| : San Beda College of Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS MEMORY AID IN CRIMINAL LAW 140620 ROOK ONE BOOK TWO SPECIAL PENAL LAWS2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS Executive Committee Over-all Chairperson Chairperson for Academics Chairperson for Hotel Operations ‘SYLVESTER C. AUSTRIA. REYNOLD L. ORSUA JOE VINCENT R. AGUILA Vice-Chair for Operations LYNDON W. RUTOR Vice-Chair for Secretariat. RODEL JAMES R. PULMA Vice-Chair for Finance DENISE DIANNE A. MAGBUHOS Vice-Chairfor EDP {AN DANIEL B. GALANG Vice-Chait for Logistics ~JOMARC PHILIP E. DIMAPILIS Vice-Chair for Membership ALBERTO D. RECALDE, JR. . Content and Lay-out Editors PATRICIA AMORES —DIVINA GRACIA MADERAL JOSEPHINE ARPAFO JAMAICA IDA PALCE ANGELINE CHAVES MURIEL IELAINE PANGANIBAN MICHELLE LIMJAP — EROL PISEC NORMAN JAYJAMORA MARK ANTHONY ROJO San Beda College of Law Administration ‘ATTY. VIRGILIO B. JARA College Dean Centralized Bar Operations Adviser ATTY. MARCIANO G. DELSON Vice Dean and Adviser ATTY. RISEL G. CASTILLO-TALEON Prefect for Student Affairs and Co-Adviser Centralized Bar Operations Core Group Mark Emmanuel Abifo, Ruth Abigail Aceto, Patrica Amores, Alfrederick Araneta, Josephine Arpafo, ‘Mark Anthony Asuncion, Rigel Bajande, Rodmel Bautista, Clarita Belo, Jennebeth Kae Cainday, Jane Kate Calipay, Rebecca Chan, Angel Chavez, Hershey Cruz, Chrysten Giana Cuyegkeng, Roy Daguio, Jr, Kennex De Dios, Janell Marie De Guziman, Alexandria De La Cruz, Deus Dulay, Matt Devela, Johansen Ferrer, Stephanie Flotendo, Ron Oliver Gamboa, Tan Michel Geonanga, Darling Sapphire Hefti, Norman Jay Jamora, Justo Franco Lacandalo, Adjelle Catrina Lachica, Karell Marie Laseano, Michelle Limjap, Beverly Lumbera, Divine Maderal, Anna Margarita Malonzo, Athira Manginsay, Camille May Medina, ‘Jay Rayniel Montevirgen, Raniel Christian Omi, Tyrone Lewis Ong, Miguel Lorenzo Osida, Ysabel Jean Padilla, Aica Palce, Mutielle Panganiban, Erol Stephen Pisec, Mark Anthony Rojo, Jastinne Mildred Sanchez, Elmo San Diego, Alexander Santos, J, Immah Concepcion Santas, Leonid Serranc, Maria Patricia Silva, James Russell Sz, Karlo Paulo Tamondong, Regina Anne Tungol, Joana Patriz Toreja, Ma. Nefseria Ailah TuqueroBOOK I Fundamental Principles Preliminary Title (Articles 1-2) Title One: Felonies & Circumstances Which Affect Crirninal Liability (Articles 3-15) Title Two: Persons Criminally Liable For Felonies (Articles 16-20) Title Three: Penalties (Articles 21-88) Title Four: Extinction Of Criminal Liability Title Five: Civil Liability (Articles 100-113) BOOK UL Title One: Crimes Against National Security (Articles 114-123) Title Two: Crimes Against The Fundamental Laws Of The State (Articles 124-133) Title Three: Crimes Against Public Order (Articles 134-160) ‘Title Four: Crimes Against Public Interest (Articles 161-187) Title Five: Crimes Relative To Opium And Other Prohibited Drugs Title Gix: Crimes Against Public Morals Title Seven: Crimes Committed By Public Officers (Articles 203-245) Title Eight: Crimes Against Persons (Articles 246-266) Title Nine: Crimes Against Personal Liberty And Security (Articles 267- 292) Title Ten: Crimes Against Property (Articles 293-332) Title Bleven: Crimes Against Chastity (Articles 333-334, 336-346) Title Twelve: Crimes Against The Civil Status Of Persons (Articles 347- 352) Title Thirteen: Crimes Against Honor (Articles 353-364) Title Fourteen: Quasi-Offenses (Article 365) SPECIAL PENAL LAWS Republic Act 9346: Act Probiibiting The Imposition Of Death Penalty In The Philippines Republic Act 9262: Anti-Violence Against Women And Their Children Act Of 2004 Republic Act 9344: Juvenile Justice And Welfare Act Of 2006, As Amended By R.A. 10630 Republic Act 7610: Special Protection Of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation And Discrimination, As Amended Republic Act 10591: Comprehensive Firearms And Ammunition Regulation Act, Amending P:D. 1866 And R.A. 8294 Presidential Decree 1829: Decree Penalizing Obstruction Of Apprehension And Prosecution Of Criminal Offenders Republic Act 4103: Indeterminate Sentence Law, As Ataended By Act 4225 Presidential Decree 968: Probation Law Of 1976, As Amended ‘Act 3326: Act Establishing Prescriptive Periods For Violations Of Special Laws And Municipal Ordinances, As Amended Presidential Decree 532: Anti-Piracy And Anti-Highway Robbery Law Of 1974, Republic Act 6235: Anti- Hijacking Law 61 88 94 98 105, 13, 126 142 148 154 372 187 199 225 235 240 243 243 256 259 261 262 263 266 266 267Republic Act 9372: Human Security Act Of 2007 Republic Act 9745: Anti-Torture Act Of 2009 Republic Act 9160: Anti-Money Laundering Act Of 2001, As Amended By RA. 9194 Presidential Decree 1602: Anti-Gambling Act, As Amended By R.A. 9287 ; Republic Act 9208: Anti-Trafficking In Persons Act Of 2003 Republic Act 3019: Anti-Graft And Corrupt Practices Act, As Amended By R.A. 3047, P.D. 77 And B.P. 195 Republic Act 7080: Anti-Plunder Act Republic Act 1379: An Act Declaring Forfeiture In Favor Of The State ‘Any Property Found To Have Been Unlawfully Acquired By Any Public Officer Or Employee And Providing For The Proceedings Therefor Republic Act 9775: Anti-Child Pornography Act Of 2009 Republic Act 8049: Anti-Hazing Law Republic Act 4200: Anti-Wiretapping Law Presidential Decree 1612: Anti-Fencing Law Of 1979 Batas Pambansa 22: Bouncing Checks Law Republic Act 6539: Anti-Carnapping Act Of 1972, As Amended By R.A. 7659 Presidential Decree 1613: Anti-Arson Law Republic Act 9995: Anti- Photo And Video Voyeurism Act Of 2009 Administrative Circular 08-2008: Guidelines In The Observance Of A Rule,Of Preference In The Imposition Of Penalties In Libel Cases Republic Act 9851: Philippine Act On Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law, Genocide, And Other Crimes Against Humanity Republic Act 9184: Government Procurement Reform Act Republic Act 10175: Cybercrime Prevention Act Of 2012 ‘BIBLIOGRAPHY 268 274 276 277 278 281 284 285 286 288 289 290 290 291 292 293 294 295 299 301 305Criminal Law cannot be criminal unless the mind is criminal. Itis a branch of public substantive law which defines 3. Actus me invito factus non est meus actus — An crimes, treats of their nature and provides for their ‘act done by me against my will is not my act. Punishment. It is a public law because it deals with 4.1 que es causa de la causa es causa del mal the relation of the individual with the State (REYES, ‘causado ~ He who is the.cause of the cause is the The Revised Penal Code, Book One, 17" ed., 2008 cause of the evil caused (People v. Ural, G.R. No. Inereinatter, REYES, 800k One}, p. 1) 30801, March 24, 1974) 5.In dubio, pro reo — When in doubt, for the: oe Substantive = ih to be construed or Prospective, ae the,taw admits of two interpretations - favorable ‘to%iKe | jent tothe ‘onende (aad one strict to the accused provi PAI © [Solfehdar that interpretation that the accused [ ~ “this offender will be adap ms ate COLLEGE CE nou RasuBE E-construed in favor of the It only ‘comes. from 5 rwith the presumption of the legislative body 5 1d (CONST, Art. Ill, Sec. his favorable to Terms 1.Crime — the Sen wrongdoing punished ia under the “special law (OR forbidding or commanding 4 supra). < Example: Jaka was counterfeiting Philippine lotto fickets in his bodega in Japan. One day, his bodega was raided by Japanese authorities. Jaka was arrested. Who has jurisdiction to try Jaka for counterfeiting such lotto tickets? Why? ‘ANS: The Philippines has jurisdiction over Jaka since his counterfeiting of lotto. tickets. is prohibited by our laws, it being an obligation secured by the Philippine goverment (Id. at 16). ‘mentioned obligations and securities.‘Those who introduced the counterfeit items are criminally: liable even if they were not the ones. ‘who counterfeited the obligations and securities. On the other hand, those who counterfeited the items are criminally liable even if they did not introduce the counterfeit items. d.While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the exercise of thelr functions, like: (B°A’°T-MIC) Direct Bribery (Art. 210); Indirect Bribery (Art. 271); Qualified Bribery (Art. 217-4); Failure to Render Accounts (Art. 218) Failure to Render Account Before, Le the Country (Art. 218); 220); Failure Fraud Against Offenses (Art. 2% Malversation of sR (a.217), Possession of Prodi and Sorption (art 233) A Philippine consulate official married here in the Philippines Yeniarties foreign country cannot be proseeatetshe the Philippines for bigamy under of RPC because the crime has no connectos with his official duties. Nevertheless, cosrevating | gone ‘aggravating ‘ctouthstance. circumstance. Note? In’ self-defense, defense of a relative or defense of a'stranger, it is essential that unlawful aggression be present, otherwise there can be no must be unlawful aggression and any of the two remaining elements. Under Art: 69 of RPC; when only untawful aggression is present, the accused is entitled to a penalty lower in degree. If unlawful aggression, and any of the: remaining two elements are present, the-accused is entitled to two degrees lower (ESTRADA, Book One, supra at 120). Par. 1. Incomplete exempting circumstances Justifying orApplies when all the requisites necessary to justiy educational background without resulting to formal the act or to exempt from criminal liabilty are NOT court proceedings (RA 9344,Sec 4p) attendant. Provided, majority of the requisites are present, “Incomplete exempting circumstance of 1.“Incomplete self-defense, defense of relatives, accident” ~ under par. 4 of Article 12 there are and defense of a stranger” - unlawful four requisites, namely: aggression must be present, it being an .A person is performing a lawful act; indispensable requisite. It is considered ordinary b.With due care; mitigating citcumstance ‘if only unlawful ¢.He causes an injury to. another by mere aggression is present. When two of the three ‘accident; and requisities (ie., unlawful aggression and any one 4. Without fault or intention of eausing it of the other two), the case should be considered a privileged mitigating circumstance referred to in If the requisites (b) with due care and (d) without ‘Art. 69 of this Code (REYES, Book One, supra al fault are absent ~ Art. 365, in effect there is a 255). _ gating circumstance because the penalty is “Incomplete. Jus i ys avoidance of oem serio the last ovo reste } cating the be greater han hattGpiowatorthere Dense EB EBEREN are absent (Recipe stated, the person Practical and less halifflultfieans of preventing it), ied ariel had the intention of COLTER Ee nL ND “Incomplete just performanceof duty’ was present, Article 6: the justifying or exempting requisites only, it seems. mitigating circumstance. privileged mitigating cirg par. 1 of Art 13 in B of Art. 12 of the RPC the not entirely uncontrollable hasty and ha! he stopped ik, he would have ascertained 5.