Title Seven

CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS

Art. 203. Who are public officers.The term "public officers" embraces every public
servant from the highest to the lowest.

Requisites:

To be a public officer, one must be —

1. Taking part in the performance of public functions in the Government, or

Performing in said Government or in any of its branches public duties as an employee, agent or subordinate
official, of any rank or class; and

2. That his authority to take part in the performance of public functions or to perform public duties must be —

1. by direct provision of the law, or

2. by popular election, or
3. by appointment by competent authority.

MALFEASANCE AND MISFEASANCE IN OFFICE

What are the crimes classified under malfeasance and misfeasance in office?

The crimes classified under malfeasance and misfeasance in office are:

Misfeasances in office that a judge can commit.

1. (1) Knowingly rendering unjust judgment. (Art. 204)

2. (2) Rendering judgment through negligence. (Art. 205)
3. (3) Rendering unjust interlocutory order. (Art. 206)
4. (4) Malicious delay in the administration of justice. (Art. 207)

Nonfeasance omission of some act which ought to be performed

5. (5) Dereliction of duty in prosecution of offenses. (Art. 208)

6. (6) Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor — revelation of secrets. (Art. 209)

Malfeasances in office that a public officer can commit.

7. (7) Direct bribery. (Art. 210)

8. (8) Indirect bribery. (Art. 211)

Note:

Misfeasance, defined.
"Misfeasance" is the improper performance of some act which might lawfully be done.
Malfeasance, defined.
"Malfeasance" is the performance of some act which ought not to be done.

Art. 204. Knowingly rendering unjust- any judge who shall knowingly render an unjust judgment in
any case submitted to him for decision

Elements:

1. That the offender is a judge;

2. That he renders a judgment in a case submitted to him for decision;
3. That the judgment is unjust;
4. That the judge knows that his judgment is unjust.
Art. 205. Judgment rendered through negligence. — Any judge who, by reason of inexcusable
negligence or ignorance, shall render a manifestly unjust judgment in any case submitted to him for decision

Elements:

1. The offender is a judge

2. That he renders a judgment in a case submitted to him for decision.
3. That the judgment is manifestly unjust.
4. That it is due to his inexcusable negligence or ignorance.

Art. 206. Unjust interlocutory order. — Any judge who shall knowingly render an unjust interlocutory
order or decree

Elements:

1. That the offender is a judge;

2. That he performs any of the following acts:
a. knowingly renders unjust interlocutory order or decree; or
b. renders a manifestly unjust interlocutory order or decree through inexcusable negligence or ignorance.

Art. 207. Malicious delay in the administration of justice. - Any judge guilty of malicious delay in
the administration of justice.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a judge;

2. That there is a proceeding in his court;
3. That he delays the administration of justice;
4. That the delay is malicious, that is, the delay is caused by the judge with deliberate intent to inflict damage on
either party in the case.

A r t . 208.Prosecution of Offenses – negligence and tolerance - any public officers or officer of the
law, who, in dereliction of the duties of his office, shall maliciously refrain from instituting prosecution for the
punishment of violators of the law, or shall tolerate the commission of offenses.

Elements of dereliction of duty in the prosecution of offenses.

1. That the offender is a public officer or officer of the law who has a duty to cause the prosecution of, or to
prosecute, offenses.
2. That there is dereliction of the duties of his office; that is, knowing the commission of the crime, he does not
cause the prosecution of the or knowing that a crime is about to be committed, he tolerates its commission.
3. That the offender acts with malice and deliberate intent to favor the violator of the law.

Art. 209. Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor — Revelation of secrets. any attorney-at-law or
solicitor who, by any malicious breach of professional duty or of inexcusable negligence or ignorance, shall prejudice his
client, or reveal any of the secrets of the latter learned by him in his professional capacity.

Acts punished as betrayal of trust by attorney.

1. By causing damage to his client, either (1) by any malicious breach of professional duty, (2) by inexcusable
negligence or ignorance.

Note: When the attorney acts (1) with malicious abuse of his employment or (2) inexcusable negligence or
ignorance, there must be damage to his client.

2. By revealing any of the secrets of his client learned by him in his professional capacity.

Note: Damage is not necessary.

3. By undertaking the defense of the opposing party in the same case, without the consent of his first client, after
having undertaken the defense of said first client or after having received confidential information from said
client.

Note: If the client consents to the attorney's taking the defense of the other party, there is no crime.
Art. 210. Direct bribery.

Elements of direct bribery:

1. That the offender be a public officer within the scope of Art. 203.
2. That the offender accepts an offer or a promise or receives a gift or present by himself or through another.
3. That such offer or promise be accepted, or gift or present received by the public officer —

(a) with a view to committing some crime; or

(b) in consideration of the execution of an act which does not constitute a crime, but the act must be unjust; or

(c) to refrain from doing something which it is his official duty to do. d. That the act which the offender agrees to
perform or which he executes be connected with the performance of his official duties.

Art. 211. Indirect bribery.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.

2. That he accepts gifts.
3. That the said gifts are offered to him by reason of his office

Art. 211-A. Qualified Bribery.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer entrusted with law enforcement;

2. That the offender refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime punishable by
reclusion perpetua and/or death;
3. That the offender refrains from arresting or prosecuting the offender in consideration of any promise, gift or
present.

Art. 212. Corruption of public officials.

Elements:

1. That the offender makes offers or promises or gives gifts or presents to a public officer.
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.

FRAUDS AND ILLEGAL EXACTIONS AND TRANSACTIONS

Art. 213. Frauds against the public treasury and similar offenses. —

Elements of frauds against public treasury (Art. 213, par. 1)

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 accounts
relating to public property or funds.
4. That the accused had intent to defraud the Government.

Elements of illegal exactions:

1. The offender is a public officer entrusted with the collection of taxes, licenses, fees and other imposts.
2. 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
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.
Art. 214. Other frauds.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.

2. T h a t he takes advantage of his official position.
3. That he commits any of the frauds or deceits enumerated in Arts. 315 to 318.

Art. 215. Prohibited transactions.

Elements:

1. That the offender is an appointive public officer.

2. That he becomes interested, directly or indirectly, in any transaction of exchange or speculation.
3. That the transaction takes place within the territory subject to his jurisdiction.
4. That he becomes interested in the transaction during his incumbency.

