CAGO_CRIM-1-CLASS-NOTES.pdf

CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law ARTICLE 2. APPLICATION OF ITS PROVISIONS. HOUSE RULES...

CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law ARTICLE 2. APPLICATION OF ITS PROVISIONS. HOUSE RULES 3. Treaty, Agreement, or Charter 1. Recitation Grade Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application, - e.g. ADB Charter a. Absent - 50 the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters b. Pass - 60 4. Doctrine of State Immunity and maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction, c. Wrong Answer - Passing Grade against those who: - President or Vice-President during tenure of their office 2. Midterms and Finals is 30% each (departmental) - Officials acting in their sovereign capacity 3. Clear Desk Policy (ballpen + paper for taking notes) 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship - Warships 4. Perfect Attendance = +1 final grade 5. No ceasefire 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Minucher v. Scalzo Government of the Philippine Islands; An agent of the United States Drug Enforcement Agency allowed Criminal Law - Branch of public law that defines crimes and provides by the Philippine government to conduct activities in the country to penalties 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these help contain the problem of drug traffic, is entitled to the defense of islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding 1. Social injury against the state for the disturbance of public state immunity from suit, NOT diplomatic immunity. number; order (imprisonment or fine) 2. Personal injury against the private offended party or the 4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an Liang v. People victim because of the damage/injury caused on him (civil offense in the exercise of their functions; or ADB agreement stipulates that their employees shall be immune indemnity) from suit. This only covers acts performed in their OFFICIAL 5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the function. Slander is not part of their official function, so there is no Crime - acts or omissions in violation of a public law forbidding or law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code. immunity. compelling it. 1. Felony - Revised Penal Code 3 Characteristics of Philippine Criminal Law XPN 2: Laws of Preferential Application 2. Offense - Special Penal Law 1. Congressional privilege of speech (Art. 6 of the 1987 3. Infractions of Law - Ordinances as enacted by the local A. GENERALITY Constitution) sanggunian GR: Penal laws shall be binding on all - XPN to XPN: When the crime for which they are charged persons who live or sojourn in the Philippines. is punishable by more than 6 years imprisonment Congress has the power to enact penal laws. 2 XPNs: Penal laws are not binding on - Members of Congress - Congress may delegate this power to the President to issue these people despite residing in the Philippines. - Libel, slander, defamation Penal Executive Orders. - Made in the halls of Congress XPN 1: Generally Accepted Principles of - During regular or special session Limitations on the power of Congress to enact penal laws. Public International Law 1. Must be general in application or it will violate the equal 1. Absolute blanket diplomatic immunity - representing B. TERRITORIALITY protection clause of the Constitution. political matters GR: Penal laws shall have force and effect within the 2. Must NOT be ex-post facto law in nature - Heads of missions: Chiefs of state/Sovereign Philippine archipelago including its atmosphere, interior waters, - Law makes an act criminal which was not yet criminal - Members of the diplomatic staff: Public Ministers and and maritime zone. at the time it was committed. ambassadors 5 XPNs: Even if the act was committed outside the Philippine 3. Must NOT be a of bill of attainder in nature - Organizations territory, the RPC would still apply, Philippine courts would have a. Law that punishes the offender without due process of jurisdiction. law 2. Functional immunity - immune only for acts related in their 4. CANNOT impose cruel or unusual punishment, or XPN 1: Committing an offense while on a Philippine official function excessive fine. REGISTERED ship or airship - Consuls, vice-consuls - Employees of organizations XPN to XPN: Warplanes or War vessels CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law 3. Equipoise Rule - Whenever prosecution evidence is equally XPN to XPN: Vessels in transit (when the point of departure and C. PROSPECTIVITY balanced with the defense evidence, the scale of justice shall the point of destination are jurisdictions other than the PH) GR: Penal laws shall only apply prospectively. be tilted in favor of the accused. Reason: Constitutional 2 XPNs: Penal laws shall have retroactive application. presumption of innocence + It is the prosecution that has the - PH Registered ship sailing in PH waters and a malaysian burden of proving the guilt of the accused XPN 1: Art. 22, RPC killed someone = PH can convict Penal laws shall retroactive application in favor of the accused - PH Registered ship sailing 200 NM from PH and a 4. Utilitarian Theory - The purpose of punishment is to protect who is not a habitual criminal. malaysian killed someone = PH can convict society from actual and potential wrong doers. - PH Registered ship sailing in Malaysian waters and a - Concurrence of mens rea (guilty mind) and actus reus XPN 2: SPL itself provides for retroactive law. malaysian killed someone = Only Malaysian government (criminal act) - E.g. Sec. 100 of RA 10951 can convict - Reason: a. Actus non facet reum nisi men cit rea = act cannot Hernan v. Sandiganbayan be criminal if mind is not criminal XPN 2: Forge or counterfeit any PH coin or PH currency note or Due to Section 100 of Republic Act No. 10951 (law adjusting the b. Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege = no crime obligations and securities issued by the PH government penalty), the law will have retroactive effect even if the accused is when there is no law that punishes the act a habitual delinquent. XPN 3: Introduction into the PH the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding number Mala in Se Mala Prohibita People v. Pineda GR: The absolute repeal of a penal law deprives the courts of their Inherently evil or wrong Wrong because there is a law XPN 4: Public officers or employees committing an offense authority to punish an accused charged with a violation of the old that defines and punishes the act while in the exercise of their functions. law prior to its repeal. Under such absolute repeal, the offense no - They can only be prosecuted in PH if they commit acts that longer exists as if the person who committed it never did so. Basis: moral trait of the offender Basis: Actual doing of the act are RELATED to their official functions. - If they commit acts that are NOT RELATED to their official Good faith is a defense Good faith is NOT a defense XPN 1: The inclusion of a saving clause in the repealing law which functions, they will be prosecuted in the country where they provides that the repeal shall have no effect on pending actions. are located. Modifying circumstances are GR: Modifying circumstances are considered NOT considered. XPN 2: Where the repealing law reenacts the former statute and XPN: Unless otherwise provided XPN 5: Commit any crimes against national security and the law punishes the act previously penalized under the old law. Under this by law. of nations exception, the act committed before the reenactment continues to - National Security: Treason, Espionage be an offense and pending cases are not affected, regardless of Stages in the commission is GR: Always in the consummated - Law of Nations = Piracy, Qualified Piracy, Mutiny whether the new penalty to be imposed is more favorable to the considered (attempted, stage - E.g. Piracy is a crime against humanity frustrated, consummated) XPN: Unless otherwise provided accused. by law. AAA v. BBB Degree of participation is Degree of participation is NOT The resulting emotional damage caused by adultery is analogous considered (principal, considered. All are punished to to the crime of estafa, where the elements include deceit and Doctrines in Criminal Law accomplice, accessory) the same extent. damage. Since the element of damage occurred in the PH, PH 1. Doctrine of Pro Reo - Penal laws shall always be interpreted courts have jurisdiction over the crime of adultery under the charge liberally in favor of the accused and strictly against the state. E.g. (RPC) Killing, (SPL) RA E.g. (SPL) Possession of of VAWC. Reason: Constitutional presumption of innocence 6646 - Electoral Reform Law, Firearms, (RPC) Technical (SPL) Plunder Malversation Offenses that have extraterritorial effect: 2. Lenity Rule - Whenever a penal provision is susceptible of two 1. Crimes Against Humanity (Sec. 17 of RA 9851) interpretations, one is lenient to the accused and the other is 2. Cybercrime (Sec. 21 of RA 10175) strict to the accused, the lenient interpretation shall prevail. 3. Terrorism (Sec. 49 of RA 11479) Reason: Constitutional presumption of innocence CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law b. The intention of the offender in performing the act Loney v. People X stabbed Y. Y was hit in the shoulder. Wound was NOT fatal. An act mala in se such as reckless imprudence causing damage to must be lawful. Charge: Attempted Homicide property cannot absorb mala prohibita like violation of the mining c. Mistake must be without fault, mistake, a. Specific Criminal Intent: Must prove intent to kill; act, etc. What makes an act malum in se is the presence of criminal carelessness, negligence on the part of the otherwise, serious physical injuries only intent or negligence on the part of the offender, whereas, what makes offender. an act malum prohibitum is the presence of a special penal law that b. General Criminal Intent: Death = intent to kill is presumed - E.g. Spur of moment = no intent, no negligence defines and punishes the act. Therefore, one cannot absorb the other. Rivera v. People ARTICLE 4. CRIMINAL LIABILITY. Intent to kill may be established through the following: 1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the ARTICLE 3. Definitions. a. Evidence of motive wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. b. Nature and number of weapons used by the offender Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies. c. The nature and number and location of wounds inflicted 2. By any person performing an act which would be an offense on the victim; against persons or property, were it not for the inherent Felonies are committed not only by means of deceit (dolo) but also by d. Manner of committing the crime; and impossibility of its accomplishment or an account of the means of fault (culpa). e. The acts or statements made by the accused before, employment of inadequate or ineffectual means. after, or during the commission of the crime. There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and Proximate Cause Doctrine (Art. 4) there is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence, Motive - Reason behind intent - Criminal liability shall be incurred by any person committed By negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill. GR: Motive is not important in determining criminal liability in any person committing a felony although the wrongful act done certain cases. be different from that which he intended. Felony - Acts and omissions punished by the Revised Penal Code a. When the identity of the accused is established - 3 elements: A. Intentional Felony - Deliberate Intent b. When the offender admits the commission of the crime a. The intended act is a felonious act. a. Criminal intent c. When there is direct evidence or eyewitness to the b. The resulting