“Incomplete exempting minority over 9 and under : under R.A. 9344, a child bel i : if there is 18 years of age shall be eke liability UNLESS he/she acted aaith o-, cathnelpbrore, of the accused at the time of the an offender 15 years or over but Under Omit of the crime which should be entitled only to the bertefits provided under Art-68" determined. His age at the time of the trial is ‘of RPC, under RA 9344, such offender nay be terial, exempt from criminal liabilly should he/she acted without discernment. es of offender . erry On the other hand, if such offender acted with on Giscernment, sych cid in confict win tne iow AMM Ee. urloss acted Shall undergo diversion programs provided under with dacofnmert. But even Ghapor2 ofA saad (REYES ook Ovo, wh dacermént, ponaty Ie at 263). . lower than that’ imposed i (RPC, Art 68, par. 2, Diversion amended by R.A. 9344) It is an altemative, child-appropriate process of determining the responsibility and treatment of child in conflict with the law on the basis of his/her socigl; cultural, economic, pyschological or SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 31‘Sentence suspended (RPC, 3.Not appreciated in murder qualified by treachery ea Att 192, RA, 9344 as (People v. Pajenado, G.R; No. L-26458, January | under amended by R.A. 10630) 30, 1976); and Note: In crimes against persons who do not die as 2 result of the assault, the absence of intent to kill reduces the felony to mere physical injuries, but it ‘ull erininal responsibilty does not canstitute a mitigating circumstance La : (People v. Galacgac, C.A., 540.G. 1207). Wiigatna, no impostien ST] 4 Meaecsted cates were eve tno s Maton harm done Imposed, execution of death | ater Appioable onl to offenses resiing in a ATisd (ESTRADA, physical injuries or material harm (REYES, Book eS cis atisine One, supra at 273). ie of the commission of the felony, Child in Confit with the Law ring stage, should be considered Ne. L-90848, March 2°, Philippine laws. . SAN BEB Sosinton orion, Par. 3. No intention toekiomifed glee Lrdrodgs EBLE PlarsBeNAh of wh (Praeter Intentiongmn) Rule for tho applicatt ‘of exciting, inciting or account only when the is a notable ‘and evident & Book One, supra at 274). means employed to execute} consequences (US v. September 25, 1917). If the.resuiting felony cous a> means employed, this of Bvailed of Intention may be ascer wie) 41.The weapon used; 2.The injury inflicted 3. The manner itis inficted; and ee ; zs ¢ standing of the person provoked; and ie el eee ee meals -qfre.place and time when the provocation is ‘One; supra at 122). a made (REYES, Book One, supra at 274). t Rul Maula NOT bs apolicsune pemae mca 2.1¢vnust originate from the offended party; seutanoIcable ee felonies by negligence (People _®TR€ provocation must be personal and directed to ‘the accused; and v, Medina, C.A., 400.6. 4196); aid 5 i Pelee ec ar a cote at the provocation must be Immediate to the negligence, the offender acts without intent. The ie cea cceneeee as crear intent in intentional felonies is replaced by negligence, imprudence, tack of foresight or lack i injury or threat, the offender cannot successfully afin pte fies (REYES, Grok Ome, GAP Saceon, sat st he can boar ; the benefit of mitigating circumstance (US v. 2.Not applicable to felonies where intention is immaterial (REYES, Book One, supra at 273); cere cee eern rate er ‘When the aggression is in retaliation for an insult, The threat should not be offensive and positively strong. Otherwise, the threat to inflict real injury is SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONStn unlawful aggression, which may gle rge to sett defense (US v. Guysayco, G.R. No. 4912, March 25, 1909). “The liability of the accused is mitigated only insofar as it concems the harm inflicted upon the: person who maie the provocation, but not with regard to the other victims who did not participate in the Provocation (US v. Malabanan, G.R. No. 3964, November 26, 1907): Basis: Diminution of intelligence and intent. roe TER pecacieapa nema TT a as Peciss ena Roquisites 1.That there be @ grave ‘Offers committing the felony, \his, descendants, legitimate, brothers or sisters or relq same degrees; and 2That the felony is “Imniediate" allows for ak offender is still suffering brought about by the offen Book One, supra at 124). be unlawful (People v. Benito, G.R. February 13, 1975) The grave offense must be the proximate cause or proximate to the act of the offender. Factors to determine gravity of offense in vindication: 4. Social standing of the person; 2. Place; and 3. Time when the insult was made (REYES, Book ‘One, supra at 283). Basis: Diminution of the conditions of voluntatiness. Par. 6. Passion or obfuscation Requisites: 1. That there be an act, both unlawful and sufficient to produce such a condition of mind; 2. That said act which produced the obfuscation ‘was not far removed from the commission of the crime by a considerable length of time, during which the perpetrator might recover his normal equanimity; and 3. The act causing such’ obfuscation was ‘committed by the victim himself (ESTRADA, Book ‘One, supra at 125). It is-a mitigating circumstance only when the same arises from lawful sentiments (People v. Bates, G.R. arch 28, 2003) The act of the offended Gpeub Haye oy arid obfuscation (People v. No. 38715, September 15, 3, May 14, 1951) feation when the crime was controllable burst of passion dist or improper acts due to a Powerful as to overcome Svétween the parties are iMegitimate. The -ipitigating circumstance cannot be considered in shot an accused when the relationship between him and the deceased is illicit, because the causes which mitigate criminal responsibility for the loss. of, self-control are such which originate from legitimate feelings, and not those which arige from vicious, unworthy and immoral passions (US v. Hicks, G.R. No. 4871, September -23, 1909). To be mitigating, it is important to’ establish ani act that is sufficient to produce a'condition of mind to commit a felony or a crime (ESTRADA, Book One, supra at 125). SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS. 33The accused acted upon an impulse. The act is committed in a spirit of lawlessness. The impulse must be 80 powerful that it naturally produced passion or obfuscation inhirn. Passion/Obfus Produ impulse which may. be ‘caused by provocation ‘The act is committed in a spirit of revenge. fo The provor: ‘come from the injured party, Offense ‘which ‘engenders perturbation of mind need not be The effect is,loss of fed the part of the offendel: Must immediately precede ney commis The cause that brought about the provocation need not be a grave offense. itis necessary that the provocation or threat immediately preceded the act. wh admits of an interval of time. itis mere spite against the one giving the provocation or threat. It concems the honor of a person, eee) Mitigating circumstance ee a ‘Exempting circumstance It cannot give rise to It requires — physical inresistible force as_it force. SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS. ‘doesnot involve physical force. Passion. or obfuscation | if must come from a isin. the . offender | third person, himself. it must arise from | Iti unlawful lawful sentiments vhedlin ain Sinton cannot coe wa Pirereiee pepsi Brenan Bente cee cent peeieente po ind eaeet ate ance oa Os preceded by calm thought and reflection upon the eazy ough ae recon upon be eS ora nt (People v., Pagal. .R. No. ie S PrEannot co-enst wh Srouna cremneatea Le emeata the aggravating oe Hoteles of quit before the court priér ‘of evidence for the aes B figating circumstances. ~ 1 Sette of voluntary surrendor: (NSV) 1 That the offender had not been actually arested; 2. That the offender surrendered himself to a person in authority or to the latter's agent; and ‘3.That the surrender was voluntary (Estacio v. ‘Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 75362, March 6, 1990). For voluntary surrender to be appreciated, the same must be spontaneous in such a manner that it shows the. interest of the accused to surrender unconditionally to the authorities, either because he acknowledge Is guilt or because he wishes to save them the trouble and expenses necessarily incurred in his search and capture (People v. Gervacio, G.R. No. L-21965, August 30, 1968).Cases NOT Constituting Voluntary Surrender 1.The accused surrendered only after warrant of arrest was served upon him (People v. Roldan, GR. No, L-22030, May 28, 1968); 2.Where the accused was actually arrested by his own admission or that he yielded because of the warrant of arrest, although the police blotter used the word “surrender” (People v. Velez, G.R. No. L- 30038, July 18, 1974) 3. Where the accused only went to the police station to report that his wife was stabbed by another Person and to seek protection a he feared that the same assailant would also stab him (People v. Trigo, G.R. No. 74531, November 30, 1962 Note: The fact that been issued is n the power to govern e whether as an individual ‘ofsas’ a election or by appointment by is charged with the mainteri@t the protection and security any. person who comes to authority (Id). Instances of Voluntary Surreriti 4.1 must be spontaneous, Zintent of the accused to unconditionally to the, authorities mi because: a.He acknowledges his guilt, or b.He wishes to save them the trouble and expense necessarily incurred in his search and capture. 3.The condust of the accused detetmines the spontaneity of the arrest. 4.Intention to surrender surrendering is not mitigating. 5.Not. mitigating when defendant was in fact arrested. 