting gives rise to grave threats.
Elements of attempted crime:

a. offender commences the felony directly by overt acts
b. does not perform all acts which would produce the felony
c. his acts are not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance
 ACTIVITIES/ ASSIGNMENT NO. 4
1. What is Parliamentary Immunity?

ASNWER:
Accordingly from what I’ve remembered during our class dicussions
Parliamentary immunity, also known as legislative immunity, is a system in which
political leadership position holders such as president, vice president, minister,
governor, lieutenant governor, speaker, deputy speaker, member of parliament,
member of legislative assembly, member of legislative council, senator, member of
congress, corporator, councilor etc. are granted full immunity from legal
prosecution, both civil prosecution and criminal prosecution, in the course of the
execution of their official duties.Parliamentary immunity suggest the doctrine is
necessary to keep a check on unauthorised use of power of the judiciary, to maintain
judicial accountability, and to promote the health of democratic institutions.
The immunity of parliamentary proceedings from impeachment and question in the
courts is the only immunity of substance possessed by the Houses and their
members and committees.
There are aspects of the immunity. First, there is the immunity from civil or criminal
action and examination in legal proceedings of members of the Houses and of
witnesses and others taking part in proceedings in Parliament. This immunity is
usually known as the right of freedom of speech in Parliament. Secondly, there is the
immunity of parliamentary proceedings as such from impeachment or question in
the courts.
2. What is currency note? Give example of currency note

ANSWER:
Well a currency note is also known as a banknote—also called a bill in North
American English, paper money, or simply a note or money—is a type of negotiable
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
promissory note, made by a bank or other licensed authority, payable to the bearer
on demand. Banknotes were originally issued by commercial banks, which were
legally required to redeem the notes for legal tender (usually gold or silver coin)
when presented to the chief cashier of the originating bank. These commercial
banknotes only traded at face value in the market served by the issuing
bank.Commercial banknotes have primarily been replaced by national banknotes
issued by central banks or monetary authorities.A banknote is a negotiable
promissory note which one party can use to pay another party a specific amount of
money. A banknote is payable to the bearer on demand, and the amount payable is
apparent on the face of the note. Banknotes are considered legal tender; along with
coins, they make up the bearer forms of all modern money.
EXAMPLE OF IT IS : Philippine PESO bank notes ,Banknotes of the Philippine peso are
issued by the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas for circulation in the Philippines. The
smallest amount of legal tender in wide circulation is ₱20 and the largest is ₱1000.
3. What legal action can you use to remove the incumbent president from his
office?
ANSWER:
Accordingly to THE 1987 CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES –
ARTICLE XI (ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS)
The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members
of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from
office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution,
treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust.
All other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by
law, but not by impeachment.
The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of
impeachment.
A verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any Member of the House of
Representatives or by any citizen upon a resolution or endorsement by any Member
thereof, which shall be included in the Order of Business within ten session days, and
referred to the proper Committee within three session days thereafter. The
Committee, after hearing, and by a majority vote of all its Members, shall submit its
report to the House within sixty session days from such referral, together with the
corresponding resolution. The resolution shall be calendared for consideration by
the House within ten session days from receipt thereof. A vote of at least one-third
of all the Members of the House shall be necessary either to affirm a favorable
resolution with the Articles of Impeachment of the Committee, or override its
contrary resolution. The vote of each Member shall be recorded.In case the verified
complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the
Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and
trial by the Senate shall forth with proceedings.No impeachment proceedings shall
be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year.
The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment.
When sitting for that purpose, the Senators shall be on oath or affirmation. When
the President of the Philippines is on trial, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
shall preside, but shall not vote. No person shall be convicted without the
concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate.
Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office
and disqualification to hold any office under the Republic of the Philippines, but the
party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to prosecution, trial, and
punishment, according to law. The Congress shall promulgate its rules on
impeachment to effectively carry out the purpose of this section.
In other words
 Through impeachment
 Death of the president the vice will become the next president in position of
power
 Accidents like the presidents become disabled ex. Comatose
 End of his term
 Through peoples power revolutiion
 Through votes of the leader in the congress
4. If M/V S Ferry, a Philippine ship, is docked in Japan and a crime of murder is

committed on board that ship, what criminal law is applicable (Philippine or Japan
criminal law)? What rule (French or English) should be applied to arrive at correct
application of either Philippine/ Japan criminal law? Explain with reason.
ANSWER:
There are two fundamental rules on this particular matter or case in connection with
International Law and international agreement; to wit, the French rule, according to
which crimes committed aboard a foreign merchant vessels should not be
prosecuted in the courts of the country within whose territorial jurisdiction they
were committed, unless their commission affects the peace and security of the
territory; and the English rule, based on the territorial principle and followed in the
United States, according to which, crimes perpetrated under such circumstances are
in general triable in the courts of the country within territory they were committed
Of this two rules, it is the last one that obtains in this jurisdiction, because at present
the theories and jurisprudence prevailing in the United States on this matter are
authority in the Philippines which is now a territory of the United States. THEREFORE
my answer to this case is that since the crime was committed on board that ship
while the same is in the territorial body of water of Japan’s territory the offender is
triable in Philippine jurisdiction seclution to the Japan’s jurisdiction using the English
rules because since the crime incident happened inside the vessel of the philippine
vessel while they are docked in another country oe the territorial body of water of
japan’s territory and since the peace and security of japan is not affectted because
they where inside of the vessel when it happened and inside that means the crime
was only an infraction of the vessels rules affecting only the internal management of
the vessel of M/V S Ferry, a Philippine ship therefore I choose english rule because it
is applicable in this case.Also both philippine jurisdiction and Japan’s jurisdiction is
applicable in this case because the M/V S Ferry, a Philippine ship committed an
offense or violation in Japan’s territorial body of water and since they were docked
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
there, there was a crime incident while they are there that’s why japan’s jurisdiction
is applicable in this case while in philippine jurisdiction it can be applied if the
perpetraitor is a Filipino citizen the one who is liable and responsible of the
commision of crime commited. Another thing is that this M/V S Ferry, a Philippine
ship must be registered if not it is considered as a pirate ship and the passenger
inside that operates as a pirates because if the vessel is illegally operated then there
is another violation offense.
 ACTIVITIES/ ASSIGNMENT N0. 5

 Look for the elements of the crimes enumerated above (1-11) and write the same
on a yellow paper.
1. Direct bribery (Article 210, RPC)

ANSWER:
Bribery connotes the idea of a public officer utilizing the power, influence or prestige
of his office for the benefit of an individual in exchange for a consideration. The
offense can not be considered bribery if there is no consideration but the act may be
considered as a violation of the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act .
Its elements are as follows:
1. That the accused or offender is a public officer
2. That the offender accepts an offer or promise or receives a gift or present by
himself or through another;
3. That such offer or promise be accepted or gift/present received by the public
officer (Mere agreement consummates the crime and delivery of consideration is not
necessary) -
a. with a view to committing some crime;
b. in consideration of an execution of an act which does not constitute a crime, but
the act must be unjust; (contemplates an accepted gift, and an overt act)
c. to refrain from doing something which is his official duty to do; (should not be a
crime)
4. That the act which the offender agrees to perform or which he executes be
connected with the performance of his official duties. (need not be a statutory duty).
IV. There are three modes of commission of direct bribery and which is the basis for
the penalty to be imposed:
 A. First Mode: requires that the act involved amounted to a crime. Example:
Falsification and destruction of papers, records and properties, killing of
inmates, robbery and taking of money or valuables, invalid arrests, releasing of
persons detained
1. Three instances when it is consumated:
a). The act agreed upon was not yet performed but a consideration has already been
received
b). The act was executed even if the consideration has not yet been received
c). The act was executed and the consideration has been received
d). Conspiracy to Commit Bribery: If the officer merely agreed but did not actually
do the act and he did not yet receive nor was given the consideration, there is also
the crime of bribery. This is in the nature of a conspiracy which is punished
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
2. This has no frustrated or attempted stage since the mere agreement

consummates the crime
3. If the act constituting a crime was committed, the officer is liable for bribery and
for the additional crime so committed. The bribe giver will also be liable for the
crime. Bribery is never absorbed or complexed but is always punished separately.
But in the crime of Delivering Prisoners bribery constitutes a qualifying aggravating
circumstance
4. Example: The Jail Guard agreed with Mr. BB to kill X, an inmate, in exchange for
money. The crime is committed if (i) he has already received the money but was
arrested before he can kill X (ii) he killed X but Mr. BB failed to give the money and
(iii) He killed X and was paid either before or after the killing. In the second and third
instance, the officer and Mr. BB are liable also for murder/homicide for the killing.
 B. Second Mode: The act is not a crime but is unjust or the doing is improper or
unfair
1. The act done is within the proper functions or duties or the public officer. Hence
to constitute bribery, the consideration must be actually received. Future promises
or offers or consideration to be given after the doing, such as reward, do not give
rise to bribery.
2. If the officer performed the act regularly, properly, or in accordance with law, he is
not liable even if he already received the consideration
3. If the act was done improperly without any consideration, the officer is not liable
for bribery but he may be:
(a). Administratively liable
(b). Liable under the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act
4. If the officer received the consideration but he did not do the act as agreed upon,
he may be sued for the recovery of the consideration and for estafa by means of
deceit
5. There are only two stages: (i) attempted when the officer agreed to do the act for
a consideration and received the consideration but was not able to perform the act
and (ii) consummated when the act was executed and the officer received the
consideration.
6. Examples:
(a). For money received, the Court sheriff delayed the service of summons to the
defendant or that he did not immediately serve the writ of execution until the
defendant has sold his properties.
(b) The complainant paid the policeman to serve the warrant of arrest of the accused
will not be able to post bail. The police however served the warrant allowing the
accused to post bail. The police is not liable for bribery but the bribe giver is liable for
attempted corruption. But he may file a case to recover the money.
(c). The police received the money but when he went to arrest on a Friday night, the
accused had already posted bail that morning. He is liable for consummated bribery
even if the purpose was not achieved.
(d). NBI agents learned the money will be given on Friday morning. When the money
was given the NBI agents who were waiting, arrested both the giver and the police.
(e). Receiving money to give preference to a late application over others earlier
submitted
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
 C. Third Mode: There is non-performance of an official duty due to a