act is a felony. b. Freedom of action commission of the crime. c. The resulting felony is the direct, natural and c. Intelligence d. If the act committed is culpable logical consequence of the felonious act of the B. Culpable Felony - Criminal Negligence e. In acts mala prohibita offender. a. Criminal negligence - It is the cause that sets into motion all other causes and b. Freedom of action XPN: Motive becomes material to determine criminal liability. which unbroken by an efficient intervening cause produces c. Intelligence a. When the act of the offender would result to variant crimes the felony without which the felony would not have b. When there is doubt on the identity of the offender resulted. - In both felonies, both are voluntary acts (concurrence of c. When there is only circumstantial evidence to prove the - For one to be liable, it is necessary that there must be no intent/negligence, freedom, intelligence) commission of the crime—no eyewitness, no direct evidence. efficient intervening cause that has broken the causal connection between the felonious act done by the offender Intent - Particular means used to achieve goal Mistake of Fact and the resulting felony. - Can be established by overt acts through actions in - A defense (absolutory cause) against criminal INTENT, so it committing a crime only applies to INTENTIONAL felonies, NOT culpable Efficient Intervening Cause - Cannot be seen but it is a crime felonies - An active force which is a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign - Misapprehension of facts on the part of the person who from the felonious act of the offender. A. General Criminal Intent - Presumed from mere doing of act; caused injury to another results are not proven - 3 elements: a. The act done would have been lawful and Urbano v. Javier & People v. Villafuerte B. Specific Criminal Intent - Never presumed; must be proven justifiable had the facts been as the accused Tetanus poisoning has an incubation period of 14 days. So if the by prosecution beyond reasonable doubt believed them to be. person died 22 days from the day of the stabbing, the offender shall CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law d. The act does not fall under any other provision of not be criminally liable because there was an efficient intervening - It has 2 possibilities: - (a) NO Mitigating Circumstance: If the intended the RPC. cause. felony is just the same as the felony actually - Note: Adultery is a crime against CHASTITY. committed, there is no difference, there is no variance between the intended felony and the A. Legal Impossibility Proximate Cause Doctrine: 3 Circumstances felony actually committed, then, the same penalty - All the intended acts, even if accomplished, would not amount shall be imposed upon the offender. to a crime. A. Aberratio Ictus or Mistake in the Blow - E.g. Impossibility of killing a person already dead - (b) HAS Mitigating Circumstance: If the intended - The offender directed the blow at his intended victim felony is different from the resulting felony in but because of poor aim, the blow landed on another case of mistake in the identity, the offender shall B. Factual or Physical Impossibility person. be prosecuted for the said resulting felony. - Extraneous circumstances are unknown to the actor or beyond - It results in two crimes: However, the penalty to be imposed should be his control, which prevented the consummation of the intended - (a) the crime against the intended victim the lesser of the 2 penalties between the crime. - (b) the crime against the actual victim intended felony and the felony actually committed. - E.g. Impossibility of stealing an empty pocket - Committed Parricide instead of Homicide GR: If these 2 crimes happen to be grave or less grave felonies, - Convicted: Parricide they can be complexed (Art. 48, RPC) so only 1 Information shall - Penalty: Homicide be filed in court. ARTICLE 5. DUTY OF THE COURT IN CONNECTION WITH ACTS WHICH SHOULD BE REPRESSED BUT WHICH ARE NOT C. Praeter Intentionem or When the Consequence Went Beyond COVERED BY THE LAW, AND IN CASES OF EXCESSIVE XPN: If one of the resulting felonies happens to be a light felony, the Intention it CANNOT be complexed so 2 cases shall be filed in court. PENALTIES. - The offender directed the blow at his intended victim Whenever a court has knowledge of any act which it may deem Note: and the intended victim actually received the blow, Grave Felonies - Afflictive Penalty (RP to PM) proper to repress and which is not punishable by law, it shall render however, the injurious result is far greater than what the proper decision, and shall report to the Chief Executive, through Less Grave Felonies - Correctional Penalty (PC to A May. & could have been anticipated from the means employed Destierro) the Department of Justice, the reasons which induce the court to by the offender. believe that said act should be made the subject of legislation. Light Felony - Arresto Menor or a Fine not exceeding - 2 Elements: P40,000 a. A felony has been committed In the same way, the court shall submit to the Chief Executive, b. There is a notable disparity between the means through the Department of Justice, such statement as may be People v. Flora employed by the offender and the resulting deemed proper, without suspending the execution of the sentence, The treachery that is present when the accused attacked the felony and out of the means employed, the when a strict enforcement of the provisions of this Code would result intended victim is also present on the actual victim. Intent to kill is resulting felony could not have been foreseen. in the imposition of a clearly excessive penalty, taking into NOT extended, only TREACHERY IS EXTENDED. consideration the degree of malice and the injury caused by the offense. People v. Benedecio Impossible Crime Doctrine (Art. 4) If the victim is a defenseless child, the act of killing is always