6.Itis not required that, to be appreciated, it be prior to the issuance of.a warrant of arrest (People v. Turalba, G.R. No, L-29118, February 28, 1974). without actually 7.Sumrender of weapons cannot be equated with voluntary surrender. Requisites of voluntary plea of guilty: (SOP) 4.That the offender spontaneously confessed his gui 2.That the confession of guilt was made it court, that tiy the case; 3. That the confession of guilt was made prior to the resentation of evidence for the prosecution; and 4.That the confession of guilt was to the offense charged in the information, ‘open before the competent court that is to Plea of guity is not mitigating in culpable felonies and in crimes punished by special laws (REYES, g, supra at 319). ed a mitigating # G.R. No. L-19585, gy deaf and dumb, blind or some physical defect, of action, defense or Tiot be considered (SQADO, supra at 142), \dhess does nat mitigate estafa “Dumb’ - means lacking the power of human speech. This paragraph does not distinguish between the educated and uneducated person with physical defect Basis: Diminution of freedom of action, therefore diminution of voluntariness. ; v BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 1D BAR OPERATIONS 35ines of the offender must diminish the ‘exercise of his will-power; and 2.That such illness should not deprive the offender of consciousness of his acts. Includes illness of the mind not amounting to insanity (REYES, Book One, supra at 321). Kleptomania, feeblemindedness, mistaken beli that killing witches was for public good and illness of erves or moral faculty may be considered as mitigating circumstances unider this. subparagraph (REYES, Book Ono, supra al 321-322). Baste: Diminutionct 9 Par. 10. Similar orb Examples: 1.Impulse of jealousy, obfuscation (People VR 763); ry 2Manitestations of Baltes analogous to an ilinstthat exercise of will power (A No. 135981, January 14 3.Over 60 years old with fii 70 years of age under Ra and Ruiz, C.A, G.R. No. 4.The act of the accused used to commit the crinigg surrender; 5:Extreme poverty, as similat which may apply to crimea-al not of violence, such as “Til Agustin, G.R. No. L-18368, Mac 6.Outraged feeling of unpaid Vindication or obfuscation C.A,, 36 0.6. 2283); 7.Appeal to the esprit de coms of the accu ‘analogous to passion; 8.Wartime state of confusion’ resulting in illegal possession of firearm after the liberation, as being similar to lack of intent to commit. so grave a wrong; ®.Voluntary return ‘of funds malversed by the accused, as equivalent to voluntary surrender, and 10.Testifying for the prosecution without being discharged from the information, as being like a plea of guilty. Circumstances which are neither exempting nor mitigating 1. Mistake in the blow or aberratio ictus; SAN BDA COLLEGE OF Law CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS gg 218Ce OPERATION: 3. Entrapment; 4.” Accused is over 18 years of age; and 5. Performance of righteous action (REYES, Book One, supra at 327). Specific Mitigating Circumstances ‘.lllegal detention (voluntary release within 3 days; ‘without attaining purpose; before criminal action); 2.Adultery (abandonment of spouse); and 3.Infanticide/abortion (intent to conceal dishonor of mother). CHAPTER FOUR ICES WHICH AGGRAVATE commission of the nalty imposed in its law for the offense or ime (ESTRADA, Book ‘circumstances: can generally apply to all subparagraphs 1, 2,3 IHERB, 9, 10, 14, 18, 19, 20-except “by vehicle”: (CAD-PRAN-HUCBU) “\eCrime committed in the Dwelling of the offended d.Palace and place of commission of offense; e-Recidivism; f. Abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulhess; @.Nighitime, uninhabited place, or band; h.Habituaity: i. Unlawful entry; |. Graf, fraud, or disguise; ° k. Breaking of parts of the house; and |. Use of persons under 15 years of age (Id. at 133). 2. Specific — those which apply only to specific crimes, such as ignominy in crimes against chastity and cruelty and treachery which areapplicable only to crimes against persons found under subparagraphs 3 (except dwelling), 15, 16, ‘May ‘be offset by an | Cannot be offset by a 17 and 24: (RATIC) ordinary mitigating | mitigating Disregard of Rank, age, or sex due the offended circumstance since it| circumstance since it party in crimes against petsons and -hohér, is not an ingredient of | is considered an b.Abuse of superior strength or means be the crime ingredient of the crime ‘employed to weaken the defense; ¢. Treachery in crimes against person: Rules on aggravating circumstances diignominy in crimes against chastity; and ‘.Aggravating circumstances shall not be e.Gruelty in crimes against persons (Id. at 133- ‘appreciated it: 134). a.They constitute a crime specially punishable by 3.Qualifying = those that change the nature of the law; or crime: b.They are included by the law in defining a crime a.Alevosia (treachery) or evident premeditation and prescribing a penalty therefore (Id. at 135). qualifies the killing of a person to murder andasiaesten. Blbat thé crime be committed by means j-alith respect to any a ferent in the crime to Considered in. incrbaapg thes Gera must of necessity imposed, such as 5 a.Evident prepeditation adultery, RA b.Abuse of public office Wa}péilery; det Breaking of a walll or estat adultery and concubinage in robbery with the use : Or dFraudinestafa, Sy a é and cannot be offset by ‘such as: (CUTE-Q) a.Complex orimes (RPC, AN ef b.Use of unlicensed firea murder; Taking’ advantage of mae group (RPG, Art. 62, Par. 1fa)}): é s d.Etror in personae (RPC, Ar.49); and <\pniy who had knowledge of them at the time of e.Quast-recidivism (RPC, Art. 160). Nhe ‘execution of the act or their cooperation therein (Id). Cnn Aggravating pemietics) Increases the penalty | Gives the crime its whigh “should be'| proper and exclusive imposed “upon the | name and places the accused» to the.| author thereof in such maximum period but | a situation as to without exceeding the | deserve no’ other limit prescribed by taw | penalty than that specially prescribed by law for said crime EMIT ened Exception: When there is proof of conspiracy in which case the act of one is. deemed to be the act of all, regardless of lack of knowledge of the +. facts ‘constituting the circumstance (RPC, Art. 62, par. 4) 5.Aggravatirig circumstances, regardless of its kind, should be specifically alleged in the information AND proved as fully as the crime itself in order to increase the penalty (RULES OF COURT, Rule 110, Sec. 9). Such circumstances are not San Bepa Cortsce or Law 2914 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 5,presumed (People v. Legaspi, G.R. Nos. 136164- 65, April 20, 2001) 6.When, there is more than one qualifying ‘aggravating circumstance present, one of them will be appreciated as qualifying aggravating while the others will be considered as generic aggravating. ARTICLE 14 AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES, Par. 1. That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position, Basis: Greater perversity of the offe 1.By the mean: offender, or 2.By the means the crim ‘Applicable only when me ‘As a means by witch public officer must use: 4.Influence; 2 Prestige; or 3.Ascendancy (REYES, integral element of 2 cr supra at-138), e.g. malve facking (.e., the crime was attend passion or obfuscation, vindi ig provocation) this aggravating era be appreciated. Art. 19, par. 3 (harboring, concealing, or assis) the escape of the principal of the crime), crimes committed by public officers (RPC, Arts. 204- 248). * Par. 2. That the crime be committed in contempt of or with insult to the public authorities. Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as shown by his lack of respect for the public authorities. Requisites: (ExNoKP) 1.That the: public ‘authority is engaged in the ‘exercise of his functions; 2. That the public authority is not the person against ‘whom the crime is committed; SAN Beva COLLEGE OF Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS '3.The offender knows him to be a public authority; and 4, resence has not prevented the offender from ‘committing the criminal act (REYES, Book One, ‘supra at 340). Teachers or professors of a public or recognized private school and lawyets are not “public authority” within the contemplation of this paragraph (ESTRADA, Book One, supra at 139). Par 2 of Art. 14 does not apply when crime is ‘committed in the presence of an agent of a person in authority only. public authority is present is [such knowledge indicates lack of The designation or title of distinction used to fix the relative position . of - the offended party in reference Reuacai) Cece, nu Seana) Cay offended part lay refer to old age or the Refers to the female sex, ot to the male sex (ESTRADA, Book One, supra at 141) ‘The four circumstances enumerated can be considered singly or together.If all the four circumstances are present, they have the welght of one aggravating. circumstance. only (REYES, Book One, supra at 342) Disregard of rank, age or sex is essentially applicable only to crimes’ against person or honor and has common denominator which is the respect due to the offended party (id. at 343). Thus, itis not Proper to consider this aggravating circumstance in crimes against property. Robbery with Homicide is primarily a crime against property and not against persons. Homicide is a mere incident of robbery, the latter being the main purpose and object of the criminal: (People v. Pagal, G.R No. L- 32040, October 25, 1977). Offender must gee lt sex of the ofendes No. 45704, May 255: There must be @ ky the offender and the One, supra at 344). The aggravating circu rank,” 29 following cases: 11When the offender obfuscation (People. vlb 1137-R, March 20, 1948): 3.When the condition dispensable in the com abduction, seduction and fape) G.R. No. L-14347, April 29, Dwelling {t must be a building or structures not a weting (People v. Magnaye, GR. oe 3510, May 30, 1951) Dwelling includes dependencies, the foot of the staircase and enclosure under the house (US v. Tapan,, G.R..No, 6504 September 11, 1911; People v. Alcala, G.R. No. 18988, December 29, 1922). The aggravating circiimstance of dwelling requires, that the crime be wholly or partly committed therein or in any integral part thereof Dwelling does not mean the permanent residence or domicile of the offended party or that he must be the owner thereof. He must, however, be actually living ‘or dwelling therein even for a temporary duration or purpose (People v. Parazo, G.R, No. 121176, May 14, 1997). It is not necessary that the accused should have actually entered the dwelling of the victim to:commit the offense. Itis enough that the victim was attacked inside his own abode, although the assailant might have devised means to perpetrate the assault from the outside (People v. Bagsil, G.R. No. 148877, “August 19, 2003). Even if the killing took place outside the dwelling, it is aggravating provided that the commission of the crime began in the dwelling. jansi (G.R. No. 77284, July 19, that the victin need nat be the. in where he was \fa>- in the qualifying People v. Catapang, “sanctity of the home by sith violence or against the jgravating in the following ime was committed NOT in cer poopie, v. Daniel, G.R. No. Mer 20, 1978): 5); lote: In People v. Ramolete, (G.R. No. L-28108, ‘Mire 27, 1974), dwelling was not considered aggravating because the victim was a mere visitor in the house where he was Killed. 