consideration provided the non-performance does not amount to a crime. If so
it is bribery of the first mode.
1. Examples:
a). A stenographer received money such that she did not record the testimony.
b). For money received, the clerk did not include the case in the court calendar or
that he did not send the required notices to witnesses.
c). Omission to accept and/or record a pleading filed
Common Principles
A. 1. The accused in the direct bribery case is the public officer only. The bribe giver
will be punished for Corruption of a Public Officer.
2. Private persons are liable if they are performing public functions such as
assessors, arbitrators, appraisers and claim commissioners. These private persons
are usually designated and/or directed by the court to perform these functions as
part of pending proceedings, and to submit their findings to the court
B. The act or omission must be in relation to the officer’s duties or functions
otherwise the crime would be estafa
C. The consideration need not be in terms of money, or articles of value so long as it
has a pecuniary value. This is because the penalty of fine is based on the value of the
consideration given. Those in the form of favors or service or non-material
considerations may induced a public official to do any of the act contemplated by
law. However there is the question of determining the value as basis for the fine.
The consideration may be given to the officer directly or to members of his family or
persons closely associated with the officer.
1.Examples of Consideration in the form of services: the employment or promotion
of a family member in a certain company; or the giving of a contract to the company
of the wife; or that the private person will shoulder the expenses of the birthday
party of the officer’s son
2. The borrowing of a vehicle by the LTO Director from a transportation company
can be considered as a gift in contemplation of law.
D. The giving of the consideration must be mutual, either at the suggestion of the
briber giver or upon the solicitation of the officer.
1. If it was the officer who solicited but the private person reported it leading to an
entrapment and the subsequent arrest of the officer, the crime is merely attempted
bribery.
2. If it was the private person who voluntarily gave but the officer used the
consideration as evidence, it is Attempted Corruption of a Public Officer
E. If the private person was compelled to agree to give a consideration due to force,
threat or intimidation on the part of the officer, the act is called extortion or
mulcting but the proper name of the offense is robbery
F. If a person gives money to a public officer as consideration for the officer to do or
not to do his duty for the benefit of the person, when will the receipt constitute
robbery and when will it be bribery?
1. If the money was given willingly at the instance of the giver, it is bribery
2. If he was forced to give it is robbery
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
3. If the giver committed a crime and at his own instance he gives money so as to
avoid arrest and prosecution, the receipt thereof would be bribery.
4. If the giver is a family member of a person arrested and was prevailed upon to
give so that the case against the relative will not push through, or will be down-
graded, the demand and receipt of consideration is robbery.
2. Qualified Bribery (Article 211-A, RPC)

ANSWER:
ELEMENTS:
Art. 211-A. QUALIFIED BRIBERY
the crime committed by any public officer who is entrusted with the law
enforcement and he refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has
committed a crime punishable by reclusion perpetua and/or death in consideration
of any offer, promise, gift or present.
ELEMENTS:
a. Public officer entrusted with law enforcement
b. Refrains from arresting/prosecuting offender for crime punishable by reclusion
perpetua and/or death (if lower penalty than stated above, the crime is direct
bribery)
c. In consideration of any offer, promise or gift Note that the penalty is DEATH if the
public officer is the one who asks or demands such present.
He need not receive the gift or present because a mere offer or promise is sufficient

Principles.
A. The offenders are limited to officers entrusted with law enforcement such as
members of the regular law enforcement agencies, as well as those tasked to
enforce special laws, and Prosecutors. This is similar to prevarication under Article
208 but the offense involved here which the officer refused to prosecute are graver
being punished by reclusion perpetua or death
B. Actual receipt of consideration is not necessary.
C. The penalty for the officer is that for the offense he did not prosecute. But if it was
the officer who solicited the gift, the penalty is death. However, the guilt of the
person who was not prosecuted must first be proven.
D. EXAMPLE: (a). what crime was committed by a law enforcement agent who
refused to arrest a rapist or murderer? (Ans). If it was because of a consideration the
crime is qualified bribery. If there was no consideration he is an accessory to the
crime
(b) Suppose it was a drug pusher who was refused to be arrested? (ans). Qualified
bribery if there was a consideration. If there was none it should be Violation of
Article 208 because there are no accessories in the offense of drug pushing
3. Indirect bribery (Article 211, RPC)

ANSWER:
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
Art. 211. INDIRECT BRIBERY

I. Concept: the crime committed by a public officer who accepts a gift given by reason of his
office or position. A gift is actually received and not future promises or offers. The officer
must have done an act appropriating the gift for himself, his family or employees. “ The
essential ingredient is that the public officer concerned must have accepted the gift or
material consideration .– The penalties of prision correctional in its medium and maximum
periods, suspension and public censure shall be imposed upon any public
officer who shall accept gifts offered to him by reason of his office.
ELEMENTS:
a. That the offender is a public officer.
b. That he accepts gifts.
c. That the said gifts are offered to him by reason of his office.
II. As illustrated example

1. An envelope was left on top of the desk of officer. The officer called his staff and told
them to use all the amount to buy food and snacks. This is indirect bribery
2. If the officer however gave it to the Jail or to some children, he is not liable
3. If he simply let the envelope drop on the floor and left it there, he is not liable.
4. If somebody pays the bill for his meal or drinks, he is not liable for indirect bribery as he
did not accept any gift.
5. Receipt of cash given as “share in winnings” or “balato” are included
II. The phrase “by reason of his office” means the gift would not have been given were it not
for the fact that the receiver is a public officer. The officer need not do any act as the gift is
either for past favors or to anticipate future favors, or simply to “impress” or earn the good
will of the officer.
The gift is given in anticipation of future favor from the public officer Indirect bribery,
the public officer receives or accepts gifts, money or anything of value by reason of
his office. If there is only a promise of a gift or money, no crime is committed
because of the language of the law which uses the phrase “shall accept gifts.” There
must be clear intention on the part of the public officer to take the gift offered and
consider the property as his own for that moment. Mere physical receipt
unaccompanied by any other sign, circumstance or act to show such acceptance is
not sufficient to convict the officer The Supreme Court has laid down the rule that
for indirect bribery to be committed, the public officer must have performed an act
of appropriating of the gift for himself, his family or employees. It is the act of
appropriating that signifies acceptance. Merely delivering the gift to the public
officer does not bring about the crime. Otherwise it would be very easy to remove a
public officer: just deliver a gift to him. There is no attempted or frustrated indirect
bribery. The principal distinction between direct and indirect bribery is that in the
former, the officer agrees to perform or refrain from doing an act in consideration of
the gift or promise. In the latter case, it is not necessary that the officer do any act. It
is sufficient that he accepts the gift offered by reason of his office  Public officers
receiving gifts and private persons giving gifts on any occasion, including Christmas
are liable underPD 46. The criminal penalty or imprisonment is distinct from the
administrative penalty of suspension from the service.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
4.Corruption (Article 212, RPC)