A r t . 2 1 6 . Possession of prohibited interest by a public officer.

Who are liable for possession of prohibited interest?

1. Public officer who, directly or indirectly, became interested in any contract or business in which it was his official duty
to intervene.

2. Experts, arbitrators, and private accountants who, in like manner, took part in any contract or transaction connected
with the estate or property in the appraisal, distribution or adjudication of which they had acted.

3. Guardians and executors with respect to the property belonging to their wards or the estate.

MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY

A r t . 217 Malversation of Public Funds or Property – Presumption of malversation.

Acts punishable in malversation.

1. By appropriating public funds or property.

2. By taking or misappropriating the same.
3. By consenting, or through abandonment or negligence, permitting any other person to take such public funds or
property.
4. By being otherwise guilty of the misappropriation or malversation of such funds or property.

Elements common to all acts of malversation under Art. 217

1. That the offender be a public officer.

2. That he had the custody or control of funds or property by reason of the duties of his office.
3. That those funds or property were public funds or property for which he was accountable.
4. That he appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented or, through abandonment or negligence, permitted
another person to take them.

Municipal President, Justice of the Peace, Municipal Secretary

A r t . 2 1 8 . Failure of accountable officer to render accounts.

Elements:

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 Commission on Audit, or to a provincial
auditor.
4. That he fails to do so for a period of two months after such accounts should be rendered.
A r t . 2 1 9 . Failure of a responsible public officer to render accounts before leaving
the country.

Elements:

1. (a) That the offender is a public officer.

2. (b) That he must be an accountable officer for public funds or property.
3. (c) That he must have unlawfully left (or be on the point of leaving) the Philippines without securing from the
Commission on Audit a certificate showing that his accounts have been finally settled.

Art. 220. Illegal use of public funds or property.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.

2. That there is public fund or property under his administration.
3. That such public fund or property has been appropriated by law or ordinance
4. That he applies the same to a public use other than that for which such fund or property has been appropriated
by law or ordinance.

Illegal use of public funds or property distinguished from malversation under Art.
217.

1. The offenders are accountable public officers in both crimes.

2. The offender in illegal use of public funds or property does not derive any personal gain or profit; in
malversation, the offender in certain cases profits from the proceeds of the crime.
3. In illegal use, the public fund or property is applied to another public use; in malversation, the public fund or
property is applied to the personal use and benefit of the offender or of another person.

Art. 221. Failure to make delivery of public funds or property.

Acts punishable under Art. 221.

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.

Elements of failure to make payment.

a. That the public officer has Government funds in his possession.

b. That he is under obligation to make payment from such funds.
c. That he fails to make the payment maliciously.

Art. 222. Officers included in the preceding provisions.

Private individuals who may be liable under Arts. 217 to 221

1. Private individuals who, in any capacity whatever, have charge of any national, provincial or municipal funds,
revenue, or property.
2. Administrator or depository of funds or property, attached, seized or deposited by public authority, even if such
property belongs to a private individual.

Purpose of Art. 222.

The purpose of Article 222 of the Revised Penal Code is to extend the provisions of the Code on malversation to private
individuals. (People vs. Escalante

Art. 223. Conniving with or consenting to evasion.

Elements:
 1. That the offender is a public officer.
2. That he had in his custody or charge, a prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment.
3. That such prisoner escaped from his custody.
4. That he was in connivance with the prisoner in the latter's escape.

Art. 224. Evasion through negligence.

Elements

1. That the offender is a public officer.

2. That he is charged with the conveyance or custody of a prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoner by final
judgment.
3. That such prisoner escapes through his negligence.

Art. 225. Escape of prisoner under the custody of a person not a public officer.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a private person.

2. That the conveyance or custody of a prisoner or person under arrest is confided to him.
3. That the prisoner or person under arrest escapes.
4. That the offender consents to the escape of the prisoner or person under arrest, or that the escape takes place
through his negligence.

A r t . 226 Removal, Concealment or destruction of documents.

Elements:

1. That the offender be a public officer.

2. That he abstracts, destroys or conceals documents or papers.
3. That the said documents or papers should have been entrusted to such public officer by reason of his office.
4. That damage, whether serious or not, to a third party or to the public interest should have been caused.

A rt. 227. Officer breaking seal.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.

2. That he is charged with the custody of papers or property.
3. That these papers or property are sealed by proper authority.
4. That he breaks the seals or permits them to be broken.

Art. 228. Opening of closed documents.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.

2. That any closed papers, documents, or objects are entrusted to his custody.
3. That he opens or permits to be opened said closed papers, documents or objects.
4. That he does not have proper authority.

Art. 229. Revelation of secrets by an officer.

Elements of No. 1

1. That the offender is a public officer.

2. That he knows of a secret by reason of his official capacity.
3. That he reveals such secret without authority orjustifiable reasons.
4. That damage, great or small, be caused to the public interest.

Art. 230. Public officer revealing secrets of private individual.

Elements:
 1. That the offender is a public officer.
2. That he knows of the secrets of a private individual by reason of his office.
3. That he reveals such secrets without authority or justifiable reason.

Art. 231. Open disobedience.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a judicial or executive officer.

2. That there is a judgment, decision or order of a superior authority.
3. That such judgment, decision or order was made within the scope of the jurisdiction of the superior authority
and issued with all the legal formalities.
4. That the offender without any legal justification openly refuses to execute the said judgment, decision or order,
which he is duty bound to obey.

A r t . 2 3 2 . Disobedience to order of superior officer, when said order was suspended

by inferior officer.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.

2. That an order is issued by his superior for execution.
3. That he has for any reason suspended the execution of such order.
4. That his superior disapproves the suspension of the execution of the order.
5. That the offender disobeys his superior despite the disapproval of the suspension.

Art. 233. Refusal of Assistance

Elements:

1. That the offender is a public officer.

2. That a competent authority demands from the offender that he lend his cooperation towards the administration of
justice or other public service.
3. That the offender fails to do so maliciously.

Art. 234. Refusal to discharge elective office.

Elements:

1. That the offender is elected by popular election to a public office.

2. That he refuses to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of said office.
3. That there is no legal motive for such refusal to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of said office.
TITLE 9
CRIMES AGAINST LIBERTY
Art. 267. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a private individual.