treachery. - Criminal liability shall be incurred by any person performing an - The judge has no recourse but to impose the penalty act which would have been a crime against persons or prescribed by law. Judges only apply the penalty. However, the Note: Intent to kill ≠ Treachery property were it not for its inherent impossibility or the judge through the Secretary of Justice can recommend to the employment of ineffectual inadequate means. President that this accused be given clemency. - 4 Elements: B. Error in Personae or Mistake in the Identity (Art. 49) a. The act done would have amounted to a crime against persons or property. ARTICLE 6. CONSUMMATED, FRUSTRATED, AND ATTEMPTED - The offender directed the blow at a person whom he thought FELONIES. b. The act was done with evil intent. was the intended victim but the intended victim was not at c. The act was not accomplished because of its the scene of the crime. He has mistaken the actual victim Consummated felonies as well as those which are frustrated and inherent impossibility or the means employed are attempted, are punishable. to the intended victim. ineffectual or inadequate. CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law Crimes that have NO FRUSTRATED STAGE A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its Attempted Felony Impossible Crime 1. Theft (Valenzuela v. People) execution and accomplishment are present; and it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce Evil intent is possible for Evil intent is NOT possible for - Unlawful taking is the only act necessary to consummate the felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce accomplishment. accomplishment. theft. Therefore, the moment unlawful taking is complete, theft it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. is already consummated. The crime was not accomplished The crime was not - Disposal of property is IMMATERIAL. There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission by reason of some cause or accomplished because of of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of accident other than the its inherent impossibility. execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause offender’s own spontaneous X entered a jewelry store. Asked for an engagement ring. While or accident other than this own spontaneous desistance. desistance. preparing a receipt, X took all the rings, placed them inside the bag, and left. Door automatically locked. 2 Phases in the Commission of the Crime 2. Frustrated Stage - Consummated Theft 1. Subjective Phase - When the offender performs all the acts of execution which - Getting all rings & placed in bag consummates theft - The offender commences the commission of the crime up would produce the felony as a consequence but which, to the time that the offender still has control over his acts. nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes X went to the classroom. Y asked X to look over stuff. X opened Y’s - The offender can either proceed with the commission of independent of the will of the perpetrator. bag. Y arrived at the moment of opening bags. the crime or desist. - 2 Elements: - Attempted Theft - If he desisted, he does not incur criminal liability. a. The offender performs all the acts of execution - Opening bag w/o possession = intent to gain which would produce the felony. 2. Objective Phase b. The felony was not produced by reason of causes - The moment the offender loses control over his acts, he is independent of the will of the perpetrator. Canceran v. People already in the objective phase of committing a felony. - E.g. Fatal wound but victim survived due to timely medical Information: Frustrated Theft. RTC: Consummated Theft because attention there is no Frustrated theft, therefore, Consummated theft. SC: 3 Stages in the Commission of a Felony Attempted Theft. If the information is wrong, the person can only 1. Attempted Stage be convicted for lower crime than the one charged. Frustrated Felony Attempted Felony - When the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of All acts of execution Only commences commission of 2. Rape (People v. Efren Agao) execution which should produce the felony by reason of some felony, not all acts are performed - Attempted Rape: cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance - A mere grazing by the penis of the fleshy portion, - 3 Elements: Independent of will of perpetrator Cause/accident other than not the vulval cleft of the labia majora. a. The offender commences the commission of a offender’s spontaneous decision - Consummated Rape: felony directly by overt acts. - The penis of the accused penetrated the vulval cleft Objective Phase Subjective Phase or the cleft of the labia majora (i.e., the cleft of the - It is necessary that the attempted felony fleshy outer lip of the victim's vagina), however slight charged is that which is directly the introduction may be connected to the overt act although the 3. Consummated Stage - Consummated Rape for Pre-Puberty Victims (9-years old offender may have a different crime in - When all the elements necessary for its execution and and below): mind. accomplishment are present. - A clear physical indication of the inevitability of the b. He was not able to perform all the acts of - The moment all the elements of the felony under Book II are minimum genital contact threshold as clarified here, if it were not for the physical immaturity and execution. present, it is already consummated. underdevelopment of the minor victim's vagina, which c. He was not able to perform all the acts of - If any of the elements is absent, it can either be attempted, may include repeated touching of the accused's execution by reason of some cause or accident frustrated or a different felony. erect penis on the minor victim's vagina and other other than his own spontaneous desistance. indicative acts of penetration. CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL b. Implied Conspiracy - No preconceived plan; Attempted Rape Acts of Lasciviousness established at the spur of the moment; offenders There is intent to have carnal There is NO intent to have carnal GR: Conspiracy and Proposal are not punishable. acting simultaneously towards a common criminal knowledge with the victim. knowledge with the victim. XPN: When the law specially provides a penalty for merely objective. conspiring or proposing. - Must actively participate in the commission of the crime 3. Arson GR: There is no frustrated arson. Either the property was set on Conspiracy Proposal Guidelines in Conspiracy: fire or not. When two or more persons When the person who has 1. The moment conspiracy is established, THE ACT OF ONE IS XPN: US v. Valdes, where it was held that there is frustrated arson. come to an agreement decided to commit a felony THE ACT OF ALL. All perpetrators are punished to the same concerning the commission of a proposes its execution to extent, regardless of their participation in the crime. Material Crime Formal Crime felony and decide to commit it. some other person or persons. 2. Conspiracy is NEVER presumed. 3. Can be deduced from the acts of the accused BEFORE, Has stages: Attempted, NO Stages Conspiracy to commit treason Proposal to commit treason DURING, AND AFTER the commission of the crime. Frustrated, Consummated Conspiracy to commit coup Proposal to commit coup d’etat, E.g. Homicide E.g. Light, Less Serious, Serious d’etat, rebellion, insurrection rebellion, insurrection Dungo v. People Physical Injuries, False RA 8049 (Anti-Hazing Law) introduces a disputable presumption Testimony Conspiracy to commit sedition Proposal to commit sedition - of actual participation. NOT PUNISHABLE GR: Mere presence at the scene of the crime does not in itself amount to conspiracy. ARTICLE 7. WHEN LIGHT FELONIES ARE PUNISHABLE. 2 Kinds of Conspiracy: XPN: Under R.A. No. 8049, the participation of the offenders in the Light felonies are punishable only when they have been 1. Conspiracy as a crime by itself. criminal conspiracy can be proven by the prima facie evidence due to consummated, with the exception of those committed against person - Mere act of conspiracy or entering into an agreement is their presence during the hazing. or property. already punished by law. XPN to XPN: They prevented the commission of the acts therein. - E.g. Conspiracy to commit rebellion, sedition. GR: Light felonies are only punishable when they are People v. Diega CONSUMMATED. Rape with a 12yo girl. Four people raped the girl, but only Diega 2. Conspiracy as a means of committing a felony. XPN: Those committed against PERSONS OR PROPERTY can be was arrested. There was a conspiracy. Although only Diega was - E.g. Conspiracy to commit kidnapping with ransom. punishable in its attempted or frustrated stage (Art. 7, RPC). arrested, since there were 4 acts of rape done against the victim, However, only principals and accomplices are liable (Art. 16, RPC). Diega is still liable for 4 counts of rape because the act of one is a. Direct or Express Conspiracy - Conspirators met, the act of all. planned, and agreed to commit the crime; the ARTICLE 8. CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT moment all of them agreed to commit a crime. People v. Bokingco FELONY. - GR: All conspirators must be present at the crime Murder and robbery has different criminal intent at that particular scene and their presence must be manifested moment; therefore, conspiracy is not established. There was only Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the through any of the following actions: cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefor. conspiracy in escaping, but there was no conspiracy in the a. Active participation crime itself. Bokingco was liable for homicide, not murder. b. Moral assistance A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an c. Exercise of moral ascendency over agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. others ABCD boarded a tricycle. C noticed the trike was going in a different - XPN: Principal by Induction/Inducement - NOT direction. D stopped the tricycle. ABC alighted. AB ganged up on C. There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a PRESENT at the crime scene but still criminally felony proposes its execution to some other person or persons. D was just looking at the fight among ABC. A strangled C’s neck. B liable stabbed C. After C died, ABD threw C’s body to the water. ABD was CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law charged as co-conspirators for murder. Is there a conspiracy? What Robbery with Rape. AB are liable as conspirators for the above-mentioned Art.. kind of conspiracy? robbery only. - There is conspiracy among ABD. There is direct or express Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which conspiracy. It was clear from their actions that ABD planned a penalty of arrest menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both; 2 Kinds of Multiple Conspiracy is provided. the crime. Before the commission, they all had a drinking 1. Wheel or Circle Conspiracy - There is a single person or spree. Afterwards, they all left and boarded D’s tricycle. It group (the "hub") dealing individually with two or more other was only C who protested. A strangled C’s neck while B Classification of Felonies According to Severity persons or groups (the "spokes"); stabbed C, yet D remained standing, showing agreement 1. Grave Felonies - Capital punishment or afflictive punishment 2. Chain Conspiracy - Successive communication and to the acts of A and B. 2. Less Grave Felonies - Correccional cooperation in much the same way as with legitimate business - There was a preconceived plan to gang up and kill C. 3. Light Felonies - Arresto Menor or a fine not exceeding 40,000 operations between manufacturer and wholesaler, then Despite merely standing there only, watching A and B, the pesos. wholesaler