ANSWER:
The same penalties imposed upon the officer corrupted, except those of disqualification and
suspension, shall be imposed upon any person who shall have made the offers or promises
or given the gifts or presents as described in the preceding articles.
1.The offender gave or received gratification (e.g. money, loan, employment, sexual
services);
2.The gratification was an inducement or reward for any act/favour/disfavour;
3.There was an objectively corrupt/dishonest element in the transaction; and
4.The offender gave or accepted the gratification with guilty knowledge.
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender makes offers or promises or gives gifts or presents to a public officer;
and
2. That the offers or promises are made or the gifts or presents given to a public officer,
under circumstances that will make the public officer liable for direct bribery or indirect
bribery.
3.The offender is the giver of the gift or the offeror of the promise. The act may or may not
be accomplished. Under PD 749, givers of bribes and other gifts as well as accomplices in
bribery and other graft cases are immune from prosecution under the following
circumstances:
1. information refers to consummated violations
2. necessity of the information or testimony
3. the information and testimony are not yet in the possession of the State
4. information and testimony can be corroborated on its material points
5. informant has been previously convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude
Republic Act No. 3019 (The Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) is the main anti-corruption
law. It enumerates certain acts of public officers that constitute graft or corrupt practices, or
which may lead thereto, as follows:
 Persuading, inducing or influencing another public officer to perform an act constituting
a violation of rules, or an offense in connection with official duties
 Requesting or receiving any gift, present, share, percentage or benefit, for himself or for
any other person, in connection with any contract or transaction between the
government and any other party, wherein the public officer in his official capacity has to
intervene under the law
 Requesting or receiving any gift, present or other pecuniary or material benefit, from
any person for whom the public officer has secured or obtained, or will secure or
obtain, any government permit or license
 Accepting or having any member of his family accept employment in a private
enterprise that has pending official business with him, during the pendency thereof or
within one year after its termination
 Causing any undue injury to any party, including the government, or giving any private
party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his
functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence
 Neglecting or refusing to act within a reasonable time on any matter pending before
him for the purpose of obtaining some pecuniary or material benefit or advantage, or
for the purpose of favouring his own interest or giving undue advantage in favour of or
discriminating against any other interested party
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
 Entering, on behalf of the government, into any contract or transaction manifestly and
grossly disadvantageous to the same, whether or not the public officer profited or will
profit thereby
 Having financial or pecuniary interest in any business, contract or transaction in
connection with which he intervenes or takes part in his official capacity, or in which he
is prohibited from having any interest
 Becoming interested, for personal gain, or having a material interest in any transaction
or act requiring the approval of a board, panel or group of which he is a member, even
if he votes against the same or does not participate in the action of the board,
committee, panel or group
 Knowingly approving or granting any license, permit, privilege or benefit in favour of
any person not qualified
 Divulging to unauthorized persons valuable information of a confidential character
acquired by his office or by him on account of his official position, or releasing such
information in advance of its authorized release date
5.Frauds against the public treasury (Article 213, RPC)

ANSWER:
1) In his official capacity, in dealing with any person with regard to furnishing supplies, the
making of contracts, or the adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to public property
or funds, shall enter into an agreement with any interested party or speculator or make use
of any other scheme, to defraud the Government;
2) Being entrusted with the collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts, shall be
guilty or any of the following acts or omissions:
a) Demanding, directly, or indirectly, the payment of sums different from or larger than
those authorized by law.
b) Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law, for any sum of money collected
by him officially.
c) Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way of payment or otherwise things or
objects of a nature different from that provided by law.
When the culprit is an officer or employee of the Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau
of Customs, the provisions of the Administrative Code shall be applied. (Act No. 3815,
Revised Penal Code).
Mode of commission
Elements of the offense:
1) The offender is a public officer;
2) He commits any of these acts:
a) In his official capacity, in dealing with any person with regard to furnishing
supplies, the making of contracts, or the adjustment or settlement of accounts
relating to public property or funds, he enters into an agreement with any interested
party or speculator or make use of any other scheme, to defraud the Government;
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
b) Being entrusted with the collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts, he is
guilty of any of the following acts or omissions:
i) Demanding, directly, or indirectly, the payment of sums different from or larger

than those authorized by law.
ii) Failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law, for any sum of money
collected by him officially.
iii) Collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way of payment or otherwise

things or objects of a nature different from that provided by law.
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender be a public officer;
2. That he should have taken advantage of his office, that is,
he intervened in the transaction in his official capacity;
3. That he entered into an agreement with any interested party
or speculator or made use of any other scheme with regard to
(a) furnishing supplies
(b) the making of contracts, or
(c) the adjustment or settlement of account relating to a
public property or funds; and
4. That the accused had intent to defraud the government.
The felony is consummated by merely entering into an agreement

with any interested party or speculator or by merely making use
of any scheme to defraud the Government.
ILLEGAL EXACTIONS
ELEMENTS:
1. The offender is a public officer entrusted with the collection
of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts; and
2. That he is guilty of any of the following acts or omissions;
a. demanding, directly or indirectly the payment of sums different
from or larger than those authorized by law, or
b. failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law,
for any sum of money collected by him officially, or payment or otherwise, things
or objects of a nature different from that provided by law
This can only be committed principally by a public officer whose
official duty is to collect taxes, license fees, import duties and
other dues payable to the government.
Mere demand of a larger or different amount is sufficient to

consummate the crime. The essence is the improper collection and
damage to the government is not required.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
6.Possession of prohibited interest (Article 216, RPC)

ANSWER:
The penalty of arresto mayor in its medium period to prision correccional in its
minimum period, or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos, or both, shall be
imposed upon a public officer who directly or indirectly, shall become interested in
any contract or business in which it is his official duty to intervene.
This provisions is applicable to experts, arbitrators and private accountants who, in
like manner, shall take part in any contract or transaction connected with the estate
or property in appraisal, distribution or adjudication of which they shall have acted,
and to the guardians and executors with respect to the property belonging to their
wards or estate. (Act No. 3815, Revised Penal Code)
Mode of commission
1) The offender is a public officer; and
2) He directly or indirectly becomes interested in any contract or business in which it

is his official duty to intervene.
Experts, arbitrators, private accountants

This provisions is applicable to experts, arbitrators and private accountants who, in
like manner, shall take part in any contract or transaction connected with the estate
or property in appraisal, distribution or adjudication of which they shall have acted,
and to the guardians and executors with respect to the property belonging to their
wards or estate.
WHO ARE LIABLE:
1. Public officer who became interested in any contract or business
in which it is his official duty to intervene.
2. Experts, arbitrators and private accountants who took part in any
contract or transaction connected with the estate or property in
the approval, distribution or adjudication of which they had acted.
3. Guardians and executors with respect to property belonging to their
wards or the estate.
Actual fraud is not necessary, Intervention must be by virtue of public office held
Act is punished because of the possibility that fraud may be committed or that the
officer may place his own interest above that of the Government or of the party
which he represents.
Constitutional prohibitions exist

- Congress: cannot personally appear as counsel, cannot be
interested financially in any franchise or special privilege
granted by government, cannot intervene in any matter
before office of Government
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
- Executive – cannot hold any other office

- Constitutional Commission – cannot hold any other office,
engage in practice of profession.
7.Malversation of public funds or property (Article 217, RPC)

ANSWER:
Presumption of malversation. - Any public officer who, by reason of the duties of his office, is
accountable for public funds or property, shall appropriate the same, or shall take or
misappropriate or shall consent, or through abandonment or negligence, shall permit any
other person to take such public funds or property, wholly or partially, or shall otherwise be
guilty of the misappropriation or malversation of such funds or property shall suffer: The
penalty of reclusion temporal, in its medium and maximum periods, if the amount involved
is more than Two million four hundred thousand pesos (P2,400,000) but does not exceed
Four million four hundred thousand pesos (P4,400,000).In all cases, persons guilty of
malversation shall also suffer the penalty of perpetual special disqualification and a fine
equal to the amount of the funds malversed or equal to the total value of the property
embezzled.
ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY -This crime is known as technical
malversation because the fund or property is already earmarked or appropriated for a
certain public purpose. The failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any public
funds or property with which he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly authorized officer,
shall be prima facie evidence that he has put such missing funds or property to personal
use.Verily, in the crime of malversation of public funds, all that is necessary for conviction is
proof that the accountable officer had received the public funds and that he failed to
account for the said funds upon demand without offering a justifiable explanation for the
shortage
The elements of malversation are:
 that the offender is a public officer,
 That there are public funds or property under his administration
 That such public fund or property has been appropriated by law or ordinance
 That he applies the same to a public use other than that for which such fund or
property hasbeen appropriated by law or ordinance.
 That he had custody or control of funds or property by reason of the duties of his office,
 That those funds or property were public funds or property for which he was
accountable, and that he appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented or,
through abandonment or negligence, permitted another person to take them
MALVERSATION ILLEGAL USE- the public fund is to be applied to the personal use &
benefit of the offender or of another person then public fund or property is applied to
another public use.
8.Failure to render accounts (Article 218, RPC)

ANSWER:
In Article 218. Any public officer, whether in the service or separated therefrom by
resignation or any other cause, who is required by law or regulation to render
account to the Insular Auditor, or to a provincial auditor and who fails to do so for a
period of two months after such accounts should be rendered, shall be punished by
prision correccional in its minimum period, or by a fine ranging from 200 to 6,000
pesos, or both. (Act No. 3815, Revised Penal Code)
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
Mode of commission
1) That the offender is a public officer whether in the service or separated

therefrom;
2) That he must be an accountable officer for public funds or property;
3) That he is required by law or regulation to render accounts to the COA or to a

provincial auditor; and
4.)That he fails to do so for a period of two months after such account should be
rendered.
Demand and misappropriation are not necessary.