2. That he kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner deprives the latter of his liberty.
3. That the act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal.
4. That in the commission of the offense, any of the following circumstances is present:

1. (a) That the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than 3 days;
2. (b) That it is committed simulating public authority;
3. (c) That any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained or threats to
kill him are made; or
4. (d) That the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female, or a public officer.

Art. 268. Slight illegal detention.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a private individual.

2. That he kidnaps or detains another, or in any other manner deprives him of his liberty.
3. That the act of kidnapping or detention is illegal.
4. That the crime is committed without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in Art. 267.

Art. 269. Unlawful arrest.

Elements:

1. That the offender arrests or detains another person.

2. That the purpose of the offender is to deliver him to the proper authorities.
3. That the arrest or detention is not authorized by law or there is no reasonable ground therefor.

Art. 270. Kidnapping and failure to return a minor.

Elements:

1. That the offender is entrusted with the custody of a minor person (whether over or under 7 years but less than
21 years of age).
2. That he deliberately fails to restore the said minor to his parents or guardians.

Art. 271. Inducing a minor to abandon his home.

Elements:

1. That a minor (whether over or under seven years of age but under 21 years old) is living in the home of his
parents or guardian or the person entrusted with his custody.
2. That the offender induces (actual inducement is essential) said minor to abandon such home. (child leaving home
immaterial)

Art. 272. Slavery.

Elements:

1. That the offender purchases, sells, kidnaps or detains a PERSON.

2. That the purpose of the offender is to enslave such person.

Art. 273. Exploitation of child labor.

Elements:

1. That the offender retains a minor in his service.

2. That it is against the will of the minor.
3. That it is under the pretext of reimbursing himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant, guardian or person
entrusted with the custody of such minor.
Art. 274. Services rendered under compulsion in payment of debt.

Elements:

1. That the offender compels a debtor to work for him, either as household servant or farm laborer.
2. That it is against the debtor's will.
3. That the purpose is to require or enforce the payment of a debt.

CRIMES AGAINST SECURITY

A r t . 275. Abandonment of persons in danger and abandonment of one's own victim.

Elements:

1. The place is not inhabited;

2. The accused found there a person wounded or in danger of dying;
3. The accused can render assistance without detriment to himself;
4. The accused fails to render assistance.
5. By failing to help or render assistance to another whom the offender has accidentally wounded or injured.
6. By failing to deliver a child, under seven years of age whom the offender has found abandoned, to the authorities
or to his family, or by failing to take him to a safe place.

Art. 276. Abandoning a minor.

Elements

1. That the offender has the custody of a child.

2. That the child is under seven years of age.
3. That he abandons such child.
4. That he has no intent to kill the child when the latter is abandoned.

A r t . 2 7 7 . Abandonment of minor by person entrusted with his custody;

indifference of parents.

Elements of abandonment of minor by one charged with the rearing or education of said minor.

1. That the offender is in charge of the rearing or education of a minor.

2. That he delivers said minor to a public institution or other persons.
3. That the one who entrusted such child to the offender has not consented to such act; or if the one who entrusted
such child to the offender is absent, the proper authorities have not consented to it.

Only the person charged with "the rearing or education" of the minor is liable.

Art. 276. abandonment of a minor Art. 277. Abandonment of minor by person

entrusted with the custody
custody of the offender is stated in
general the custody of the offender is specific, that is,
the custody for the rearing or education of the
minor.
the minor is under 7 years of age
the minor is under 21 years of age.
the minor is abandoned in such a way as
to deprive him of the care and
protection the minor is delivered to a public institution or
other person.

Elements of indifference of parents

1. That the offender is a parent.

2. That he neglects his children by not giving them education.
3. That his station in life requires such education and his financial condition permits it.

Art. 278. Exploitation of minors.- The exploitation of the minor must be of such nature as to endanger his life or
safety, in order to constitute the offense described in this article.

Acts punished under this article:

1. By causing any boy or girl under 16 years of age to perform any dangerous feat of balancing, physical strength or
contortion, the offender being any person.
2. By employing children under 16 years of age who are not the children or descendants of the offender in exhibitions
of acrobat, gymnast, rope- walker, diver, or wild-animal tamer, the offender being an acrobat, etc., or circus manager
or person engaged in a similar calling.
3. By employing any descendant under 12 years of age in dangerous exhibitions enumerated in the next preceding
paragraph, the offender being engaged in any of the said callings.
 4. By delivering a child under 16 years of age gratuitously to any person following any of the callings enumerated in
paragraph 2, or to any habitual vagrant or beggar, the offender being an ascendant, guardian, teacher or person
entrusted in any capacity with the care of such child.
5. By inducing any child under 16 years of age to abandon the home of its ascendants, guardians, curators or teachers to
follow any person engaged in any of the callings mentioned in paragraph 2 or to accompany any habitual vagrant
or beggar, the offender being any person.

Art. 280. Qualified trespass to dwelling.

Elements of trespass to dwelling. – DEVOTED FOR REST AND COMFORT

1. That the offender is a private person. IF PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEE VIOL OF DOMICILE.
2. That he enters the dwelling of another. IF WITH FORCE AND VIOLENCE QUALI CIRCUM HIGHER
PENALTY
3. That such entrance is against the latter's will. - Entrance into dwelling must be against the will of
owner or occupant.

The law which forbids entry (with violence) into the dwelling of another relates not only to the method by which one
may pass the threshold of the dwelling of another, but also to the conduct immediately after entrance of one who so
enters. In this case, although the couple already retired at that time, as it was between 8 and 9 o'clock at night, the
wife's sister was still awake and sitting up sewing. But the accused entered the house without first obtaining the
permission of any person. Once inside, the accused wounded the husband.

Held: Qualified trespass was committed. (U.S. vs. Arceo, 3 Phil. 381)

Trespass by means of violence:

1. Pushing the door violently and maltreating the occupants after entering. (U.S. vs. Paray, 17 Phil. 378)
2. Cutting of a ribbon or string with which the door latch of a closed room was fastened. The cutting of the
fastenings of the door was an act of violence. (U.S. vs. Lindio, 10 Phil. 192)
3. Wounding by means of a bolo, the owner of the house immediately after entrance. (U.S. vs. Arceo, et al., 3 Phil.
381)

Trespass by means of intimidation

1. Firing a revolver in the air by persons attempting to force their way into a house. (U.S. vs. Ostrea, 2 Phil. 93)
2. The nourishing of a bolo against inmates of the house upon gaining entrance. (U.S. vs. Lindio, 10 Phil. 192)

Art. 281. Other forms of trespass.