3.The victims, while sleeping as guests in the house ‘of another person, were shot to death (People'v. ‘Basa, G.R. No. L-2014, May 18, 1949). Note: The Code speaks of “dwelling" NOT domicile (People v. Parazo, G.R. No. 121176, May 14, 1997) ‘A condition sine qua non of this circumstante is that the offended party has not given provocation to the offender (People. Ambis, GR. No 46298, September 30, 1939) SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSMeaning of provocation in the aggravatin circumstance of dwelling: ‘The provocation must be: (GS!) 1.Given by the owner of the dwelling; 2 Sufficient; and 3:[mmediate to the commission of the crime. If all these conditions are present, it is not an aggravating circumstance. The provocation must also have a close relation to the commission of the erime in the dwelling (People v. Dequifia, G.R. No, 41040, August 9, 1934). Reason: When it is the offended par Provoked the incident, he loses NEGLEEG uated the ¥. paramour also dwells in applicable aggravating confidence (US v. Ibarioe”G.RI October 26, 1915). SE) upon things, dwelling is nog 2 is inherent (US v. Cas, G.A 1909); because this class of robbery i without the necessity of trespassing teeane the offended party's house (People v. Cp GR. No. L-37400, Apri 12, 1988). Dwelling is not inherent, hence aggravating,. in Robbery with Homicide since the author thereof could have accomplished his heinous deed without having to violate the domicile of the victim (People v. Mesias, G.R. No. 67823, July 9, 1991). 3.In the crime of trespass to dwelling, it is inherent OF included by law in defining the crime (REVES, Book One, supra at 355); 4.When the owner of the dwelling gave sufficient and immediate provocation (Id.);-and 5. The victim is not a dweller of the house (d.). SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 2. Obvious ungratefulness. Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as shown by the means and ways employed (Id). Par. 4 provides two aggravating circumstances which, if present in the same case must be independently appreciated. Requisites of abuse of confidence: (TAF) 4. That the offended party had trusted the offender; 2. That the offender abused such trust by committing ‘a crime against the offended party; and the abuse of confidence facilitated the The confidence must the crime, the culprit \ded party's belief that said confidence (Id). the offender and the mediate .and personal No. 130492, January 21, (RPC, Art. 310); a by conversion or misappropriation (RPC, ( 315); and 4.Maiversation (RPO, Art. 217); Roquisites of obvious ungratefulness: (TAOU) 4. That the offended party had trusted the offender, 2.That the offender abused such trust by committing a crime against the offended party; and 3.That the act be committed’ with obvious ungratefulness. ‘The ungratefulness contemplated by par. 4 must be such obvious, clear and manifest ingratitude on the Part of the accused (ESTRADA, Book One, supra at 148).When Obvious Ungratefulness is Present: 4.When the accused killed his father-in-law in whose house he lived and who partially supported him (People v. Floresca, G.R. Nos. L-8614-15, May 31, 1956); 2.When the victim was suddenly altacked white in the act of giving the assailants their bread and coffee for breakfast (People v. Bautista, G.R No. 1-38624, July 25, 1975); and 3.When the accused was.tiving in the house of the victim who employed him as an overseer and in charge of carpentry work, and had. free access to the house of the victim who was very kind to him, his family, and who helped him solve his problems (People v. Lupango, G.R. No. L-32633, November Presence; <— 3.Where public auth discharge of their dut 4.1n a place dedicated ¥6: Basis: Greater perversit by the place of the coms must be respected (REVE 561) Must be dedicated to private chapels not included There must be intention ¥% dedicated to public religioda ‘worship regularly in said pla GR.No. CA. No. 364, Fobra ‘The President or Chief Executive Palace to aggravate the liabliieg Under no, 2 above. As long as he: his presence is known to the accu the. crime, there is aggravating (REYES, Book Ono, supra at 361) oe G Except for the third which requires that official functions are ‘being periommed at the time of the commission of the crime, the other - places mentioned are aggravating per se even if no official duties or acts -of religious worship are being Conducted there. Cemeteries are not considered as place dedicated to the worship of God (ld. af 362). Offender must have intention to commit a crime when he entered the place (People v. Jaurigue, G.R. ‘No. CA, No, 384, February 21, 1946) ‘An electoral precinct or poling place during election day is a place “where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties" (People v. Canoy, GR. No. L- 6037, September 30, 1954) eae as eae i Sen Preeietkagris Dutios Public authorities are in the p ree mertres fiers err formance of their Ec er ‘Outside of their office cece Public authority should jeme case and their element fable and can _ subsist all be considered separately No. L-4189, May 21, 1952). age ye eT highttime, uninhabited place or band abaravating 1.When it facilitated the commission of the crime (objectivey; 2.\When especially sought for by the offender to insure the commission of the crime of for the purpose of impunity (subjective); or 3, When the offender took advantage thereof for the purpose of impunity (subjective) That period of darkness beginning at end of dusk and ending at dawn, Nights are from sunset to sunrise SAN Bea COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 41nO houses at all; a Place ata Considerable distance COCR Ramm from town, or where POEM the houses are scattered at. a. great distance. from each ‘other (REYES, Book ‘One, supra at 369) ‘Whenever. more than three (Le. at least four 4. Nighttime began and was *comy = Sat nghtiime Dowdell, G.R. No. 419: 28, 1 nighttime is not aggrave No. L- 31139, October 42 ‘come from moon, torch, People v. Berbal, et.al 10, 1989), the ‘Court matéhstick was used 1983), the Court octurnity cannot be 2 flashlights were used. of the moment. The circumstance “of noctumity, althoug rot Specialy sought for- shal aggravate inal liability if it facilitated the commission of the offense or the fonder tSok sevantage of the ‘same to commit the crime (People v. Luchico, No. 26170, December 6, 1926). It isnot considered as an aggravating circumstance when the crime began at daytime. ‘The commission of the crime should begin and end at nighttime (People v. Lerchico, supra). General Rule: Nighttime is absorbed in treachery. Exception: Where both the treacherous mode of attack and noctumity were deliberately decided SAN BEDA COLLEGE oF Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS upon in the same cae, they can be considered separately if such circumstances have different factual bases. In People v. Berdida (G.R. No. L- 20183. June 30, 1966), the Supreme Court ruled that “inasmuch as the treachery consisted in the fact that the victims' hands were tied at the time they were beaten, the circumstance of nighttime is not absorbed in treachery, but can be perceived distinely therefrom, since the treachery rests upon fan independent factual basis. A special case therefore is present to which the rule that nighttime is absorbed in treachery does not epply” olitude of the place where (ed was sought in order to (No. 26170, December 6, neces conspicary is not an aggravating ‘eifoumstance, but a means to commit a crime. THUS, one cannot absorb the other (BOADO, supra at 162). {fone of them was a principal by inducement, the aggravating circumstance of having acted with the aid of armed men may be considered. Jtabsorbs the aygiavating circumstances of abuse of superior strength and use of firearms (except when the firearm has no license or there is a lack of license to carty the firearm) if they are present in the’ commission of the crime (People. v. Escabarto, G.R. No, 42964, March 14, 1988).This aggravating circumstance is not applicable in crimes against chastity, but is considered in crimes against property, crimes against persons, illegal detention, and treason (People v. Corpus, CA, 43 0,6, 2249; People v. Laoto, G.R. No. 29530, December 8, 1908). This aggravating circumstance is inherent -in brigandage (REYES, Book One, supra at 374). “Arm” may even refer to stone (People v. Maniolo, G.R. No, 40778, January 26, 1989). When the armed men met up casually with others, and a crime was thereafter commitied, be considered as an aggravating reer s Recey roErErar Ee Generic Aggravat Circumstance If the classes of robbery, and (2) are perpetrated by be punishable under A would be a generic agura under Art. 14. Par. 7. That the ‘crime be. occasion of a conflagral earthquake, epidemic or 2 misfortune. Reason for the aggravation: In the midst of dfeat calamity, the offender, instead of lending aid to the afflicted, adds to their suffering by taking advantage of their misfortune to despoil them. It is necessary that the offender took advantage of the catamity or misfortune (ESTRADA, Book One, supra at 149). Other calamity or misfortune It refers to other conditions of distress similar to those preceding in the enumeration (People v. Corpus, C.A,, 43 0.6. 