Demand for accounting is not necessary. It is also not essential that
there be misappropriation because if present, the malversation.
In ART. 219- FAILURE OF A RESPONSIBLE PUBLIC OFFICER TO RENDER ACOUNTS

BEFORE LEAVING THE COUNTRY ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a public officer
2. That he must be an accountable officer for public funds or property
3. That he unlawfully left (or be on the point of leaving) the Phils. without securing
from the Common Audit a certificate showing that his accounts have been finally
settled.
9. Illegal use of public funds or property (Article 220, RPC)

ANSWER:
Any public officer who shall apply any public fund or property under his
administration to any public use other than for which such fund or property were
appropriated by law or ordinance shall suffer the penalty of prision correcctional in
its minimum period or a fine ranging from one-half to the total of the sum
misapplied, if by reason of such misapplication, any damages or embarrassment shall
have resulted to the public service. In either case, the offender shall also suffer the
penalty of temporary special disqualification.
Mode of commission
1. Offender is a public officer;
2. There are public funds or property under his administration;
3. Such fund or property were appropriated by law or ordinance;
4. He applies such public fund or property to any public use other than for which it
was appropriated for.
Illegal use of public funds or property is also known as technical malversation.The
term technical malversation is used because in this crime, the fund or property
involved is already appropriated or earmarked for a certain public purpose. The
offender is entrusted with such fund or property only to administer or apply the
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
same to the public purpose for which it was appropriated by law or

ordinance.Instead of applying it to the public purpose to which the fund or property
was already appropriated by law, the public officer applied it to another purpose.
Since damage is not an element of malversation, even though the application made
proved to be more beneficial to public interest than the original purpose for which
the amount or property was appropriated by law, the public officer involved is still
liable for technical malversation. If public funds were not yet appropriated by law or
ordinance, and this was applied to a public purpose by the custodian thereof, the
crime is plain and simple malversation, not technical malversation.If the funds had
been appropriated for a particular public purpose, but the same was applied to
private purpose, the crime committed is simple malversation only.
10. Failure to make delivery of public funds or property (Article 221,

RPC)
ANSWER:Failure to make delivery of public funds or property.- Any public officer
under obligation to make payment from Government funds in his possession, who
shall fail to make such payment, shall be punished by arresto mayor and a fine from
5 to 25 percent of the sum which he failed to pay.
This provision shall apply to any public officer who, being ordered by competent
authority to deliver any property in his custody or under his administration, shall
refuse to make such delivery. The fine shall be graduated in such case by the value of
the thing, provided that it shall not be less than 50 pesos.
ACTS PUNISHED:
1. By failing to make payment by a public officer who is under
obligation to make such payment from Government funds in his
possession
2. By refusing to make delivery by a public officer who has been
ordered by competent authority to deliver any property in his
custody or under his administration (must be malicious)
ELEMENTS:
1. That the public officer has goverment funds or property in his
possession.
2. That he is under obligation to either:
a. make payment from such funds, or
b. to deliver property in his custody or administration when
ordered by competent authority; and
3. That he maliciously fails or refuses to do so.
Penalty is based on value of funds/property to be delivered.
11.Falsification by a public officer or employee committed with abuse of his official

position (Article 171, RPC)
ANSWER:
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
I think the elements of falsification by a public officer or employee or notary public

as defined in Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code are that:
 (1) the offender is a public officer or employee or notary public;
 (2) the offender takes advantage of his official position; and
 (3) he or she falsifies a document by committing any of the acts mentioned in
Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code
EXAMPLE
The first element is indisputably present in this case. Petitioners were public officers
being the Governor and Officer-in-Charge of the General Services Office of the
Province of Camarines Norte at the time of the commission of the offense.
As to the second element, the offender takes advantage of his official position in
falsifying a document when (1) he has the duty to make or to prepare, or otherwise
to intervene, in the preparation of the document; or (2) he has the official custody of
the document which he falsifies.
12. Those having to do with the discharge of their duties in a foreign

country. (UP Law
ANSWER:
It is the policy of the State to promote a high standard of ethics in public service. Public
officials and employees shall at all times be accountable to the people and shall discharge
their duties with utmost responsibility, integrity, competence, and loyalty, act with
patriotism and justice, lead modest lives, and uphold public interest over personal interest.
Norms of Conduct of Public Officials and Employees. - (A) Every public official and employee
shall observe the following as standards of personal conduct in the discharge and execution
of official duties:
(a) Commitment to public interest. - Public officials and employees shall always uphold the
public interest over and above personal interest. All government resources and powers of
their respective offices must be employed and used efficiently, effectively, honestly and
economically, particularly to avoid wastage in public funds and revenues.
(b) Professionalism. - Public officials and employees shall perform and discharge their duties
with the highest degree of excellence, professionalism, intelligence and skill. They shall enter
public service with utmost devotion and dedication to duty. They shall endeavor to
discourage wrong perceptions of their roles as dispensers or peddlers of undue patronage.
(c) Justness and sincerity. - Public officials and employees shall remain true to the people at
all times. They must act with justness and sincerity and shall not discriminate against
anyone, especially the poor and the underprivileged. They shall at all times respect the rights
of others, and shall refrain from doing acts contrary to law, good morals, good customs,
public policy, public order, public safety and public interest. They shall not dispense or
extend undue favors on account of their office to their relatives whether by consanguinity or
affinity except with respect to appointments of such relatives to positions considered strictly
confidential or as members of their personal staff whose terms are coterminous with theirs.
(d) Political neutrality. - Public officials and employees shall provide service to everyone
without unfair discrimination and regardless of party affiliation or preference.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
(e) Responsiveness to the public. - Public officials and employees shall extend prompt,
courteous, and adequate service to the public. Unless otherwise provided by law or when
required by the public interest, public officials and employees shall provide information of
their policies and procedures in clear and understandable language, ensure openness of
information, public consultations and hearings whenever appropriate, encourage
suggestions, simplify and systematize policy, rules and procedures, avoid red tape and
develop an understanding and appreciation of the socio-economic conditions prevailing in
the country, especially in the depressed rural and urban areas.
(f) Nationalism and patriotism. - Public officials and employees shall at all times be loyal to
the Republic and to the Filipino people, promote the use of locally produced goods,
resources and technology and encourage appreciation and pride of country and people.
They shall endeavor to maintain and defend Philippine sovereignty against foreign intrusion.
(g) Commitment to democracy. - Public officials and employees shall commit themselves to
the democratic way of life and values, maintain the principle of public accountability, and
manifest by deeds the supremacy of civilian authority over the military. They shall at all
times uphold the Constitution and put loyalty to country above loyalty to persons or party.
(h) Simple living. - Public officials and employees and their families shall lead modest lives
appropriate to their positions and income. They shall not indulge in extravagant or
ostentatious display of wealth in any form.
(B) The Civil Service Commission shall adopt positive measures to promote (1) observance of
these standards including the dissemination of information programs and workshops
authorizing merit increases beyond regular progression steps, to a limited number of
employees recognized by their office colleagues to be outstanding in their observance of
ethical standards; and (2) continuing research and experimentation on measures which
provide positive motivation to public officials and employees in raising the general level of
observance of these standards.
. Duties of Public Officials and Employees. - In the performance of their duties, all
public officials and employees are under obligation to:
(a) Act promptly on letters and requests. - All public officials and employees shall,
within fifteen (15) working days from receipt thereof, respond to letters, telegrams
or other means of communications sent by the public. The reply must contain the
action taken on the request.
(b) Submit annual performance reports. - All heads or other responsible officers of
offices and agencies of the government and of government-owned or controlled
corporations shall, within forty-five (45) working days from the end of the year,
render a performance report of the agency or office or corporation concerned. Such
report shall be open and available to the public within regular office hours.
(c) Process documents and papers expeditiously. - All official papers and documents
must be processed and completed within a reasonable time from the preparation
thereof and must contain, as far as practicable, not more than three (3) signatories
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
therein. In the absence of duly authorized signatories, the official next-in-rank or

officer in charge shall sign for and in their behalf.
(d) Act immediately on the public's personal transactions. - All public officials and
employees must attend to anyone who wants to avail himself of the services of their
offices and must, at all times, act promptly and expeditiously.
(e) Make documents accessible to the public. - All public documents must be made
accessible to, and readily available for inspection by, the public within reasonable
working hours.
 ACTIVITIES/ ASSIGNMENTS NO. 6

Look for the elements of the crimes enumerated above (Crimes against national
security and Crimes against the law of nations), write the same, and submit to me via

Crimes against national security:
1. Treason (A.114)
ANSWER:
Elements:
(1) Offender is a Filipino citizen or resident alien;
(2) There is a war in which the Philippines is involved;
(3) Offender either-
(a) levies war against the government or
(b) adheres to her enemies living them aid or comfort
Penalties:
(1)Reclusion perpetua to death and a fine not to exceed P100,000 if the offender is a
Filipino citizen,
(2) Reclusion temporal to death and a fine not to exceed P100,000 if the offender is a
resident alien.
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason (A.115)

ANSWER:
Elements of conspiracy to commit treason.
(1)There is a war in which the Philippines is involved,
(2) At least two (2) persons come to an agreement to-
(a)levy war against the government or
(b)adhere to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort.
(3)They decide to commit it.
Penalty
Prision mayor and a fine not to exceed P10,000
Elements of proposal to commit treason.
(1)There is a war in which the Philippines is involved
(2)At least one person decides to-
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
(a)levy war against the government or

(b)adhere to the enemies, giving them aid or comfort.
(3) He proposes its execution to some other persons.
Penalty Prision correccional and a fine not to exceed P5,000
3. Misprision of treason (A.116)