Elements:

1. That the offender enters the closed premises or the fenced estate of another .
2. That the entrance is made while either of them is uninhabited.
3. That the prohibition to enter be manifest.
4. That the trespasser has not secured the permission of the owner or the caretaker thereof.

Entering a warehouse may be trespass under this article – warehouse is a closed

premise

Distinguished from trespass to dwelling.

In the first, the offender enters a dwelling house; in the second, the offender enters closed premises or fenced estate.
In the first, the place entered is inhabited; in the second, the place entered is uninhabited.
In the first, the act constituting the crime is entering the dwelling against the will of the owner; in the second, it is entering
the closed premises or the fenced estate without securing the permission of the owner or caretaker thereof.
In the first, the prohibition to enter is express or implied; in the second, the prohibition to enter must be manifest.

TRESPASS TO DWELLING 280 OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS 281

the offender is a private person the offender is any person.

the offender enters a dwelling house the offender enters closed premises or fenced estate.

the place entered is inhabited the place entered is uninhabited.

the act constituting the crime is entering the dwelling against it is entering the closed premises or the fenced estate
the will of the owner without securing the permission of the owner or caretaker
thereof.
the prohibition to enter is express or implied the prohibition to enter must be manifest.
Art. 282. Grave threats.

Elements of grave threats where offender attained his purpose:

a. That the offender threatens another person with the infliction upon the latter's person, honor or
property, or upon that of the latter's family, of any wrong.
b. That such wrong amounts to a crime.
c. That there is a demand for money or that any other condition is imposed, even though not unlawful.
d. That the offender attains his purpose.

Or imposing any other condition, even though not unlawful.

A seduced B's daughter. Because A refused to marry her, B threatened A with death, unless A would marry his said
daughter. Is B liable for grave threats?

Yes. B threatened A with the infliction upon his person of a wrong amounting to a crime (homicide), imposing a condition
(unless A would marry his daughter).

It will be noted that the condition imposed is not unlawful. Nevertheless, since a threat to inflict a wrong amounting to a
crime was made, B is criminally liable for the crime of grave threats.

Elements of grave threats not subject to a condition:

1. That the offender threatens another person with the infliction upon the latter's person, honor, or property, or
upon that of the latter's family, of any wrong.
2. That such wrong amounts to a crime.
3. That the threat is not subject to a condition.

Art. 283. Light threats.

Elements:

1. That the offender makes a threat to commit a wrong.

2. That the wrong does not constitute a crime.
3. That there is a demand for money or that other condition is imposed, even though not unlawful.
4. That the offender has attained his purpose or, that he has not attained his purpose.

Art. 284. Bond for good behavior. In all cases falling within the two next preceding articles, the person
making the threats may also be required to give bail not to molest the person threatened, or if he shall fail to give such
bail, he shall be sentenced to destierro.

In what cases may a person be required to give ball not to molest another?

1. When he threatens another under the circumstances mentioned in Art. 282. Grave threats.
2. When he threatens another under the circumstances mentioned in Art. 283. Light threats.

Art. 285. Other light threats.

Acts punished as other light threats.

1. By threatening another with a weapon, or by drawing such weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful
self-defense.
2. By orally threatening another, in the heat of anger, with some harm (not) constituting a crime,
without persisting in the idea involved in his threat.

Note: The word "not" in this paragraph is enclosed in parenthesis, because the inclusion of that word
in paragraph 2 of Art. 285 is a mistake.

3. By orally threatening to do another any harm not constituting a felony.

**there is no demand for money or that there is no condition imposed when the offender threatens
another with a weapon, and that the case does not fall in subdivision No. 2 of Art. 282. Grave threats.
Art. 285(OTHER LIGHT THREATS, compared with Art. 282(GRAVE THREATS) and Art.
283(LIGHT THREATS)

Threats under paragraph 2 of Art. 285 is similar to the third form of grave threats (Art. 282), because the harm
threatened to be committed is a crime.

Threats under paragraph 3 of Art. 285 is similar to light threats (Art. 283), because the harm threatened to be committed
is not a crime.

The difference lies in the fact that in other light threats (Art. 285), there is no demand for money or that there is no
condition imposed or that the threat is not deliberate.

Art. 286. Grave coercions.

Two ways of committing grave coercions.

There are two ways of committing grave coercions:

1. By preventing another, by means of violence, threats or intimidation, from doing something not prohibited by law.
2. By compelling another, by means of violence, threats or intimidation, to do something against his will,
whether it be right or wrong.

Elements of grave coercions:

The three elements of the crime of grave coercions are:

1. That a person prevented another from doing something not prohibited by law, or that he compelled him to
do something against his will, be it right or wrong;
2. That the prevention or compulsion be effected by violence, threats or intimidation; and
3. That the person that restrained the will and liberty of another had not the authority of law or the
right to do so, or, in other words, that the restraint shall not be made under authority of law or in the exercise
of any lawful right.

**In the crime of grave coercion, the person coercing must have restrained his victim from doing something, not
prohibited by law, at the time he wanted to do it. The coercing person must have exerted violence on his victim at
the very moment that the latter is doing or is about to do something he wants to do.

If the defendant, however, had told the complainant not to do something he desired to do, but the complainant went
ahead and did it, without the defendant doing anything to prevent him, and after the complainant had finished doing
it, the defendant exerted violence on him, the crime committed was unjust vexation, not grave coercion.

Had the defendant waylaid Oscar Flores while he was on his way to work and then prevented him, by means
ofviolence, from going to his work, he would have been guilty of grave coercion.

**The sergeant of police and the municipal president of a town wanted to cross a private bridge which was closed.
They were refused passage because they were on a heavy truck. What they did was to open the bridge, grabbed and
pushed the caretaker who fell to the ground. One of them pulled out a revolver ready to shoot.

Held: They committed grave coercion.