and retailer, and then retailer and consumer; act of one is the act of all. usually involving the distribution of narcotics or other contraband ARTICLE 10. OFFENSES NOT SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS ABCD discussed how they wanted to kill W. That evening, they went OF THIS CODE. to W’s house. ABCD approached W. A asked to borrow W’s lighter, Can there be conspiracy in violation of SPL? which W gave. A immediately struck W with a piece of wood. A took Offenses which are or in the future may be punishable under special 1. When there is an express provision in the SPL providing for out his bolo and hacked W. W died. C stabbed the chest of W. All 4 of laws are not subject to the provisions of this Code. This Code shall conspiracy. them left. Of the 4 men, only C was arrested. C was charged with be supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should specially 2. When SPL does not prohibit the suppletory application of Art. provide the contrary. Murder. C argues that it was an impossible crime of Murder because 10 of the RPC. W had already died when C stabbed W’s body. Is C’s argument meritorious? - NO. Assuming that A was the one who killed W, C is still People v. Morilla Ladonga v. People criminally liable for W’s death because C is a co-conspirator. Conspiracy was applied in RA 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous B.P. Blg. 22 does not expressly proscribe the suppletory Evidence shows that they conspired to kill W. C’s liability for Drugs Act) because Sec. 26 of the same law expressly provides application of the provisions of the RPC. Thus, in the absence of Murder. that there can be conspiracy in violation of RA 9165, which contrary provision in B.P. Blg. 22, the general provisions of the RPC, includes illegal transportation. Sec. 98 of RA 9165 provides that the which are by nature necessarily applicable may be applied XY were drinking at one table. In another table, there was ABCDE. RPC does not apply to violations of this law. suppletorily. ABCDE were so noisy. X, a police officer, went to ABCDE’s table. X was about to leave when A hit X. In the course of the fist fight, X, Go-Tan v. Tan People v. Simon being a police officer, pulled out his gun and shot the right foot of A. Y RA 9262 (Anti-VAWC) does not preclude the application of GR: The provisions in the RPC suppletorily apply to SPL. told X “Itodo mo na par!” Thereafter, X shot the said victim. Y told the conspiracy under the RPC for 2 reasons. First, Sec. 47 expressly XPN 1: When the SPL itself expressly prohibits the suppletory others “‘Wag kang mangingialam!” Is Y a co-conspirator? provides for the suppletory application of the RPC. Second, Art. 10 of application of the RPC. - Yes, it was an implied conspiracy. Y should be criminally the RPC provides that RPC suppletorily applies to violations of SPL. XPN 2: When there’s a legal impossibility SUCH THAT (example liable for homicide, for having killed the victim. of exception 2) when the SPL does not use the Technical Nomenclature of the penalties imposed under the RPC. ABC conspired to rob D’s house. ABC agreed to commit robbery ARTICLE 9. GRAVE FELONIES, LESS GRAVE FELONIES AND only; no other crime would be committed. ABC committed robbery. C LIGHT FELONIES. told AD C needed to go to the restroom, but C’s real intention was to ARTICLE 11. JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES. look for D’s minor daughter. C raped the daughter then returnted to Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital The following do not incur any criminal liability: punishment or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive, in AB. Charged for special complex crime of Robbery with Rape. accordance with Art. 25 of this Code. 1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that Correct? the following circumstances concur; - NO. There was no conspiracy as to the acts of C. Only C Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties should be convicted for the special complex crime of which in their maximum period are correctional, in accordance with First. Unlawful aggression. CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law 1. Self-Defense (Person, Honor, Property, Rights) Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or - 1st element was initially present = once X got the gun, 1st - 3 Elements: repel it. element had ceased. Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person a. Unlawful Aggression (Physical or Imminent) - 2nd element is NOT present defending himself. b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to - No self-defense prevent or repel it 2. Any one who acts in defense of the person or rights of his spouse, i. Nature and the number of the weapons used ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natural or adopted brothers X was walking. Y pointed a gun at X. “Give me your thing.” X gave ii. Personal circumstances or sisters, or his relatives by affinity in the same degrees and those things to Y. X suddenly grabbed the gun while about to give the iii. Place and location of the assault consanguinity within the fourth civil degree, provided that the first and watch. Already gave a necklace and wallet to Y. X aimed at his right c. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the second requisites prescribed in the next preceding circumstance are leg. X rushed to Y & got his things back. Less serious physical present, and the further requisite, in case the revocation was given by person defending himself injuries or Self-defense? the person attacked, that the one making defense had no part - Flight after the commission of the crime is highly evidentiary of - 1st element is present = when X got the gun & Y ran away, therein. guilt 1st element remained. Y had a necklace and wallet of X. 3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger, - 2nd element is present = no intent to kill, fired only at leg. provided that the first and second requisites mentioned in the first People v. Olarbe - 3rd element is present circumstance of this Article are present and that the person defending The right of a person is based in the light of the circumstances - It was self-defense. be not induced by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive. as they then appeared to the accused. 