2249). There should be deliberate intent to take advantage of this circumstance. It is inapplicable to cases attendant of negligence or carelessness, passion or obfuscation and chance encounters Par. 8.That the crime be committed with the aid of: 4. Armed men; or 2. Persons who insure or afford impunity. Basis: means and ways of committing the crime Roquisites: 1.That armed men or persons took part in the commission of the crime, directly or indirectly: and 2.That the accused availed himself of their aid or them when the crime was committed One, supra at 376). Ee dros Bapledmen are accomplices hould they constitute a Bggravating circumstance ifacking party and- the, party lyarmed. aswell as those who 7 in the, commission of the ae Ces As to their number eee (3) armed Iyalefactors (ie., at least four PeRNene Requires that more | This circumstance is than three (3) armed | present even if one malefactors - shall | (1) of the offenders have acted together | merely relied on in the commission of | their aid, for actual an offense. aid is not necessar CRNA Band members are] Armed men are all principals, mere accomplices. SAN Bepa COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CeNTRALIZED Bak OPERATIONS 43Mere moral or psychological aid or reliance is sufficient to constitute this aggravating circumstance. If there are four armed men, aid of armed men is absorbed in employment of 2 band (Id) “Aid of armed’ men" includes “armed women" (People v.Licop, G.R. No. L-6061, Apri! 29, 1954) Persons wito insure or afford impunity must have or be in @ position to afford impunity, e.g. a judge. Par. 9. That the accused is a recidivist (reineldencia) Basis: Greater NF by his inetination t Recidivist He is one who, at the hi shall have been pra judgment of another criti file of the RPC (Pgople May 6, 1991) his tral for Requisites: (TCS) 4-That the offender is on ta Meaning of 1.Itis employed in its general sense. course of the trial, from arraignment until sentence is announced by the judge (REYES, Book One, supra at 379). 3.In recidivism, it is sufficient that the succeeding offense be committed after the commission of the preceding offense provided that at the time of his, trial for the second offense, the accused had already been convicted of the first offense (Id). 4.If both offenses were committed on the same date, they shall be considered as only one, hence, they cannot be separately counted in order to recidivism. Also, judgments. of constitute conviction handed down on the same day shall be considered as only one conviction (Galang v. People, G.R. No. L-45698, December 18, 1937). SAS Brin CouLeGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS eh er Gorse 5.To prove recidivism, it is necessary to allege the same in the information and to attach thereto cerlified copy of the sentences rendered against the accused (ESTRADA, Book One, supra at 151). 6 Recidivism must be taken into account no matter how many years have intervened between the first, and second felonies (People v. Jaranilla, G.R. No. L-28547; February 22, 1974), 7.Even ifthe accused was granited a pardon for the first offense, but he commits another felony ‘embraced in'the same tile of the Code, the first conviction is still counted to make him a recidivist, since pardon does not obliterate the fact of his conviction (US Vv. Sotelo, G.R. No. 9791, know Amnesty In the case» of amnesty which theoretically considers the previous. transgressions a8 not punishable. According to Art. 69, amnesty extinguishes the Penalty and all its effects, ‘or an offense to which the law attaches an jual or greater penalty; or 2.For two or'more crimes to which it attaches'a lighter penalty. Basis: Greater perversity of the offender as shown by his inclination to crimes. Requisites of reiteracion or habituality:(TPC) 1. That the accused is on trial for an offense; 2 That he was previously served sentence for ‘another offense to which the law attaches (not the penalty actually imposed): a. Equal or greater penalty, or.For two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty than that for the new offense; and 3. That he is convicted of the new offense. If the second offense or crime is punishable under a special law, it cannot be considered - under relteracion because Arts, 13, 14 and 15 of the RPC are not applicable to special law crimes. Rooecns Goer ‘As to the first offense Itis necessary that the | It is enough that a final offender shall have | judgment has been served out his The ja [Rea at subsequent, Gute must not be embracedy jrthe same tité-of the in the same title of te Not ‘aggravating 0 Rosey rg Pea er) rae ey Pare Coe eae) eens El eeuace pu iipertileiasee! for two crimes to it attaches a penal Where a person within a period of ten (10) years from the date of Cece! his release or last Rot conviction of the COTO M cam crimes of serious or aoe less serious physical Seem injuries, robbery, theft, Ere etae estafa or falsification, mts is found guilty of the said crimes a third time of oftener. lighter Where a person commits felony before beginning to serve or while serving sentence on a__ previous conviction for a felony Since reiteracion provides that the accused has duly served the sentence for his previous convietion/s, of is legally considered to have done. so, quasi- recidivism cannot at the same time coristitute reitoracion, Hence this aggravating cifcumstance cannot apply to a quasi-recidvist e set of facts constitutes recidivism and ability of the accused should be ill (Art 268), and once ie of Homicide in 1978, “bécause the first and the Yawe requires only final even if the convict has ‘for one offense, there is jedzthat the first and second a'in the same title of the Code (ee byitbeerativating power itsett cy ~To.considet this circumstance, the price, reward’or promise must be the primary reason or primordial motive for the comrrission of the crime (ESTRADA, Book One, supra at 156) Whose liability is aggravated: Pree Es coe erie) Citric Rittnrsettcs Only the liability of | Both the fiability of the receiver is| the giver and the affected. receiver are affected. ‘There must be two or more principals, the one who gave or offered the price or promise and the one who accepted it, both of whom are principals. SAN BeDa COLLEGE OT LAW 2014 CenTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 45If without previous-promise it was given volintarily after the crime had been committed, it should not be taken into consideration for the purpose of increasing the penalty (US v. Flores, G.R. No. 9008, September 17, 1914) ‘The price, reward or promise need not consist of or refer to material things or that the same were actually delivered. It is sufficient that the offer made by the principal by inducement be accepted by the principal by direct participation before the commission of the offense (REYES, Book One, supra at 385). Par. 12. That the crime be committad of (FIPE-SAD) 4.Fire; ‘When another aggravating, “qualifies the crime, eny circumstances shall be ‘aggravating circumstance on! supra at 387). RPC, Art. 248). “Fire,’. explosion," and “derailment of locomotive” may be part of the definition of a particular crime, such as, arson, .ctime involving destruction, and damages and obstruction to means. of ‘communication. In these cases, they do not serve to increase the penalty (REYES, ‘Book One, supra at 389). A killing committed through any of these qualifies the crime to murder, except if arson was resorted to but without intent to kill, in view of P.D. 1613 which provides a specific penalty for that situation. San Bea Counce or LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS. a Ce ere eae} ores Sinners The crime is committed by means | committed on the of any such acts | occasion of a involving great waste | calamity or misfortune. eee ater mate ro The crimes CeQmre cerry meek ‘Intent was only to| Simple arson but burn but somebody.) with a specific penalty (Art.326) Ge of the aforementioned ints or incendiary devices, "of any person or persons, ss, detonation agents or committed with evident forthe ways of committing the premeditation implies a ihe act before executing it. ist prove: (TADS) the offender determined to commit Kn_att manifestly indicating that the culprit has ‘lung to his determination; 3:Thé date and time when the crime was ‘committed, to compute the lapse of ime; and 4.A. sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution of the crime, to allow him to refiect upon the consequences of his act and to allow his conscience to overcome the resolution of his will (People v. Lagarto, G.R. No. 65683, May 6, 1991). Essence:. The execution of the criminal act is preceded by.cool thought and reflection upon the resolution to cary out the criminal intent within a space of time surficient to arrive at a calm judgment (People v. Abadies, GR No. 135975, August 14, 2002).