**Facts: The three carabaos of A entered the rice paddies of B, causing considerable damage thereto. B took
possession of the three carabaos and refused to return them to A, unless the latter would pay for the damage done. A did
not deny B's right to compensation, but he was not at that time ready to make payment. The next day, B and his son set
out to take the animals to the justice of the peace for the purpose of depositing them in his care until the question of
damages could be settled in court. On the road, they met A in company with some other persons. When A came to know
that B and his son were taking the carabaos to the justice of peace and refused to give them back to him, A drew his bolo,
rushed at B's son, who was then mounted on one of the carabaos ahead of B and leading another carabao with a rope, and
cut that rope. With threats of bodily harm, A compelled B to turn loose the carabao on which he was riding.

Was A guilty of grave coercion?

Held: Yes. With violence, he compelled B to do that which the latter did not desire to do, to turn over the possession of the
carabaos to him, and it matters not whether it was right or wrong.

It is a maxim of the law that no man is authorized to take the law into his hands and enforce his rights with threats or
violence except in certain well-defined cases where one acts in the necessary defense of one's life, liberty, or property.

Art. 287. Light coercions.

Elements:

1. That the offender must be a creditor.

2. That he seizes anything belonging to his debtor.
3. That the seizure of the thing be accomplished by means of violence or a display of material force producing
intimidation.
4. That the purpose of the offender is to apply the same to the payment of the debt.

Unjust vexation — other light coercion (Art. 287, par. 2).

Unjust vexation includes any human conduct which, although not productive of some physical or material harm would,
however, unjustly annoy or vex an innocent person. (Guevara)

The paramount question to be considered, in determining whether the crime of unjust vexation is committed, is whether
the offender's act caused annoyance, irritation, vexation, torment, distress or disturbance to the mind of the person to whom
it is directed.

There is no violence or intimidation in unjust vexation.

Light coercion under the first paragraph will be unjust vexation if the third element (employing violence or intimidation)
is absent.

ART. 288. Other Similar Coercions

Acts punished as other similar coercions:

1. By forcing or compelling, directly or indirectly, or knowingly permitting the forcing or compelling of the laborer
or employee of the offender to purchase merchandise or commodities of any kind from him.
2. By paying the wages due his laborer or employee by means of tokens or objects other than the legal tender
currency of the Philippines, unless expressly requested by such laborer or employee.

Elements of No. 1

a. That the offender is any person, agent or officer of any association or corporation.
b. That he or such firm or corporation has employed laborers or employees.
c. That he forces or compels, directly or indirectly, or knowingly permits to be forced or compelled, any
of his or its laborers or employees to purchase merchandise or commodities of any kind from him or
from said firm or corporation.

Elements of No. 2:

d. That the offender pays the wages due a laborer or employee employed by him by means of tokens or
objects.
e. That those tokens or objects are other than the legal tender currency of the Philippines.
f. That such employee or laborer does not expressly request that he be paid by means of tokens or objects.

A r t . 2 8 9 . Formation, maintenance, and prohibition of combination of capital or

labor through violence or threats.

Elements:

1. That the offender employs violence or threats, in such a degree as to compel or force the laborers or employers in
the free and legal exercise of their industry or work.
2. That the purpose is to organize, maintain or prevent coalitions of capital or labor, strike of laborers or lockout of
employers.

Art. 290. Discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a private individual or even a public officer not in the exercise of his official function.
2. That he seizes the papers or letters of another.
3. That the purpose is to discover the secrets of such another person.
4. That offender is informed of the contents of the papers or letters seized.

Art. 291. Revealing secrets with abuse of office.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a manager, employee or servant.

2. That he learns the secrets of his principal or master in such capacity.
3. That he reveals such secrets.

Art. 292. Revelation of industrial secrets.

Elements:

1. That the offender is a person in charge, employee or workman of a manufacturing or industrial establishment.
2. That the manufacturing or industrial establishment has a secret of the industry which the offender has learned.
3. That the offender reveals such secrets. That prejudice is caused to the owner.
Title 10
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
Art. 293. Who are guilty of robbery.

Any person who, with intent to gain, shall take any personal property belonging to another, by means of violence against
or intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything, shall be guilty of robbery.

Robbery, defined.

Robbery is the taking of personal property, belonging to another, with intent to gain, by means of violence against, or
intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything.

Classification of robbery.

1. Robbery with violence against, or intimidation of persons. (Arts. 294, 297 and 298)
2. Robbery by the use of force upon things. (Arts. 299 and 302)

Elements of robbery in general.

1. That there be (1) personal property (not real property that’s usurpation); (2) belonging to another;
2. That there is (3) unlawful taking of that property;
3. That the taking must be (4) with intent to gain; and
4. That there is (5) violence against or intimidation of any person, or force upon anything.

Prohibitive articles may be the subject matter of robbery; opium, for instance.
In robbery, the personal property of another is taken by the offender against the will of the owner.
The taking of personal property must be unlawful.

As to robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons.

From the moment the offender gains possession of the thing, even if the culprit has had no opportunity to dispose of the same, the unlawful
taking is complete.

As to robbery with force upon things.

When the culprit had already broken the floor of the bodega, had entered it, and had removed one sack of sugar from the pile, but was caught in
the act of taking out the sack of sugar through the opening on the floor, it was frustrated robbery only.

"Taking," as an element of robbery, means depriving the offended party of ownership

of the thing taken with the character of permanency.

A was the owner of a gun kept in a drawer which was locked. B, A's son, destroyed the drawer's lock and obtained the
gun in order to threaten A with it, as in fact B threatened A with said gun.

Held: B had no intention of depriving A of the ownership of the gun with any character of permanency, negativing
therefore the essential element of "taking" in the crime of robbery. (People vs. Kho Choc, C.A., 50 O.G. 1667)

Note: The accused in this case was convicted of grave threats (Art. 282), for threatening the offended party with the said
gun, demanding money, but without attaining his purpose, because the offended party reported the matter to the police.

Intent to gain.

Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful taking of personal property.

The intent to gain, being an internal act, cannot be established by direct evidence, except in case of confession by the
accused and his overt act. It must, therefore, be deduced from the circumstances surrounding the commission of the
offense. As a general rule, however, the unlawful taking of personal property belonging to another involves intent to gain
on the part of the offender.
Absence of intent to gain will make the taking of personal property grave coercion if there is violence used.