ANSWER:
Elements.
(1) Offender owes allegiance to the Government, and is not a foreigner.
(2) He has knowledge of conspiracy to commit treason against the Government,
(3) He conceals or does not disclose and make known the same as soon as possible
to the governor or fiscal of the province, or the mayor or fiscal of the city in which he
resides Penalty, Punished as an accessory to the crime of treason.
4. Espionage (A.117)
ANSWER:
Acts punished and their respective elements.
(1)Entering, without authority therefor, a warship, fort, or naval or military
establishment or reservation to obtain any information plans, photographs, or other
data of a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippines.
 (a)Offender enters any of the places mentioned.
 (b) He has no authority therefor,
 (c) His purpose is to obtain any information, plans, photographs, or other data of
a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippines
2)Disclosing to the representative of a foreign nation the contents of ( the articles,
data or information referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 117, which he has in
possession by reason of the public office he holds
(a)Offender is a public officer
(b) He has in his possession the articles, data or information referred
to in paragraph 1 of Article 117, by reason of the public office he holds:
(c) He discloses their contents to a representative of a foreign nation
Penalty
Prision correccional The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed if the
offender is a public officer or employee.
Crimes against the law of nations:

1. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals (A.118)
ANSWER:
Elements
(1) Offender performs unlawful or unauthorized acts
(2) The acts provoke or give occasion for-
(a)a war involving or liable to involve the Philippines, or
(b) exposure of Filipino citizens to reprisals on their persons or property
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
PENALTY
(1) Redusion temporal if offender is a public officer or employee
(2) Prision mayor if offender is a private individual
2. Violation of neutrality (A.119)

ANSWER:
Elements
(1)There is a war in which the Philippines is not involved;
(2)There is a regulation issued by a competent authority to enforce neutrality.
(3)Offender violates the regulation
Penalty
Prision correccional.
3. Correspondence with hostile country (A.120)

ANSWER:
Elements:
(1) It is in time of war in which the philippine is involved
(2) Offender makes correspondence with an enemy country or territory occupied by
enemy troops,
(3)The correspondence is either-
(a)prohibited by the Government.
(b)carried on in ciphers or conventional signs; or
(c) containing notice or information which might be useful to the enemy
Penalties.
(1) Prision correccional if the correspondence has been prohibited by the
Government,
(2) Prision mayor if the correspondence be carried on in ciphers or conventional
signs, and
(3) Reclusion temporal if notice or information be given thereby which might be
useful to the enemy if the offender intended to aid the enemy by giving such notice
or information, he shall suffer the penalty of from reclusion temporal to death.
4. Flight to enemy‘s country (A.121)

ANSWER:
Elements
(1) There is a war in which the Philippines is involved,
(2) Offender must be owing allegiance to the Government.
(3)Offender attempts to flee or go to an enemy country
(4)Going to the enemy country is prohibited by competent authority
Penalty
Arresto mayor.
5. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas or in Philippine waters (A.122)
ANSWER:
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
Elements of piracy.
(1) The vessel is on high seas or Philippine waters,

(2) Offenders are neither members of its complement nor passengers of the vessel,
(3)Offenders either-
(a)attack or seize a vessel on the high seas or in Philippine waters,
(b)seize in the vessel while on the high seas or in Philippine waters the whole or part
of the cargo of said vessel, its equipment of personal belongings of its complement
or passengers.
(4)There is intent to gain Penalty Reclusion perpetua
Elements of mutiny.
(1)The vessel is an high seas or Philippine waters (2)Offenders are members of its
complement or passengers of the vessel.
(3)Offenders either -
(a) attack or seize a vessel on the high seas or Philippine waters,
(b) seize in the vessel while on the high seas or in Philippine waters the whole or part
of the cargo of said vessel, its equipment, or personal belongings of its complement
or passengers.
Penalty
Reclusion perpetua

1. Mr. A was accused of committing theft in 2010. A warrant for his arrest was
issued by the court causing his incarceration in the City jail of Zamboanga City. Mr.
A filed a petition for bail, was able to post the bond and eventually got out from
jail in 2013. While outside, he committed large scale estafa and was again
imprisoned for such crime. In 2015, he got out again from penal
institution by virtue of bail posted by him. Trial ensued for the two cases against
him and in January of 2019 he was convicted for large scale estafa followed by his
conviction in November of 2019 of the felony of theft. While serving his sentence,
he committed serious physical injuries against fellow inmates causing his trial for
the said act.
a. What is warrant of arrest?

ANSWER:
As I’ve remembered Warrant of arrest means a written order commanding that a

person or persons be arrested and brought without unnecessary delay before a
court named therein, or otherwise dealt with according to law. It shall be signed by
the clerk of the court or by the official issuing it and shall contain the name of the
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
accused, or if his name is unknown any name or description by which he can be

identified with reasonable certainty. It shall describe the criminal offense charged
and may do so by referring to either the original or a copy of the complaint or
information attached to or on the same sheet as the warrant. Except where
otherwise indicated, the word “Warrant” in this title refers to a “Warrant of Arrest.”
An arrest warrant is a document issued by a judge or magistrate that authorizes the
police to take someone accused of a crime into custody. An arrest warrant is issued
by the competent authority upon a showing of probable cause, which means a
warrant may be issued if a reasonable person would believe the information at hand
is sufficient to suggest criminal activities.
Arrest warrants serve the purpose of protecting people from unlawful arrests under
the Fourth Amendment. The warrant also gives an actual notice to the person or
persons being arrested about the charges pressed against them.
An arrest warrant is preferred, but not required, to make a lawful arrest.
b. What is bail?
ANSWER:
Definition and Purpose of Bail:
Bail Defined: Bail is a constitutional right in the Philippines, allowing an accused

person to be released from custody by posting a bond or property guaranteeing their
appearance at trial.
Purpose: The main purpose of bail is to ensure that the accused will appear in court
when required.
Availability of Bail:
Generally Available: Bail is generally available for most offenses except those
punishable by life imprisonment or death when evidence of guilt is strong.
Judicial Discretion: The court has the discretion to grant or deny bail based on factors
such as the severity of the offense, risk of flight, and the evidence presented.
Factors Affecting the Granting of Bail:
Severity of Crime: Crimes of a severe nature may result in the denial of bail,
especially if the evidence of guilt is strong.
Risk of Flight: If the court believes the accused may flee and not attend trial, bail
may be denied.
Health and Age: The health and age of the accused may be considered in
determining the appropriateness of bail.
Process of Applying for Bail:

To apply for bail, the accused must sign a bail bond, which is a legal instrument, and
provide the sum stated in the bail bond. There must also be two sureties who take
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
the accused’s promise that the accused will appear in court or at the police station
whenever he is required to be present for the investigation of the court proceedings.
Application: The accused or their legal representative may apply for bail, which will
be evaluated by the judge.
Hearing: A bail hearing may be conducted to assess the application, taking into
account factors such as the nature of the offense, evidence, and the accused's
personal circumstances.
Conditions: If bail is granted, conditions may be imposed to ensure the accused's
appearance at trial.
Legal Assistance:
Consulting a Lawyer: If there are uncertainties regarding the availability of bail in a
specific situation, consulting a legal professional experienced in criminal law in the
Philippines can provide personalized advice and assistance.
In conclusion, bail is a complex legal issue that is generally available in the
Philippines but subject to various rules, exceptions, and judicial discretion.
Understanding these aspects and seeking legal assistance when needed can help
navigate the process of applying for and securing bail.
Classification of bail
Depending on the stage of the criminal proceeding, a person may ask for one of four
types of bail in India:
 Regular Bail: Regular bail is frequently issued to an individual who has previously
been arrested and detained by police. The accused has the right to be freed
from such confinement under Section 437 and Section 439 of the CrPC. So, a
regular bail is simply the release of an accused from jail to ensure his attendance
at the trial.
 Interim Bail: Interim bail is bail issued for a short period. Interim bail is granted
to an accused before the hearing for regular or anticipatory bail.
 Anticipatory Bail: If a person suspects that he may be arrested for a non-bailable
offence, he may petition for anticipatory bail. In recent years, this has become
an important problem because corporate competitors and other prominent
persons sometimes seek to frame their opponents with fake charges. It’s similar
to obtaining advance bail under Section 438 of the CrPC. A bail under Section
438 may be bail before arrest, and an individual cannot be arrested by the police
if the court has granted anticipatory bail.
 Statutory Bail: The remedy of statutory bail, also known as default bail, is
distinct from bail obtained in the ordinary procedure under CrPC Sections 437,
438, and 439. As the name implies, statutory bail is given when the police or
investigating agency fails to file its report/complaint within a certain time frame.
A bail bond is an agreement by a criminal defendant to appear for trial or pay a sum
of money set by the court. The bail bond is co-signed by a bail bondsman, who
charges the defendant a fee in return for guaranteeing the payment.
The bail bond is a type of surety bond.

CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
The commercial bail bond system exists only in the United States and the Philippines.
In other countries, bail may entail a set of restrictions and conditions placed on
criminal defendants in return for their release until their trial dates.
A bail bond co-signed by a bail bondsmen is posted by a defendant in lieu of full

payment of the bail set by the court.
The bail bond serves as surety that the defendant will appear for trial.
Judges typically have wide latitude in setting bail amounts.
Bail bondsmen generally charge 10% of the bail amount up front in return for their
service and may charge additional fees. Some states have put a cap of 8% on the
amount charged.
The bail system is widely viewed as discriminatory to low-income defendants and
contributing to the mass incarceration of young Black men.
How a Bail Bond Works
A person who is charged with a crime is typically given a bail hearing before a judge.
The amount of the bail is at the judge’s discretion. A judge may deny bail altogether
or set it at an astronomical level if the defendant is charged with a violent crime or
appears likely to be a flight risk.
Judges generally have wide latitude in setting bail amounts, and typical amounts vary
by jurisdiction.
c. What is the effect of bail upon the detained person?

ANSWER:
As what I’ve understand Bail is the conditional release of a suspect from detention.
The conditions attached to bail are generally used to ensure that a suspect complies
with the judicial process and appears in court when they need to.When an individual
is arrested, they are given a ticket with a court date, showing the signed promise to
appear in court, or the individual will go to jail. Posting bail is necessary in order to
get out of jail. Once the court has the money needed for bail, the individual is
released “on bail,” meaning they will appear in court on the given date. Payment
needs to be in cash, money order, or cashier’s check. Defendants can post their own
bail, or they can work with a bail bondsman to post bail.
d. Is Mr. A considered as Habitual Criminal?

ANSWER:
YES . MR A is considered as habitual criminal because he commits many crimes again
and again and he because he was in and out of the jail that means he never change
or learn from his evil actions. He stills commit crimes over and over again that means
even if theres a law punishing it and even if he was in jail already he will never
change because it is in his blood that he is a criminal and it was he’s habbit to
commit a crime and do evil things. And it is also because A habitual criminal, also
known as a repeat offender, refers to a person who has been previously convicted of
one or more crimes in the past and is currently facing new charges. Repeat offenders
tend to commit the same type of crime over and over again, but a person does not
necessarily have to commit the same crime in order to be considered a repeat or
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
habitual offender. Examples of crimes that habitual offenders often commit include
drug crimes, burglary, robbery, petty larceny, assault, trespassing, sex offenses, and
driving while intoxicated (DWI).
e. is Mr. A considered as Habitual Delinquent?

ANSWER:
YES, because in Habitual Delinquency A person shall be deemed to be habitual
delinquent, if within a period of ten year from 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. All the elements that
is mentioned in habitual deliquency was committed by MR. A that is why he is
considered as Habituala delequency because he committed large scale estafa and
was again imprisoned for such crime. In 2015, he got out again from penal
institution by virtue of bail posted by him. Trial ensued for the two cases against him
and in January of 2019 he was convicted for large scale estafa followed by his
conviction in November of 2019 of the felony of theft. While serving his sentence, he
committed serious physical injuries against fellow inmates causing his trial for the
said act. Lastly he is a 3rd time offender.
2. Under the provision of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty for homicide is from
12 years 1 day to 20 years. In 2015, Jose was accused of being responsible for the
death of Mr. X. a case for homicide was filed against the accused and while trial
was pending, the provision of the Revised Penal Code on homicide was amended/
revised making the range of penalty to 6 years 1 day to
12 years. Before judgment on Homicide case, Jose committed Serious Physical
Injuries against Mr. Y inside the penitentiary.
a. Explain the concepts of amendment and revision of law.

ANSWER:
Amendment, in government and law, an addition or alteration made to a
constitution, statute, or l egislative bill or resolution. Amendments can be made to
existing constitutions and statutes and are also commonly made to bills in the course
of their passage through a legislature. Since amendments to a national constitution
can fundamentally change a country’s political system or governing institutions, such
amendments are usually submitted to an exactly prescribed procedure.
A total of 27 amendments have been made to the Constitution. For an amendment
to be made, two-thirds of the members of each house of Congress must approve it,
and three-fourths of the states must ratify it. Congress decides whether the
ratification will be by state legislatures or by popularly elected conventions in the
several states (though in only one instance, that of the Twenty-First Amendment,
which repealed prohibition, was the convention system used). In many states,
proposed amendments to a state constitution must be approved by the voters in a
popular referendum. The best-known amendments are those that have been made
to the U.S. Constitution; Article V makes provision for the amendment of that
document. The first 10 amendments that were made to the Constitution are called
the Bill of Rights.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
Law revision is the process of updating the law without changing its substance. It is
aimed at presenting the law in its correct form at any given time thus facilitating the
administration of justice, law enforcement, legal education, research, law reform,
efficient use of the law and access to justice.
Revision is the re-examination of legal actions. They may be some assumptions made
illegally, non-exercise or exercise of jurisdiction irregularly by a lower court In this
case, therefore, a higher court reexamines the decisions made by a lower court to
know whether ail the legal actions were exercised
Unlike the appeal, revision is not a statutory right. The superior court therefore can
decide to examine or not examine a decision made by a tower court. The main
primary purpose of a revision is to make sure that justice has been administered
property and also to correct any errors that could have led to improper justice.
If the higher court finds that the legal procedures were followed to arrive at a
decision, then no changes are made no matter how unreasonable the decision may
appear Revision is basically reworking and rewriting
 Why is the 20th Amendment called the Lame Duck Amendment?

ANSWER:
MEANING (one whose position or term of office will soon end)
The phrase "lame duck" was coined in the 18th century at the London Stock
Exchange, to refer to a stockbroker who defaulted on his debts.
The first known mention of the term in writing was made by Horace Walpole, from a
letter in 1761 to Sir Horace Mann: "Do you know what a Bull and a Bear and Lame
Duck are?
In 1791, Mary Berry wrote of the Duchess of Devonshire's loss of £50,000 in stocks,
"the conversation of the town" that her name was to be "posted up as a lame duck".
In the literal sense, the term refers to a duck which is unable to keep up with its
flock, making it a target for predators.The term was transferred to politicians in the
19th century. The first known recorded use is in the Congressional Globe (then the
official record of the United States Congress) of January 14, 1863: "In no event be
justly obnoxious to the charge of being a receptacle of 'lame ducks' or broken down
politicians. In politics, a lame duck or outgoing politician is an elected official whose
successor has already been elected or will be soon. An outgoing politician is often
seen as having less influence with other politicians due to their limited time left in
office. Conversely, a lame duck is free to make decisions that exercise the standard
powers with little fear of consequence, such as issuing executive orders, pardons, or
other controversial edicts. Lame duck politicians result from term limits, planned
retirement, or electoral losses, and are especially noticeable where political systems
build in a delay between the announcement of results and the taking of office by
election winners. Even at the local level, politicians who do not seek re-election can
lose credibility and influence. Uncompleted projects may fall to the wayside as their
influence diminishes.
Commonly known as the +“Lame Duck Amendment,” the Twentieth Amendment
was designed to remove the excessively long period of time a defeated president or
member of Congress would continue to serve after his or her failed bid for
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
reelection. Originally, federal officials took their seats on March 4 (the date
coinciding with the government’s commencement of proceedings in 1789), four
months after election day, and per Article I, section 4, members of Congress “shall
assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday
in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day”; this meant that it
would be 13 months before a new Congress met, and there would be a necessary
session of Congress following the November elections. Because they were voted out
of office, defeated politicians would serve as lame ducks, incapable of effectively
representing their constituents or affecting public policy.The amendment also
provided for the vice president-elect to become president if a president-elect died
before taking the oath of office. The third and fourth sections of the Amendment
(pertaining to death, disability, disqualification, and succession) are addressed
further in the Twenty-fifth Amendment.
 Why is the 20th Amendment called the Lame Duck Amendment?See all videos
for this article
ANSWER:
The Twentieth Amendment (Amendment XX) to the United States Constitution
moved the beginning and ending of the terms of the president and vice president
from March 4 to January 20, and of members of Congress from March 4 to January 3.
It also has provisions that determine what is to be done when there is no president-
elect. The Twentieth Amendment was adopted on January 23, 1933.
The amendment reduced the presidential transition and the "lame duck" period, by
which members of Congress and the president serve the remainder of their terms
after an election. The amendment established congressional terms to begin before
presidential terms and that the incoming Congress, rather than the outgoing one,
would hold a contingent election if the Electoral College deadlocked regarding either
the presidential or vice presidential elections.
Section 1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the
20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the
3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article
had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.
Section 2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting
shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January unless they shall by law appoint a
different day.
Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the
President-elect shall have died, the Vice President-elect shall become President. If a
President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his
term, or if the President-elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President-
elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress
may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President-elect nor a Vice
President-elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act
accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
Section 4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the
persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever
the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of
any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever
the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.
Section 5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the
ratification of this article.
Section 6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an
amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several
States within seven years from the date of its submission.
b. Will the lesser penalty for Homicide apply to the case of Mr. A?
ANSWER:
YES. Because the revision and amendment of law was passed already before its final
judgement or conviction that is why it is applicable for him. 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. NOTE: According Art. 22 is NOT applicable to the
provisions of the RPC. Its application to the RPC can only be
invoked where some former or subsequent law is under consideration
GENERAL RULE: Penal laws are applied prospectively.
EXCEPTION: When retrospective application will be favorable
to the person guilty of a felony; Provided that:
1. The offender is NOT a habitual criminal (delinquent)
under Art. 62(5);
2. The new or amendatory law does NOT provide against its
retrospective application.
The favorable retroactive effect of a new law may find the

defendant in one of the 3 situations:
1. The crime has been committed and the prosecution begins
2. The sentence has been passed but service has not begun
3. The sentence is being carried out
That is why the new lesser penalty can be applied in his case.
c. is Jose considered as habitual delinquent?