4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does not act 2. Defense of a Relative PO2 Cambe v. People which causes damage to another, provided that the following - 3 Elements: requisites are present; No self-defense. 1st element was present = Police were hit by a. Unlawful Aggression (Physical or Imminent) brother. 2nd element was present = Only used pistol he had. 3rd b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to First. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists; element was absent = Provoked the accused by pushing their prevent or repel it Second. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it; mother. A privileged mitigating circumstance because 1st and Third. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of i. Nature and the number of the weapons used 2nd element was present. preventing it. ii. Personal circumstances iii. Place and location of the assault Toledo v. People 5. Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the lawful c. In case the provocation was given by the person exercise of a right or office. No such thing as accidental self-defense. Either self-defense or attacked, the one making the defense has no part accident. Both cannot be raised at the same time. Accident = therein 6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior accused did not mean it. Self-defense = direct to save his own life; - Relatives considered: for some lawful purpose. self-preservation. a. Spouse b. Ascendants Justifying Circumstances c. Descendants - Circumstances present in the commission of a felony that X was in an alley. A grabbed bag. ABC ganged up on X. While on the d. Legitimate, natural or adopted brothers and sisters negate criminal liability. ground, A is about to stab head. X got a big piece of stone & hit A. A e. Relatives by affinity (by marriage) in the same degree - Basis: Lack of criminal intent died. X brought A to hospital. Homicide? Or Self-defense? f. Relatives by consanguinity (by blood) within the 4th - Burden of evidence is shifted to the accused - 1st element is present = 3 men ganged up on X civil degree - Failure to prove evidence suffices conviction because it is - 2nd element is present = unarmed, got a piece of stone already an admission of the act - 3rd element is present = no provocation at all - It was self-defense, therefore, no criminal and civil liability. X was walking on his way home, and saw father in law about to be GR: No CRIMINAL AND CIVIL liability. stabbed by neighbor W. He kicked W to stop him from stabbing his XPN: HAS CIVIL liability - Art. 11(4) or Avoidance of Greater Evil of X was walking. Y said “bag or life? Holdup ‘to. X pretended to give father. W’s knife pierced through his own chest. They brought W to Injury. Those who benefitted will be proportionately civilly liable. bag but got Y’s pistol. Struggle for possession of a pistol. Once X got hospital. Frustrated homicide or defense of a relative? Is father in law a pistol, Y ran away. X found it. Y died. Self-defense? part of Art. 11(2)? - YES. Relative by affinity, same degree as ascendant. CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law - This also applies to private individuals who have a duty to help a. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender - 1st element was present = father almost died others to profit by the effects of the crime. - 2nd element was present = kicked only b. By concealing or destroying the body of the - 3rd element was present = X did not provoke 6. Obedience to an order issued for some lawful purpose crime, or the effects or instruments thereof, in order - 3 Elements: to prevent its discovery. Same facts except instead of father in law, has son of sister if his a. An order has been issued by a superior c. Public officers who harbor, conceal or assist in mother (1st cousin) b. Such order must be for some lawful purpose the escape of the principal of any crime (not light - YES. Relative by consanguinity (otherwise, subordinate will be criminally liable) felony) with abuse of his public functions c. The means used by the subordinate to carry out d. Private persons who harbor the escape of the 3. Defense of a Stranger said order is lawful author of the crime who is guilty of treason, - 3 Elements: parricide, murder, or attempts against the life of a. Unlawful Aggression (Physical or Imminent) the President, or who is known to be habitually Tabuena v. Sandiganbayan b. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to guilty of some other crime Although the order was unlawful, Marcos asked to transfer money. If prevent or repel it order (though unlawful) appears lawful, a person should be i. Nature and the number of the weapons used - Exempted from Criminal Liability by Relationship: acquitted of criminal liability. ii. Personal circumstances a. Spouses iii. Place and location of the assault b. Ascendants c. The person defending was not induced by c. Descendants Prisoner escaped, went into a neighborhood. Went inside the house. revenge, resentment, or other evil motive; no evil d. Legitimate Police encircled house. X came out but X was holding a hostage, a motive e. Natural woman with a knife. “Do not come or I’ll stab her.” Woman struggled f. Adopted brothers and sisters free. She escaped, and the police shot the gun at X’s head. X died. 4. State of Necessity g. Relatives by affinity within the same degrees, Homicide? Fulfillment of Duty? - 2 Elements: XPN: If they profit or assist the offender to profit, - 1st element was present = to arrest a prisoner, save life a. The evil sought to be avoided actually