People vs. Villar

(C.A., GR. No. 14289-R, July 29, 1955)

Facts: The offended party was heading for Oregon Street when the accused from behind, snatched the bag she was then
carrying. The accused ran away after snatching the bag.

Held: The crime committed is theft. In taking away the bag, the accused did not use "violence against or intimidation of
any person." In U.S. vs. Samonte (8 Phil. 286), the case was found to be robbery because, after snatching the money from
his hand, the offended party was pushed to prevent him from recovering the seized property. In U.S. vs. Blanco (10 Phil.
298), besides snatching the pawn ticket from the hand of the offended party, the offender used intimidation on the
despoiled party. In People vs. Mallari, et al. (60 Phil. 400), the offenders grabbed the hands of the victim and wrested the
wallet from him.

The intimidation exists when it causes the fear or fright of the victim. Thus, a threat of arrest and prosecution, pointing a
gun or a knife to the victim, and the like — are forms of intimidation.

The violence or intimidation must be present before the taking of personal property
is complete.

Exception:

But when the violence results in: (1) homicide, (2) rape, (3) intentional mutilation, or (4) any of the serious physical injuries
penalized in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Art. 263, the taking of personal property is robbery complexed any of those crimes under
Art. 294, even if the taking was already complete when the violence was used by the offender.

In denning the special complex crimes penalized in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of Art. 294, the phrase "by reason" or
"accompanied by" is used, which indicates that even if the violence resulting in homicide, rape, intentional mutilation, or
serious physical injuries is used by the offender after the taking of personal property belonging to another, the crime is
still robbery complexed with any of those crimes.

A r t 2 9 4 . Robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons — Penalties.

1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, when by reason or on occasion of the robbery,

the crime of homicide shall have been committed;

or when the robbery shall have been accompanied by

a. rape
b. intentional mutilation
c. arson;

2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclusion perpetua when by reason or
on occasion of the robbery, any of the physical injuries penalized in subdivision 1 Article 263 (person
shall become imbecile, insane, impotent, or blind), shall have been inflicted;

3. The penalty of reclusion temporal, when by reason or on occasion of the robbery, any of the
physical injuries penalized in subdivision 2 Article 263 (lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell,
or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a leg, or shall have become incapacitated for work) shall have been
inflicted;
4. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its medium period,
if the violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery shall have been carried
to a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime, or when in the course of its
execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon any person not responsible for its commission
any of the physical injuries covered by subdivisions 3 and 4 of said Article 263 ( par 3: person become
deformed, lost any other part of his body, lost the use of it, be ill or incapacitated for work for more 90 days and par 4: crime has
caused the person´s illness or incapacity for labor for more than 30 days);
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period
in other cases.

Par 1-3 before , Par 4 on occasion or by reason, if after separate crime (no person killed only
SPI)

Acts punished as robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons:

1. When by reason or on occasion of the robbery (taking of personal property belonging to another with intent to gain),
the crime of homicide is committed;
2. When the robbery is accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation or arson;
3. When by reason or on occasion of such robbery, any of the physical injuries resulting in insanity, imbecility,
impotency or blindness is inflicted;
4. When by reason or on occasion of robbery, any of the physical injuries resulting in the loss of the use of speech or the
power to hear or to smell, or the loss of an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg or the loss of the use of any such
member or incapacity for the work in which the injured person is theretofore habitually engaged is inflicted;
 5. If the violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery is carried to a degree clearly unnecessary
for the commission of the crime;
6. When in the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon any person not responsible for the
commission of the robbery any of the physical injuries in consequence of which the person injured becomes deformed
or loses any other member of his body or loses the use thereof or becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of
the work in which he is habitually engaged for more than 90 days or the person injured becomes ill or incapacitated
for labor for more than 30 days;
7. If the violence employed by the offender does not cause any of the serious physical injuries defined in Art. 263, or if
the offender employs intimidation only.

The crime defined in this article is a special complex crime.

Art. 294 already provides a specific penalty for each kind of robbery with violence against persons in the first, second,
third and fourth paragraphs thereof.

"On the occasion" or "by reason" of the robbery.

Note the phrases "on the occasion" and "by reason" of the robbery. These phrases mean that the homicide or serious
physical injuries defined in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Art. 263 must be committed in the course or because of the robbery

Robbery and homicide are separate offenses, when the homicide was not committed
"on the occasion" or "by reason" of the robbery.

Where the original design comprehends robbery, and homicide is perpetrated by

reason or on occasion of the consummation of the former, the crime committed is
robbery with homicide.

***Robbery is the main purpose, killing is merely incidental. -Robbery w homicide

An intent to take personal property belonging to another with intent to gain must
precede the killing.

If the idea of taking the personal property of another with intent to gain came to the mind of the offender after he had
killed the victim, he is guilty of two separate crimes of homicide or murder, as the case may be, and theft.

Killing first the victim and then afterwards taking the money from the body of the deceased is robbery with homicide.

Inflicting serious physical injuries defined in subdivisions 3 and 4 of Art. 263 "upon any person
not responsible for its commission."

Suppose that in the course of the execution of the crime of robbery, one of the offenders inflicted upon another robber,
who wanted to get all the loot, physical injuries which resulted in the latter's deformity, is the crime, robbery with serious
physical injuries? Note the wording of the law as regards this question. It says: "upon any person not responsible for its
commission." It would seem that the penalty prescribed in paragraph 4 of Art. 294 should not be applied. The offender
who inflicted on another robber, physical injuries which later resulted in deformity, would be liable

for two crimes, namely: (1) robbery, and (2) serious physical injuries under Art. 263, paragraph 3.

The serious physical injuries defined in subdivisions 3 and 4 of Art. 263, inflicted in connection
with the robbery, must be inflicted "in the course of its execution."

Hence, if the victim became deformed or lost any other part of his body or the use thereof, or became ill or incapacitated
for his work for more than 90 days (Art. 263, par. 3), or became ill or incapacitated for labor for more than 30 days (Art.
263, par. 4), it is necessary to determine whether the physical injuries were inflicted in the course of the execution of the
robbery.

If they were inflicted after the taking of the personal property had been complete, the serious physical injuries mentioned
should be considered as separate offense.