ANSWER:
NO. Because is NOT yet convicted for he’s first offense the final judgement is not yet
done and he’s case was pending ,also he is not yet a a former convict of 10 years
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
before or after he commits the new offense of serious physical injury and accordingly
to elements of considering a Habitual deliquent A person is considered as a. habitual
delinquent if within a period of 10 years from. the date of his last release or
conviction of the crimes. of serious or less physical injuries, and found guilty of. any
aforementioned crimes a third time or more.also it was he’s second time commiting
an offense that’s why he is not a Habitual Deliquent.

Answer the following questions:
1. Mr. A, standing at a distance of 500 Feet, shot Mr. B. The weapon used was
Magnum .22 caliber with a range of 400 feet. The bullet was not able to reach the
target because of distance.
a) What was the crime committed by Mr. A?

ANSWER:
The crime that was committed by MR. A was a FRUSTRATED felony because the
subjective phase is completely passed. Subjectively the crime is complete. Nothing
interrupted the offender while he was passing through the subjective phase. The
crime, however, is not consummated by reason of the intervention of causes
independent of the will of the offender. He did all that was necessary to commit the
crime. If the crime did not result as a consequence it was due to something beyond
his control like the distance that is why it was frustrated crime.
Frustrated murder occurs when:
 The offender has the intent to kill

 The victim does not die which is Mr. B
 The reason the victim doesn't die is due to causes independent of the offender's
will like the distance of MR. A and the limitation of the distance of the gunshots.
He was also considered a 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. Mr. X, intending to poison Mr. Z, put a white powdery substance into the San
Mig Light drink of the victim. The victim was able to drink said San Mig Light. The
victim went home thereafter.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
a. If the victim did not suffer any injury because said white powdery substance
turned out to be sugar, is there any crime committed by Mr. X?
ANSWER:
The Crime that’s was committed by MR. X was a frustrated felony. Because he
perform all the acts with deliberate intent to poison MR. Z but the poison turned out
to be a sugar and it does not produce a death to the victim because of uncontrolled
circumstances that is why it is frustrated.
b. If the victim suffered from internal hemorrhage due to chemical reaction of

Sugar (white powdery substance) and San Mig Light, what crime was committed by
Mr. X?
ANWER:
The Crime that’s was committed by MR. X was a Consumated felony because he
passed all the subjective and objective paste of the crime and it is because
consummated felony are when all the elements necessary for its execution and
accomplishment are present which is present in this case.
c. If there was no chemical reaction between sugar and san mig light, but the
victim suffered internal damage because he was allergic to sugar, what crime was
committed by Mr. X?
ANSWER:
Therefore The Crime that’s was committed by MR. X was a Attempted felony or
attempted crime because in attempted crime 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.which was the felony cause by MR.X was
by accident and not in his control.
3. Mr. A was the mortal enemy of Mr. X. one night, Mr. A went to a drinking spree
with his friends after work. Due to too much intake of alcohol (alcoholic drinks),
Mr. A, on his way home fell on a manhole. His head hit hard on said manhole
causing his death. Mr. X chance upon Mr. A who was lying on said manhole and
out of rage shot the latter blasting the head of the victim.
Unknown to Mr. X, Mr. A was already dead before he arrived at the scene.
a. Was there any crime committed by Mr. X?

ANSWER:
As what I’ve read in the lectures of mr. ASID the crime that was committed by MR. X
was an Impossible crime WHERE in if you distiguished it, it is considered as a LEGAL
IMPOSSIBILITY why? Because he killed a dead person where in MR. X shot Mr. A but
Mr. A is already dead whitout the knowledge of mr. x , where In the legal
impossibility of crime which occurs where the intended acts, even if completed
would not amount to a crime. Example of this is that killing a dead person.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
no crime is committed, but subjectively, he is a criminal because It is a principle of

criminal law that the offender will only be penalized for an impossible
crime if he cannot be punished under some other provision of the RPC. An
impossible crime is a crime of
last resort. It also could be violate laws prohibiting desecration of a corpse and
discharge of firearms in certain areas as well as possibly other statutes. Even though
he will make his lack of knowledge of Mr. A conditions as a defense still he is liable
for using of firearms illegaly and for attempting to kill mr. A .
Where in also MR.X was a mortal anemy of MR. A then there should be attempted
murder in his intent.
2nd criminal liability is Desecration of a Corpse

3rd is Illegal Discharge of a Firearm
Again, not all attempted killings involve a gun, so these charges would only apply in
select cases.
b. If Mr. X, before shooting the victim checked first on him and finding out that the
victim was already dead, but nevertheless shot and blasted the head of the victim,
was there any crime
committed by Mr. X?
ANSWER:
YES. Because The first element was MR. X has a legal knowledge of the condition of
his victim , there is also what we call negligence or culpa in his part 2 nd but because
he was his mortal anemy’s he still shot and blusted his head which we considered a
crime with intent to kill , 3rd element he uses his firearms in illegal used or what we
call abuse of fire arms 4th there is a mens rea and actus reus in his behalf that is why
MR.X is a criminal liable for his act, THERE was a Reckless or Negligent Homicide
Because different states have different names for similar criminal charges. Reckless
homicide and negligent homicide are the preferred modern terms because the title
defines the state of mind or mens rea possessed by the killer. These charges require
either that the defendant knew the lethal actions were risky and could cause harm
or that the defendant failed to abide by a duty of care or special responsibility
toward the victim.
If n not then my answer is the crime commited by MR. X was Wrongful death law
suit because it occurs when a person or entity fails to fulfill a legal duty and causes a
death to occur. When this happens, a wrongful death lawsuit can be filed by certain
surviving family members or by a personal representative from the estate of the
deceased.
In a wrongful death lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove certain things in order to
recover compensation. Plaintiffs must prove:
 A person or entity behaved negligently or committed an intentional wrongful act
 Their actions were the direct cause of a death
 There are damages associated with the death
Or what we call Desecration of a Corpse
One of the most obvious options for charging someone who attempts to murder a
corpse is the desecration of a corpse, which is charged
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
Interestingly though, these codes require the corpse be knowingly or willfully

mutilated, so it’s possible that someone accused of desecrating a corpse they
believed to be alive could actually argue that they did not knowingly or willfully harm
a corpse -though the fact that they were acting intentionally, regardless of the status
of the body, means they would likely still be convicted under these charges, which
could be filed as a misdemeanor or felony.
This is a serious felony that could result in a penalty of up to 7 years in prison, even if
no one living was injured.
Desecration of a Corpse
One of the most obvious options for charging someone who attempts to murder a
corpse is the desecration of a corpse, which is charged
Interestingly though, these codes require the corpse be knowingly or willfully
mutilated, so it’s possible that someone accused of desecrating a corpse they
believed to be alive could actually argue that they did not knowingly or willfully harm
a corpse -though the fact that they were acting intentionally, regardless of the status
of the body, means they would likely still be convicted under these charges, which
could be filed as a misdemeanor or felony.
 Another possible crime that MR. X committed was Illegal Discharge of a Firearm
Again, not all attempted killings involve a gun, so these charges would only apply in
select cases.
 Activities/Assignment: NO.9
to be submitted on or before December 07, 2020 via my email address.
1. What is the reason for lawfulness of self‐ defense?