‘There must be sufficient time between the outward acts and the actual commission of the crime. Evident premeditation is presumed to exist when conspiracy is directly established (People. Sapigao, et. al, GR No. 144975, June 18, 2003). Premeditation is absorbed by reward or promise but only insofar as the inducer is concerned since he obviously reflected thereon in planning the crime but not the person induced since one can be a principal by direct participation without the benefit of due reflection (US v. Manalinde, G.R. No. 6292 August 28, 1909). Bo bangs todo Bd waOl EGE is identified, determined so long class that may be Manalinde, supra; OR I the offender premedi person, it is profer to coy the aggravating circumsta because whoever is kill his premeditation, (REYE: 402). may be aggravating in premeditation included the” (ESTRADA, Book One, sup It is a general rule that evidal%p applicable in error in per Evident premeditation is compatible: Wim mitigating circumstance of immediate vindicatior’ of arrelative for a grave offense. ee Par. 14 - That (CFD) 4. Crat 2, Fraud; or 3. Disguise be employed There are three aggravating circumstances under this paragraph. Basis: Means employed in the ‘commission of the Invoves the use of intellectual trickery _or ‘cunning on the part of the agcused to aid in the execution of his criminal design (REYES, Book One, words or machinations used to induce the victim to act in a manner which’ would enable the offender to carry ey Creme Resorting to any device to of the done in to arouse ‘efalado, the fine distinctions fraud" would not really be in Att. 14 are variants of @ the victim and if all are absorbed in treachery if they ly adopted as the means, the treacherous strategy, or pendently. Ntsst of disguise is whether the device or “eghijvance resorted toby the offender was intended to did make identification more difficult, such as. the use of a mask or false hair or beard. Disguise contemplates a superficial but somewhat effective dissembling to avoid identification (People v. Reyes, GR. No. 118649, March 9, 1998). Par. 15.That 1. Advantage be taken of superior strength; or 2. Means be employed to weaken the defense. ‘There are two aggravating circumstances under this paragraph. Basis: Means employed in the commission of the crime. BEDA CouLEGE OF Law 2014 CENIRALIZED BAROFERATIONSPar. 15 enunciates two aggravating circumstances. + either of which qualifies a killing to murder. To deliberately use excessive force that is out of proportion to the means for self-defense available to the Person attacked (People v. | Lobrigas, et. al, GR No. 137649, December 17, Ce a er of re Terra ‘Offender employs means that materially weakens the resisting po ofthe offended porior st vi wih pacSdtchd EOPLERE eee ot ea) rears No advantage followin: superior strength; 2.When a quarrel aros: blow was struck af a ti For abuse of superior sti felative strength of the ‘of whether or not he took advé strength (ESTRADA, Book Wien there are several ofS Gane, ey must all Participation and their attact be concerted and intended ‘t Pooplo, GF. No. L-20388, In abuse of superior strengih— Considered is not that there were tht assailants as against one victim, bi aggressors took advantage of theif sirength in order to consummate the offen (People v. Cabangcala, GR. No. 135065, August 8, 2001). ‘Abuse of superior strength is inherent in the crime of parricide where the husband kills the wife (People v. Galepia, G.R. Nos. L-39303-05, August 1, 1978). ‘Abuse of superior strength is also present when the offender uses a weapon which is out of proportion to the defense available to the offended party (People ¥. Padilla, G.R. No. 75508, June 10, 1994). When the victin was altemately attacked, there is no abuse of superior strength (People v. Datun, GR. No. 118080, May 7, 1997). San Bepa Coustcr oF Law 2084 CENTRALIZED BA OPEEATIONS Speope! ‘Abuse of Superi Bari The gravamen of abuse of superiority is the taking advantage by the culprits of their collective strength to ‘overpower their relatively weaker victim or victims. Cut ‘Appreciated when the offense is committed by more than three armed malefactors regardiess of the comparative strength of victim or victims. the What is taken info account here is not the number of aggressors nor the that they are but their physical such as robbery with physical injuries or hothigide (REYES, Book Ono, supra at 419). Par. 16. That the act be committed with treacher (alevosia) Basis: Means and. ways employed in the commission of the crime Treachery (alevosia) Itis present when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offendedarty might make (People v. Lacao, Sr, G.R. No. 95320, September 4, 1991). Requisites of treachery: 4. That at the time of the attack, thé victim was not in 2 position to defend himself; and 2.That the * offender consciously adopted the particular means, method or form of attack employed by him (ESTRADA, Book One, supra at 162). The test of treachery is not only the relative position of the parties but, more specifically, whether or not the victim was forewamed or afforded the opportunity to make a defense or to ward_off attack (Id. at 163). accomplishment of cf 3. The mode of attack mu ba involving a different (People v. Abdul, G.R. No’ to support a finding of ale was to kill, so long as the sudden and the victim’ actidental (People v. Real, child even if the manner (People v. Rebucan, G.R. 201 Treachery ix srprechid “wha employed means to render the vichigr’ Important questions to answer: 4.Was the attack sudden and unexpected? 2.Did the offended party have opportunity to defend himself? 3.Was the mode of the attack deliberately or consciously adopted. by the accused to insure ‘execution without risk to himself? “If the answers to all these questions is YES, then treachery is present. When must treachery be present: 1.When' the aggression is continuous, treachery ‘must be present in the BEGINNING of the assault (People v. Manalad, GR No. 128593, August 14, 2002). 2.When the assault was not continuous, in that there was interruption, itis sufficient that treachery was present at the moment the fatal blow was given (US v. Baluyot, 40 Phil 385, 1919). Hence, even though in the inception of the aggression which resulted to the death of the deceased, treachery was not present, if there was a break in the continuily:of the aggression and at the time of the fatal wound was inflicted on the deceased he was defenseless, the circumstance of treachery must be taken into account intal, there is no treachery as the any risk to the which the party ireachery when the kden and unexpected to especially insure on es GURENG. 126028 March 14, 2003). etermined but there was a herously kill any first &wo a class (The same rule meditation), fetus and the bullet hit a WNtygorie intended by the accused BEBOOR One, supra at 166). rule: When there is treachery, it is GEES for either the. Intended viel oF the “aaa vctm "defend “himself “ages! he abaression, Treachery absorbs (CAN-ACE) 4. Craft 2. Abuse of superior strength; 3. Nighttime; + 4, Aid of armed men; 5. Cuadriia (‘band’); and 6. Employing means to weaken the defense, Treachery cannot co-exist with passion or obfuscation (People v. Pansensoy, GR No. 140634, Sept. 12, 2002). San BEDA COULEGE OF Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 4gThe presence of treachery, though, should not re: in qualifying the offense to murder from the Special Complex Crime of Robbery with Homicide, forthe correct rules is that when it obtains:in the special complex crime, such treachery is to be regarded as a generic aggravatirig circumstance, robbery with homigide, being a case of composite crime with its ‘own definition and special penalty in the Revised Penal Code (People v. Cando, G.R..No. 128114, ‘October 25, 2000). Par. 17.’ That means be employed or circumstances brought about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the act. Basis: Means employed Wy), Ignominy Wis a ccumstar Note: This is lasciviousness. Meaning of “which add'iggomniny to fh effects thereof” a 3 The’ means employed or more humiliating to vicimso¥t6, p Party to shame, or add to ignominy was inficted upon the offense be committed in is, add to his moral suffering YReope Gi No! b14odlanusny 38 too NG Applicable to: SS 4Crimes against chastity; 2 Leas serous physical mje; 5 Light or grave coercion; and Murder. Par. 18, That the crime be committed after an unlawful entry. Basis: Means and ways.employed to commit the crime Unlawful entry It is when an entrance (and not for escape) is effected by a way not intended for the purpose (REYES, Book One, supra at 458). SAN BREDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS Reason for aggravation: One who acts, not respecting the walls erected by men to guard their property and provide for their personal safety, shows a greater perversity, a greater audacity; hence, the law punishes him with more severity (Id) Example: Entering through a window Unlawful entry is inherent in: 1. Robbery with the use of force upon things; and 2. Trespass to dwelling, Note: When the accused gained access to the dwelling by climbing through the window and once ccsgurinaide, murdered certain persons in the dweling Presupposes that ; z there is no such compimientc) of the | breaking as’by entry “mn parts of | through the window the house If the offender broke a window to enable himself to Teach a purse with money on the table near that window, which he took while his body was outside of the building, the crime of theft was attended by this aggravating circumstance. It is not necessary that the offender should. have entered the building (REYES, Book One, supra at 460) Where Breaking of Door or Window is Lawful: Under Sec.11, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court, it states that an officer, in order to make an arresteither by virtue of a warrant, or without a warrant as provided in Section 5, may break into any building or enclosure where the person to be arrested is or is reasonably believed to. be, if he is refused ‘admittance thereto, after announcing his authority and purpose. Under Sec. 7, Rule 113 of the Rules of Court, it states that the officer, if refused admittance to the place of directed search after giving notice of his purpose and authority, may break open any outer or inner door or window of a house or any part of a house or anything therein to execute the warrant to “berate himself or any person lawfully aiding him when unlawfully detained therein. Par. 20. That the e be committ vith the aid of San age; or their irresponsibility (Re 482). 