In paragraph 4 of Art. 294, the phrase "by reason" is not used.

Requisites of robbery under the second case of paragraph 4 of Art. 294.

1. That any of the physical injuries defined in paragraphs 3 and 4 of Art. 263 was inflicted in the course of the
robbery; and
2. That any of them was inflicted upon any person not responsible for the commission of the robbery.

Robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of any person under
paragraph 5 of Art. 294.

1. The robbery under this paragraph is known as simple robbery, because the use of violence against any person
does not result in homicide, rape, intentional mutilation, or any of the serious physical injuries defined in Art.
263, which may give rise to special complex crime.
2. When the injury inflicted upon the offended party on the occasion of robbery can be qualified only as less
serious physical injuries (U.S. vs. Barroga, 21 Phil. 161) or slight physical injuries (People vs. Mandia, 60 Phil.
372; People vs. Magramo, et al., 62 Phil. 307), the crime is that defined and penalized in par. 5 of Art. 294.
3. There is violence, even if the physical force employed by the offender merely consists in his pushing the victim.
Robbery with violence or intimidation "in other cases" referred to in par. 5 is
committed by:

1. Snatching money from the hands of the victim and pushing her to prevent her from recovering the seized
property. (U.S. vs. Samonte 8 Phil. 286)
2. Grabbing pawn ticket from the hands of another and intimidating him. (U.S. vs. Blanco, 10 Phil. 298)

Threats to extort money distinguished from robbery thru intimidation.

In both crimes, there is intimidation by the offender. The purpose, when threat is made to extort money, is identical — to
obtain gain.

The differences are:

1. (1) In robbery, the intimidation is actual and immediate; whereas in threats, the intimidation is conditional or
future, that is, not immediate;
2. (2) In robbery, the intimidation is personal, while in threats, it may be through an intermediary;
3. (3) In threats, the intimidation may refer to the person, honor or property of the offended party or that of his
family; while in robbery, the intimidation is directed only to the person of the victim;
4. (4) In robbery, the gain of the culprit is immediate; whereas in threats, the gain of the culprit is not immediate.
(People vs. Moreno, C.A., G.R. No. 43635, April 30, 1936)

Robbery with violence distinguished from grave coercion.

1. (1) In both crimes, there is violence used by the offender;

2. (2) While in robbery, there is intent to gain, but such element is not present in coercion.

The only distinction between these two crimes is just a matter of intention.

If the purpose of the accused in taking somebody's property by force or intimidation is to obtain gain, the crime is
robbery; but if his purpose is to compel another to do something against his will, without authority of law, but believing
himself to be the owner or creditor, and thereby seizes property, then the crime is grave coercion.

Problem:

A lost his watch. One day, A saw B using the watch. A, recognizing the watch, asked B to give it to him because it was his
property. Because B refused, A, with drawn pistol, told him that if B would not give him the

watch, A would kill him. Because of fear for his life, B gave the watch to A against B's will.

Is the crime committed by A robbery, grave threats or grave coercion?

It is grave coercion, because B was compelled to do something against his will, whether it be right or wrong.

It cannot be threats, because in the crime of threats, the intimidation is not actual and immediate. It is true that there was
a sort of a condition made, that is, B would be killed if he would not give A the watch. But in threats, the intimidation
must promise some future harm or injury. When the effect of the intimidation is immediate and the offended party is
compelled thereby to do something against his will, whether it be right or wrong, the crime committed is grave coercion.

It cannot be robbery, because there is no intent to gain, as A believed that the watch he was taking was his own property.

A r t . 2 9 5 . Robbery with physical injuries, committed in an uninhabited place and by

a band, or with the use of firearm on a street, road or alley.
If the offenses mentioned in subdivisions 3, 4, and 5 of the next preceding article (263) shall have been committed in an
uninhabited place or by a band or by attacking a moving train, street car, motor vehicle or airship, or by entering the
passengers' compartments in a train or, in any manner, taking the passengers thereof by surprise in the respective
conveyances, or on a street, road, highway, or alley, and the intimidation is made with the use of a firearm,

Paragraphs 3,4 and 5 of ART 263 SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES

3. The penalty of reclusion temporal, when by reason or on occasion of the robbery, any of
the physical injuries penalized in subdivision 2 Article 263 (lost the use of speech or the power to
hear or to smell, or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a leg, or shall have become incapacitated for work)
shall have been inflicted;
4. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its medium
period, if the violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the robbery shall
have been carried to a degree clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime, or
when in the course of its execution, the offender shall have inflicted upon any person not
responsible for its commission any of the physical injuries covered by subdivisions 3 and
 4 of said Article 263 ( par 3: person become deformed, lost any other part of his body, lost the use of it, be ill or
incapacitated for work for more 90 days and par 4: crime has caused the person´s illness or incapacity for labor for more
than 30 days);
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its
medium period in other cases.

When is robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons qualified?

If any of the offenses denned in subdivisions 3, 4 and 5 of Art. 294 is committed

1. in an uninhabited place, or
2. by a band
3. by attacking a moving train, street car, motor vehicle, or airship, or
4. by entering the passengers' compartments in a train, or in any manner taking the passengers thereof by surprise in the
respective conveyances, or
5. on a street, road, highway, or alley, and the intimidation is made with the use of firearms, the offender shall be punished
by the maximum periods of the proper penalties prescribed in Art. 294.

Art. 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred by the members thereof.

Outline of the provisions.

1. When at least four armed malefactors take part in the commission of a robbery, it is deemed committed by a
band. graves resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency
2. When any of the arms used in the commission of robbery is not licensed, the penalty upon all the
malefactors shall be the maximum of the corresponding penalty provided by law, without prejudice to the
criminal liability for illegal possession of such firearms.
3. Any member of a band who was present at the commission of a robbery by the band, shall be
punished as principal of any of the assaults committed by the band, unless it be shown that he attempted to
prevent the same.

Requisites for liability for the acts of the other members of the band.

A member of the band is liable for any of the assaults committed by the other members thereof, when the following
requisites concur:

1. That he was a member of the band.

2. That he was present at the commission of a robbery by that band.
3. That the other members of the band committed an assault.
4. That he did not attempt to prevent the assault.