ANSWER:
Accordingly to what I’ve understand Self-defense is lawful because it would be quite
impossible for the State in all cases to prevent aggression upon its citizens (and even
foreigners, of course) and offer protection to the person unjustly attacked.Self-defense
includes not only the defense of the persons or body of the one assaulted but also that of his
rights, which is protected by law. Aside from the right to life on which rests the legitimate
defense of our person, we have the right to property, and the right to honor which is not the
least prized of man’s patrimony.On the other hand, it cannot be conceived that a person
should succumb to an unlawful aggression without offering any resistance. Generally, the
burden lies upon the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt
when the accused, however, admits killing the victim, it is incumbent upon him to prove any
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
claimed justifying circumstance by clear and convincing evidence. To invoke self-defense… it

is incumbent upon the accused to prove by clear and convincing evidence, the following
requisites under the second paragraph of Article 11 of the RPC,
 (1) unlawful aggression

-refers to an attack amounting to actual or imminent threat to the life and limb of the
person claiming self-defense. Unlawful aggression on the part of the victim is the primordial
element of the justifying circumstance of self-defense. Without unlawful aggression, there
can be no justified killing in defense of oneself. At the heart of the claim of self-defense is
the presence of an unlawful aggression committed against [the Accused]. Without unlawful
aggression, self-defense will not have a leg to stand on and this justifying circumstance
cannot and will not be appreciated, even if the other elements are present. Unlawful
aggression is the main and most essential element to support the theory of self-defense and
the complete or incomplete exemption from criminal liability; without such primal requisite
it is not possible to maintain that a person acted in self-defense within the terms under
which unlawful aggression is subordinate to the other two conditions… When an act of
aggression is in response to an insult, affront, or threat, it cannot be considered as a defense
but as the punishment which the injured party inflicts on the author of the provocation, and
in such a case the courts can at most consider it as a mitigating circumstance, but never as a
reason for exemption, except in violation of the provisions of the Penal Code.
Test of unlawful aggression
The test for the presence of unlawful aggression under the circumstances is whether the
aggression from the victim put in real peril the life or personal safety of the person
defending himself; the peril must not be an imagined or imaginary threat.
Elements of unlawful aggression

The accused must establish the concurrence of three elements of unlawful aggression,
namely:
1) There must be a physical or material attack or assault;
2) The attack or assault must be actual, or, at least, imminent; and
3) The attack or assault must be unlawful.
Kinds of unlawful aggression
1) Actual or material unlawful aggression; and
2) Imminent unlawful aggression.
Actual or material unlawful aggression contemplates the offensive act of using physical
force or weapon which positively determines the intent of the aggressor to cause the injury.
Actual or material unlawful aggression means an attack with physical force or with a
weapon, an offensive act that positively determines the intent of the aggressor to cause the
injury.
Imminent unlawful aggression means an attack that is impending or at the point of
happening; it must not consist in a mere threatening attitude, nor must it be merely
imaginary, but must be offensive and positively strong (like aiming a revolver at another with
intent to shoot or opening a knife and making a motion as if to attack). Imminent unlawful
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
aggression must not be a mere threatening attitude of the victim, such as pressing his right
hand to his hip where a revolver was holstered, accompanied by an angry countenance, or
like aiming to throw a pot.
 (2) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it;

- The second requisite – reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or
repel,the aggression – requires a reasonable proportionality between the unlawful
aggression and the defensive response: The means employed by the person invoking self-
defense contemplates a rational equivalence between the means of attack and the
defense.” This is a matter that depends on the circumstances. a) Rational necessity or
rational equivalence
Reasonable necessity of the means employed to repel the unlawful aggression does not
mean absolute necessity. It must be assumed that one who is assaulted cannot have
sufficient tranquility of mind to think, calculate and make comparisons that can easily be
made in the calmness of reason. The law requires rational necessity, not indispensable need.
In each particular case, it is necessary to judge the relative necessity, whether more or less
imperative, in accordance with the rules of rational logic. The accused may be given the
benefit of any reasonable doubt as to whether or not he employed rational means to repel
the aggression.
 (3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending him self.
- The third requisite – lack of sufficient provocation – requires the person mounting a
defense to be reasonably blameless. He or she must not have antagonized or incited the
attacker into launching an assault. This also requires a consideration of proportionality.
Provocation is sufficient when it is proportionate to the aggression, that is, adequate enough
to impel one to attack the person claiming self-defense. Verily, to invoke self-defense
successfully, there must have been an unlawful and unprovoked attack that endangered the
life of the accused, who was then forced to inflict severe wounds upon the assailant by
employing reasonable means to resist the attack
I think Self-defense – refers to a justifying circumstance wherein no criminal liability results
for a crime committed by an accused who acted in self-defending.An excuse holds that a
person committed a wrongful act but should nonetheless avoid responsibility—insanity,
entrapment, and duress are excuses ,A justification of self- defense means that even though
a person carried out an ordinarily prohibited act, he was right to do it and therefore
deserves no legal condemnation in the form of conviction or punishment. Violence in self-
defense and defense of others are examples of justified acts.
A person invoking self-defense (or defense of a relative) admits to having inflicted harm
upon another person – a potential criminal act under Title Eight (Crimes Against Persons) of
the Revised Penal Code. However, he or she makes the additional, defensive contention that
even as he or she may have inflicted harm, he or she nevertheless incurred no criminal
liability as the looming danger upon his or her own person (or that of his or her relative)
justified the infliction of protective harm to an erstwhile aggressor.Self-defense cannot be
justifiably appreciated when uncorroborated by independent and competent evidence or
when it is extremely doubtful by itself. Indeed, in invoking self-defense, the burden of
evidence is shifted and the accused claiming self-defense must rely on the strength of his
own evidence and not on the weakness of the prosecution.
CLJ 103- 1:00- 2:30 - WS
2. One night, Rose, a young married woman, was sound asleep in her bedroom
when she felt a man on top of her. Thinking it was her husband Pedro, who came
home a day early from his business trip, Rose let him have sex with her. After the
act, the man said, "I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did." Not
recognizing the voice, it dawned upon Rose that the man was not Pedro, her
husband. Furious, Rose took out Pedro's gun and shot the man. Charged with
homicide,
Rose denies culpability on the ground of defense of honor. Is her claim correct?
ANSWER: No,ROSE claim that she acted in defense of honor is not tenable because
the unlawful aggression on her honor had already ceased. Defense of honor as
included in self-defense, must have been done to prevent or repel an unlawful
aggression. There is no defense to speak of where the unlawful aggression no longer
exists, and I also think there is No transfer of burden of proof when pleading self-
defense The burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt is not lifted from the
shoulders of the State, which carries it until the end of the proceedings. It is the
burden of evidence that is shifted to the accused to satisfactorily establish the fact of
self-defense. In other words, only the onus probandi shifts to the accused, for self-
defense is an affirmative allegation that must be established with certainty by
sufficient and satisfactory proof .But in case of an agreement to fight, self-defense is
not feasible as in case of a fight, the parties are considered aggressors as aggression
is bound to arise in the course of the fight because Self-defense vs Retaliation self-
defense retaliation Inself-defense,the unlawful aggression still existed when the
aggressor was injured ordisabled by the person making the defense. In
retaliation,the inceptual unlawful aggression had already ceased when the accused
attacked him. Immediate vindication of a grave offense – refers to the mitigating
circumstance under the Revised Penal Code wherein the accused committed the
offense in immediate vindication of a grave offense to the one committing the
felony, his spouse, ascendants, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees.

CLJ103 Act. Joselle

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLJ103 Act. Joselle

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CLJ103 Act. Joselle

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NAME : JOSELLE A.

ASSIGNMENT/ ACTIVITY NO:1

1. WHAT IS MISTAKE OF FACTS?

Specifically, mistake of law can be used as a defense in four limited circumstances:

 When the law has not been published;

2. WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF SUCCESSFULLY PUTTING UP THE DEFENSES OF JUSTIFYING

1. There is no mens rea or criminal intent

4. They are limited to the 6 enumerated in Article 11.

The following are those that do not incure criinal liability

a. Defense of oneself (Self-defense)

e. Fulfillment of lawful duty/exercise of rights or office

f. Obedience to superior order

 Must rely on the strength of his own evidence and

NOT the weakness of that for the prosecution.

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

INCLUDES: Defense of life, chastity, property and honor.

 When there is no peril to one's life, limb, or right there is no aggression.

 A SLAP OF THE FACE is an unlawful aggression.

3. WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF SUCCESSFULLY PUTTING UP THE DEFENSE OF EXEMPTING

IN EXEMPTING FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY

1. An imbecile or insane person (unless acted during lucid interval)

2. Under 9 years of age

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

 IMBECILE OR INSANE PERSON

WHEN THE DEFENSE ARE THE FOLLOWING:

2. Kleptomania must be proved otherwise it will constitute a mitigating circumstance

6. Amnesia-no defense to criminal charge unless it is shown by competent proof

 PERSON UNDER 9 YEARS OLD

 PERSON OVER 9 AND UNDER 15

 ACTED WITH DISCERNMENT

EXCEPTION TO THE GENERAL RULE:

 IN PERFORMANCE OF LAWFUL ACT

1. A person is performing a lawful act.

2. With due care

3. Causes an injury to another by mere accident

4. Without fault or intention of causing it

4. WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF SUCCESSFULLY PUTTING UP THE DEFENSE OF

c) The defendant recognizing the error of their ways

 CLASSES OF MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCE

1. Provocation must be sufficient

 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES (SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION)

1. Eloping with the offender's daughter

2. Insulting an old man

 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES (IMMEDIATE VINDICATION OF GRAVE OFFENSE)

ART 332- Adulterous wife caught in flagrante delicto having sexual

 MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES (PASSION AND OBFUSCATION)

MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES (VOLUNTARY SURRENDER)

1 Plea was made in open court. (judicial confession)

5. IS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION A CRIME?

 ACTIVITIES/ ASSIGNMENT NO.2

a. Is the law valid?

b. can we successfully prosecute Mr. A?

b. Can Mr. X be successfully prosecuted based on the law?

3.The act of male individual urinating on the street is made criminal

 ACTIVITIES/ ASSIGNMENT NO: 3

1. Is the act of illegally possessing an unlicensed firearm mala inse or mala

3.Distinguish intent from motive.

when a particular state of mind compounded with a prohibited conduct constitutes

To distinguish intent and motive in example. One evening, a stockbroker receives