2.By means of motor veli similar means. modern criminals in said (id) Use of moior vehicle is aggravating} accused. purposely and deliberataly, motor vehicle in’ ‘a.Going to the place of the crime; b.Camying away the effects thereof; and cn facilitating their escape (People v. Espejo, G.R. No. L-27708, December 19, 1970). Note: If the ‘motor vehicle was used only in facilitating the escape, it should, not be an aggravating circumstance (REYES, Book One, supra at 463) Meaning of “or other similar means” It should be understood as referring to motorized vehicles or other efficient means of transportation similar to. automobile or airplane (REYES, Book ‘One, supra at 465). ‘Theft, which is committed by merely taking personal property which need not be carried away cannot be committed by means of a motor vehicle. It would be stretching the meaning of thé law too far to say that the crime was committed "by means of motor vehicles" (People v. Real, 10C.A, Rep. 668). Par. 21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime be deliberately augmented . by causing other wrong not necessary for its ‘commission. Ways employed to commit the crime the culprit enjoys and delights in Suller slowly, and ‘gradual, paybe unnecessary for the os of the offender. roof that the Wounds found were inflicted while he was wshnecessarly prolong physical s, G.R. No. 69986, March Se ange alone does not show cruelty, it to show that the accused bruary 11, 1931). we If the victim was already dead when the acts of mutilation were being performed, this. would also qualify the kiling to murder due to outraging of his corpse. But since the victim is already dead, cruelty cannot be appreciated in this case (People v. Balisteros, G.R. No. 110289, October 7, 1994). Cory (rte) re (Par. 17) Involves suffering SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAROYERATIONS 5Unlike mitigating circumstances (RPC, Art. 13, par. 10), there is no. provision for aggravating circumstances of a similar or analogous character. Other Aggravating Circumstances Under Spor Penal Laws When a crime is committed by an ae offender who is under eas the influence of, Pricetimeateeta dangerous drugs, err such state shall be considered as a B qualifying aggravating Crimes involving gain or profit: (TERI) 1.Theft 2.Estata; 3.Robbery; and 4 Illegal Recruitment. Thus syndicate is not aggravating in 4.Homicide; 2. Murder; 3.Rape; and 4. Physical injuries. Specific Aggravating Circumstances circumstance. ___.-v-sud senses iolation of domicile (nighttime; papers and effects Cee ee era eee uC ey ae) Po) Creme EEMMORREMEE ES the offense cs er committed by Cany Person who belongs to an organizedisyndicated crime group urge ecuNCesetsia| The penalty of Ife erg Eg imprisonment to ee CIEEEN death is imposed killed or raped Organized/syndicated crime group confederating or mutually hel (RA. 7659, Art. 23). SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS Itis a group of two or more persons collaborating, 19 one another for the purposes of gain.in the commission of any crime is '@ public officer fiands upon a person Rélationship Shall be taken into consideration when - the offended party is the: (SADBroSA) a.Spouse; b-Ascendant, ¢. Descendant; d Legitimate, natural, or adopted brother or sister; € Relative by affinity in the same degree of the offender. Other relatives included: a. The relationship of stepfather or stepmother and stepson oF stepdaughter (People v. Bersabal, GR. No. 24532, December 11, 1928).bestow upon their mother's/father's affection, care and protection. b. The relationship of adopted parent and adopted child. But the relationship of uncle and niece is not covered by any of the relationship mentioned (People v. Lamberte, G.R. No. L-65153, July 11, 1986). Application: a.Crimes against Property Mitigating in the ff. crimes against _prope RUFA) =p: i. Robbery (A ii, Usurpation, Thet; i, Estafa; and Malicious. mischie offended pay lve It is aggravating in cases where the offen higher degree than the same. level (Peo 46588, January 20, 194 descendants, relationship is aggravating. the serious physical injuries must fot” be inflicted“ by ‘a ‘parent upon. his child by excessive chastisement (See RPC, Art. 263; REYES, Book One, supra at 474). li. Less serious physical injuries or physical injuries: 4.Mitigating if the offended party is a relative ‘of a lower degree; and 2.Aggravating if the offended party is a relative of a higher degree of the offender (id. at 475), Homicide or murder: relationship is aggravating regardiess of degree (Id.). light iv.Rape: aggravating where a stepfather raped his stepdaughter or in a case where a father raped his own daughter (Id). ¢.Crimes against chastity Acts. of lasciviousness (Art. 336) - relationship is always aggravating, regardless of whether the offender is a relative of a higher or lower degree of the offended patty When the qualification given to the crime is derived from the relationship between the offender and the offended party, it is neither gating nor agaravating, because it is bjewfom and inherent in the offense, ern COREE s¥i-tiabitual, or Ragepi it is intentional falsubsequent 10 the plan to ‘commit a felony) - drinks fully, knowing its effects, to find a stimulant to commit a crime or a means to suffocate 2 or “subsequent to the plan to commit the felony NPoople v. Boduso, GR. No. L-30450-51, ‘September 30, 1974). Habitual Drunkard He is one given to intoxication by excessive use of intoxicating drinks. ‘The habit should be actual and confirmed. It is. unnecessary that it be a matter of daily occurrence (People v. Camano, G.R. No. L- 3662-63, July 30, 1982). , To be mitigating, the accused's state of ‘intoxication must be proved. Once intoxication established by satisfactory evidence, in the SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 5absence of proof to the contrary, it is presumed to be non-habitual or unintentional (People _v. Fortich, G.R. No. 0399-404, November 13, 1997). Instruction or Education As ai alternative circumstance, does not refer only to literacy but more to the level of intelligence of the accused. It refers to the lack of sufficient intelligence and knowledge of the full significance of one’s acts (People v. Nabong, G.R. No. 172324, April 3, 2007). Low degree of instruction and education or lack of itis generally mitigating. High degree of instructions aucer cod NS £3 Esko ot J, COLLEGE GF LTAW'Y theft, robbery (U: 3777,January 6, 19 natural feeling of uunlettered or uncutture; e.Rape (Molesa v. Direé 39998, January 24, 193: For grave and less grave felonies: 4.Principals; 2.Accomplices; and 3. Accessories. For light felonies: 1.Principals; and 2.Accomplices. Light Felonies are punishable _ only . when consummated but in crimes against persons or Property, light felonies are punishable in attempted and frustrated stage but only principal and accomplice are liable (RPC, Ar. 7). Accessories are not liable for |ight felonies (RPC, An. 16) SAN Broa COLLEGE OF LAW 54, 2014 CENTRALIZED BAK OPERAsIONS Reason: In the commission of light felonies, the social wrong as well as the individual prejudice is so small that penal sanction is deemed not necessary for accessories (REYES, Book One, supra at 489). ‘The classification of the offendefs as principal, an ‘accomplice, or an accessory is essential under the RPC. The classification may ‘be applied to special laws. only if the latter provides for the same graduated penalties as those provided under the RPC. ‘Two patties in all crimes: 19 subject (the criminal) Biumerates the active subjects of the fe active subject of \epetsonal nature of the For of deprivation of tibet for insolvency cases sir ‘and imprisonment ISSive subjects because they have no rights that be injured (1d.) Under Art. 253, the crime of defamation may be committed if the imputation tends to blacken the memory of one who is dead. Exception: ‘Att. 16 applies only when the offenders are to be judged by their individual, and not collective, liability, LARTICLE 17 PRINCIPALS ues) rites ace aoe eit ier cls cn eee ‘Those who'| Those who | Those who take a direct | directly force | cooperate . in part in the|or induce execution of | others to | commission of ‘the act. ‘commit it, the offense by another act without which Par. 4. Principal Requisit. and 2.That they carried out took part in ‘When the second requii conspiracy (REYES, Bo direct participation who to scene of the crime is not li ‘a.His non-appearance which is favored and éh Book One, supra at 180). b.Conspiracy is generally nota law sreciialy provies ES RPC, Art 8). This, by mer crime unless he would appear a the crime’ and perform any act indirectly in the accomplishment ¢f,the conspiracy. There is no basis for criminal liability because there is no criminal participation. “Personally took partiin its execution” ‘That the principal by direct participation must be at the scene of the commission of the crime, personally taking part in its execution (id. at 179) except when there is conspiracy and the principal by direct participation has already performed his Part prior to the actual commission of the crime: Note: The cooperation which the law punishes is the assistance which is knowingly or intentionally SAN neon given and which is not possible without previous’ knowledge of the criminal purpose (People v. Cruz, G.R. No. 74048, November 14, 1990). Par. 2. Principats by induction Requisites: 1.That the inducement be made directly with the intention of procuring the commission of the crime; and. 2.That such inducement be the determining cause of the commission of the crime by the material executor (US v. Indanan, G-R. No, 8187, January 29, 1913) fe commission of fesentation to the temptation to. commit hoerepleomese ie LAW “of having instigated the He-without first being shown ycommitted (or attempted) One, supra at 180). ation without a principal by jensable cooperation) (Id) ved, without prior promise, there can be no indugement (REYES, Book One, supra at 529) If the crime committed is not contemplated in the order given, inducement is not material and not the determining cause thereof. ‘Two ways of becomifig principal by induction: {by directly forcing another to commit a crime by: 2 Using irresistible force Irresistible Farce It is such physical force as would produce an effect upon the individual that in spite of all Sas Bepa COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED Bak OPERATIONS 552. 