exists they are criminally liable. - 2nd element was present = killing prisoner was unavoidable. b. The injury feared to be greater than that done to Had he not, the woman would have died. avoid it (should not have been brought about by - NOTE: While they may be exempted by Art. 20, RPC, they - Also defense of a stranger. All elements were present. negligence or imprudence, or wilful inaction of the may be held liable as a principal for Obstruction of Justice actor) (PD 1829) or the Anti-Fencing Law (PD 1612). - The accused should not be the author of the state of necessity Absolutory Causes - Those where the act committed is a crime but for reasons X killed Y. X narrated to father what happened. Father told X, “look for of public policy and sentiment, there is no penalty People v. Norma Hernandez this man.” Police asked the father, “Where is your son?” Father imposed. Wife-to-be did not appear at the wedding. Man felt embarrassed. She denied any knowledge. Son was later arrested. Father’s act of argued that marrying a man which she did not love would have been assisting was disrespected. Accessory to crime? NO. 1. Art. 6(3) a lonely marriage. Therefore, all elements were present but there is - Under Article 20, but can be charged with obstruction of - SPONTANEOUS DESISTANCE in the ATTEMPTED stage still civil liability. justice (PD 1829) unless the overt act committed already constitutes a crime other than that intended X killed Y. After, X told the brothers to throw Y’s body into the sea. X 5. Performance of a Duty & Z placed Y’s body and threw body. Z assisted in throwing the body. - 2 Elements: 2. Art. 20 & Art. 19 Can Z be held liable as an accessory? a. Offender acted in the due performance of a duty - ACCESSORIES who are exempt from criminal liability by - No, not liable as an accessory to the act of killing BUT or in the lawful exercise of a right or office. reason or relationship and in light felonies (Art. 16) obstruction of justice under PD 1829. b. The resulting felony is an unavoidable - Accessories = those who took part subsequent to consequence of the due performance of his duty the commission of the crime: or the lawful exercise of such right or office. CRIM 1 | PROSEC. VICTORIA GARCIA | JUSTINE CAGO - SBU Law 3. Art. 247 that X acted out of an intense emotional response upon X was a prisoner. Charged with illegal possession of drugs. Acquitted - Married person surprised to see spouse in SEXUAL discovering the situation. by RPC. Set up by police officers for a buy-bust operation against W. INTERCOURSE with another person shall KILL or inflict X refused. Police left. The Chief of PNP begged X. W & X were SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURY on ANY or BOTH of them IN eventually arrested. the act or IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER 4. Art. 280 - Instigation. X = acquitted by reason of public policy. - Parents with respect to their DAUGHTERS UNDER - Qualified Trespassing for the following purpose: EIGHTEEN YEARS OF AGE, and their seducer, WHILE THE a. Preventing some serious harm to himself, the X was a meat vendor and was probably selling drugs. Police asked X DAUGHTERS ARE LIVING WITH THEIR PARENTS. occupants of the dwelling or a third person, what to drink to stay awake. X offered red bull. Refused. X offered - XPN: Any person who shall promote or facilitate the b. Rendering some service to humanity or justice drugs. X got arrested. prostitution of his wife or daughter, or shall c. Enter cafes, taverns, inn and other public houses, - Entrapment. otherwise have consented to the infidelity of the while the same are open. - Evil intent originated from X. He was already engaged in other spouse shall not be entitled to the benefits of selling drugs. He was merely caught in flagrante delicto. this article. 5. Art. 332 - No criminal, but only civil liability - Theft, swindling or malicious mischief 7. Battered Woman Syndrome (RA 9262) People v. Abartha a. Spouses (including paramour), ascendants and - No criminal and civil liability Abartha returned home and found his wife having sex with another descendants (including stepparents), or relatives - Cycles: man. Consumed by rage, he wanted to kill them but had no weapon. by affinity in the same line. a. The Tension-building phase = where minor It took him an hour to borrow a firearm, during which his jealousy b. The widowed spouse with respect to the property battering occurs and the woman usually tries to persisted. He fired the weapon, killing his wife’s paramour and which belonged to the deceased spouse before the pacify the batterer to prevent escalation of violence injuring two other individuals. Charged with murder and two counts of same shall have passed into the possession of b. The Acute battering incident = where there is frustrated murder, the Supreme Court ruled that Article 247 of the another. brutality, destructiveness, and sometimes, death Revised Penal Code applied. c. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and and the woman believes it is futile to fight back sisters-in-law, if living together. based on past painful experience The first two elements of Article 247 were present, and the phrase c. The Tranquil, loving (or at least, non-violent) "immediately thereafter" did not strictly require an phase = where the batterer begs for her instantaneous reaction, as Abartha’s jealousy persisted even Intestate v. Testate This AC only applies in simple cases. Once complexed, Art. 332 forgiveness and the woman tries to convince after an hour. will not apply. Not merely estafa but estafa through falsification of herself that the battery will never happen again public documents. - The cycle has to occur at least TWICE to be exempted from Since Article 247 is not a felony but an absolutory cause, the act is liability not considered a felonious crime. As for the two injured individuals, Article 4(1) requires a felonious act, but since Article 247 is not a