Art. 297. Attempted and frustrated robbery committed under certain circumstances. — When
by reason or on occasion of an attempted or frustrated robbery a homicide is committed, the person
guilty of such offenses shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion 6

perpetua, unless the homicide committed shall deserve a higher penalty under the provisions of this
Code.

A rt. 298. Execution of deeds by means of violence or intimidation.—

Elements:

1. That the offender has intent to defraud another.

2. That the offender compels him to sign, execute, or deliver any public instrument or document.
3. That the compulsion is by means of violence or intimidation.

***Personal property only

Robbery by the use of force upon things is committed only when either (1) the offender entered a house
or building by any of the means specified in Art. 299 or Art. 302,

What are the two kinds of robbery with force upon things?

They are:

1. Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to religious worship. (Art. 299)
2. Robbery in an uninhabited place or in a private building. (Art. 302)
ELEMENTS

--Entering the building, if no entrance there is no robbery with force upon things

Art. 299. Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to worship. Any armed
person who shall commit robbery in an inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to religious worship,
shall be punished by reclusion temporal, if the value of the property taken shall exceed 50K pesos, and if –

(a) The malefactors shall enter the house or building in which the robbery is committed, by any of the following means:
1. Through an opening not intended for entrance or egress;
2. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or breaking any door or window;
3. By using false keys, picklocks, or similar tools;
4. By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority.

Or if –

(b) The robbery be committed under any of the following circumstances:

1. By breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle;
2. By taking such furniture or objects away to be broken or forced open outside the place of the robbery.

ELEMENTS:

1. That the offender entered (a) an inhabited place, or (b) public building, or (c) edifice devoted to religious
worship. IF A CAR THEFT ONLY,
2. That the entrance was effected by any of the following means:

*Through an opening not intended for entrance or egress;

*By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or breaking any door or window;
*By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools; or
*By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of public authority.

3. That once inside the building, the offender took personal property belonging to another with intent to gain.

Art. 300. Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a band.

Robbery in an inhabited house, public building or edifice devoted to religious worship is

qualified when committed by a band AND in an uninhabited place.

The robbery mentioned in Art. 299, if committed in an uninhabited place AND by a band, shall be punished by the
maximum period of the penalty provided therefor.

The two qualifications (uninhabited place and by a band) must concur. (U.S. vs. Morada, et al., 23 Phil. 477)

The fact that the robbery with force upon things in inhabited house or public building or edifice devoted to religious
worship was committed in an uninhabited place and by a band must be alleged in the information to qualify the offense.

A r t . 3 0 1 . What is an inhabited house, public building, or building dedicated to religious

worship and their dependencies. —

Inhabited house means any shelter, ship, or vessel constituting the dwelling of one or more persons, even though the
inhabitants thereof shall temporarily be absent therefrom when the robbery is committed.

Dependencies, defined.

Dependencies of an inhabited house, public building or building dedicated to religious worship — are all interior courts,
corrals, warehouses, granaries or inclosed places contiguous to the building or edifice, having an interior entrance
connected therewith, and which form part of the whole. (Art. 301, par. 2)

Note: Three requisites:

1. (1) Must be contiguous to the building;

2. (2) Must have an interior entrance connected therewith;
3. (3) Must form part of the whole.

Art. 302. Robbery in an uninhabited place or in a private building. —

1. A. The crime committed is punishable under Article 257 Unintentional Abortion since
Clara is six months pregnant. The Revised Penal Code provides that when there is a
violence committed by a person to a pregnant woman, without intending the abortion, the
violence is intentionally exerted and because of the violence inflicted to the pregnant
woman the child died in her womb or after having been exerted from the woman`s body.
Therefore, Mario is guilty of Unintentional Abortion.

However, since both Clara and the unborn child died, the crime punishable would be
parricide. The elements of parricide are, the accused killed the deceased, the deceased is
either a father, a mother or child illegitimate or legitimate or a spouse of the accused.

Here, Mario and Clara are spoused, therefore, Mario should be convicted with Article
246 Parricide only since Mario killed his unborn child and his wife Clara.

B. Yes. Revised Penal Code does not distinguish the stage of a woman`s pregnancy, as
long as the victim is pregnant and she suffered any of the crimes stated above, still Mario
must be punished with the same crime.

2. Yes, Article 247 Death or Physical Injuries Inflicted under exceptional circumstances

Still applies because the elements of such crime states that, a legally married person
surprises his or her spouse in the act of committing a sexual intercourse with another
person. It does not explicitly stated that the married person shall have a sexual intercourse
with a male only.

3.Ray committed a crime under Article Art. 267. Kidnapping and serious illegal
detention. The elements of this crime as provided for in the Revised Penal Code are, that
the offender is a private individual, that he kidnaps or detains another, or in any other
manner deprives the latter of his liberty. that the act of detention or kidnapping must be
illegal, that in the commission of the offense, any of the following circumstances is
present, (a) That the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than 3 days; (b) That it is
committed simulating public authority; (c) That any serious physical injuries are inflicted
upon the person kidnapped or detained or threats to kill him are made; or d) That the
person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female, or a public officer.

4. Tristan is liable for the crime of Other light threats under the Revised Penal Code. The
acts punished as other light threats include, by threatening another with a weapon, by
orally threatening another, in the heat of anger, with some harm constituting a crime, and
without persisting in the idea involved in his threat. By orally threatening Dave to return
his necklace Tristan is guilty of this crime as the elements were met. That Tristan threats
Dave . Also, there is no demand for money or that there is no condition imposed when
the Tristan threatens Dave with a weapon, and that the elements of this problem does not
fall in subdivision mentioned in other article or the crime of Grave Threats.

5. Michael and Sam are both guilty of Kidnapping and serious illegal detention under
Article 267 as they conspired to abduct Anthony, with regard to having sexual intercourse
by force only Sam shall be held liable under Anti-Rape law which provides that any
person inserts his penis to another person`s mouth or anal orifice by inserting any
instrument or object into the victim’s anal orifice and this crime can be committed by any
person either man or woman to his or her victim.

6. David should be held liable for the crime of less serious physical injury. The Revised
Penal Code provides that, any person who shall cause or inflict injury to another causing
him to be incapacitated for labor for 10 days or but not more than 30 days shall be
punished.