56 resistance, if reduces bim to a mere instrument (US v. Elicanal, G.R. No, October 28, 1916). b.Causing uncontrollable fear. Uncontroltable Foar It is @ compulsion by means of intimidation or threat that promises an evil of such gravity and eminence that the ordinary man would have succumbed toit (U.S. v. Elicanal, supra.) In these cases, there is no conspiracy, not even unity of criminal purpose and intention. Only the one using the force or causing the fear is criminally liable. The material executor. isunotos criminally tiable because of Art Stoxemptnowigurstances) By di i By srecty ince appther to commits @.Giving of price, of The one giving th or promise is a pr . the one committing thereof is a princi There is - collecti (REYES, Book One, a principal by inducemi ‘committed the crime In determining whether ti accused are sufficient to mal Principal by inducement, it result (People v. Castillo, G.R. No. 19238,-Suly 26, 1966) re Requisites: i, That the one uttering the words of command must have the intention of procuring the ‘commission of the crime; ii. That the one who made the command must have an ascendancy or influence over the person who acted; iil, That the words used must be so direct, so efficacious, so powerful as to amount to physical or moral coercion; iv, The words of command must be uttered prior {0 the commission of the crime; and. San Bea Coutecr oF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS AM BeBe ae v. The material executor of the crime has no personal reason to commit the crime. ‘The inducement must precede the act induced and ‘must be so influential in producing the criminal act that without it, the act would not have been performed (REYES, Book One, supra at 529). If the person who actually committed the crime had reason of his oWvn to commit the crime, it cannot be said that the inducement was influential in producing the criminal act (People v. Kiichl Omine, G.R. No. 42476, July 24, 1938). Note: distinction should be made between the °° \d of a father to his sons, under determine obedience, and the Fan individual to od Goi boa Creer Ts ae) Cee ate) ih gan inducement to commit a crime | ees ‘The mere proposal to commit a felony is punishable in treason or rebellion. However, the person, to. whom the proposal is made should: not commit the crime, otherwise, the proponent becomes a principal by inducement. Gauci) ete ans ‘The proposal to be punishable must involve only treason, rebellion, insurrection or coup Effects of acquittal by direct participation upon inducement: 4.Conspiracy Is negated by the acquittal of co- defendant. of principal liability of principal by2.0ne cannot be held guity of having instigated the ‘commission of a orime without first being shown that the crime has been actually committed by another (People v. Ong Chiat Lay, G.R. No. 39086, October 26, 1934). But if the one charged as principal by direct participation is acquitted because he acted without criminal intent or malice, his acquittal is not a ground for the acquittal of the principal by inducement (Péople v. Bo Gok To, G.R. No. L-7236, -Apnl 30, 1955). In exempting circumstances, Reason for the rule: lack of intent on the part of the acc crime committed criminal P fonesvie coors BEBA” , COLLEG Requisites: 4.Patticipation in the 6 there is either criminal purpose and i the com a. Requires participatio b. There must be conspit ¢. Concurrence is suffici 4-Presently on trial for the offense; 2.Has already been sentenced but service of which has not begun; or SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CovTRALIZED BAROFERATIONS — 63. Already serving sentence. The exception applies to a law dealing with prescription of crime, ‘The retroactive effect of criminal statutes does not apply to the culprits civil lability (People v. Panaligan, C.A, 40 0.G. 207). Reason:-The rights of offended persons or innocent third parties are not within the gift of arbitrary disposal of the State. No retroactive effect even when favorable to the = if the new law is express inapplicable to pending actions or e action (Tavera vsValdez, G.R. No. 1.When the provisiohs reenacted; cs The right to punish of ld penal law is not When a penal law, whi old law, is itself repe: repealing law revives te otherwise. If the repeal is absok obliterated When the repeal is absolute, the Bt ‘0 be criminal (People v. Tamayo, Note: No retroactive effect of penal laws as reg jurisdiction of court. The jurisdiction of the cQuft to tty a criminal action is to be determined by the law in force at the time of instituting the action, not at the time of the commission of the crime (People v. Pegarum, G.R. No. 37565, November 13, 1933). Jurisdiction of courts in criminal cases is determined by the allegations of the complaint or information, and not by the findings the court may make afer trial (People v. Mission, G.R. No. L-3488, November 28, 1950). Note: See discussion of retroactive. law under the Prospective characteristic of criminal law. SAN BrDa Couece oF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS ARTICLE 23 EFFECT OF PARDON BY THE ‘OFFENDED PARTY General Rule: Pardon by the offended party does NOT extinguish the criminal liability of the offender. Reason: A crime committed is an offense against the State. Only the Chief Executive can pardon the offenders (RPC, Art. 36). Note: In criminal cases, the intervention of the aggrieved parties is limited to being witnesses for the prosecution, tno repesfiAEN 2 Bea pie MEE eSiecnese (RPC, Art, 344) ardon must be given by A prior to institution of v. Lim, G.R. No.'85753 (ster-Pegpie v. Lecson (CA 58 OG 9460) held ie" Pardon by the parents, standing alone, is ficacious. Too, the express pardon of a on guily of attempted abduction of a minor, granted by the latter's parents, is not sufficient to femove criminal responsibiliy, but must. be accompanied by the express pardon of the git herself. Pardon must be given prior to the institution of the criminal action. However, marriage between: the offender and the offended party even after the institution of the criminal action or conviction of the offender will extinguish the criminal action or remit the penalty already imposed against the offender, his co-principals, accomplices, and accessories after the fact.Note: Not applicable in rape, where there are two or more principals involved and in case of mul rape. 3.Rape (as amended by R.A. 8353) ‘The subsequent valid martiage between the offender and the offended party shall extinguish criminal liability or the penalty imposed. Marital pardon granted before the filing of the case, during the proceedings and even after final conviction shall extinguish criminal liability and shall remit or rebate the penalty already imposed. Pardon by the offended party under Art, 344 is ‘only a. bar to criminal prosecution; ground for extinguishment of gf waiver of the offen ity. » An offense causes 2 Produced by disturbance and alarm which are the outcome of the offense. ts sought to be repaired through the imposition of | the corresponding penally. The State has an interest in this class of injury. The offended party cannot pardon "the offender "so as" 1 relieve him .of the | indemnity. penalty “ ARTICLE 24 MEASURES OF PREVENTION OR SAFETY. WHICH ARE NOT CONSIDERED PENALTIES ‘The following are NOT considered as penalties: 4,The arrest and. temporary detention of accused persons, as. well as their detention by reason of insanity’ or imbecilty, or iliness requiring their confinement in a hospital; 2.The commitment of a minor to any of the institutions mentioned in Art. 80 (now Art. 192, i acilbenae P.D. No. 603) and for the purposes specified therein; 3.Suspension frorn the employment or public office during the trial or in order to institute proceedings; 4.Fines and other corrective measures which, in the exercise of their administrative or disciplinary Powers, superior officials may impose upon their subordinates; and 5.Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the civil law may establish in penal form. Reasons why they are NOT penalties: 1. They’ are not: imposed as a result of judicial proceedings. Those mentioned in paragraphs 1, 3 Somat are etch preventive, measien before or made to suffer or as punishment ‘not been arrested for a Persons” who are ity oF imbeciity.” established in penal form fated in the case of parents git parental authority if found corruption of their minor with Art. 332 of the Civil detention was only a preventive measure, whereas aba: crime during the service of the penalty for a previous crime. CHAPTER TWO CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES (ARTS. 25-26) ARTICLE 25 PENALTIES WHICH MAY BE IMPOSED ‘The scale in Art. 25 is only a general classification of penalties based on their severity, nature and subject matter. SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 63The scale of penalties in Art. 70 is provided for successive service of sentences imposed on the same accused, in consideration of their severity and natures. The scales in Art. 71 are for the purpose of gfaduating the penalties by degrees in accordance with the rules in Art. 61. Classification of Penalties under Article 25: ‘A. Based on their severity or gravity OLLEGE B. Based on their nature— 4.Principal penalties ‘are divisible nto three Retiods b indivisible Death i. Reclusion perpetiia i, Perpetual disqualification iv. Public censure 2.Accessory penalties . Based on subject matter 4. Corporal (death); 2.Deprivation of freedom (reclusi temporal, prision mayor and correci6y mayor and menor); 3.Restriction of freedom (destierr0); 4.Deprivation of fights disqualification” and suspension); and 5.Pecuniary (fine). Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification, perpetual or temporary special disqualification, and ‘suspension may be principal or accessory penalties. Examples: 1,Pespetual absolute. disqualification is a principal Penalty. in prevaricacion (RPC, Art. 204) and perpetual special disqualification, in malversation (RPC, Art. 217). 2.Temporary absolute disqualification is a principal penalty when the accessary acts with abuse of SAN Bupa COLLEGE oF Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 64 public functions (RPC, Art, 19[3] and Art, 68) and temporary special disqualification, in direct bribery (art. 206). 3. Suspension is a principal penalty in rendition of ‘unjust interlocutory orders (RPC, Art. 206). Bond to keep the peace is imposed only in the crime of threats (Art. 284), either grave (Art. 282) or light (Art. 283). Note: It is necessary to employ legal terminology in the imposition of penalties because of the substantial diference in their corresponding legal effects and accessory penalties (BOADO, supra at 47}.-Thuis, a sentence of “five years in Bilbid” is esBéoause it does not specily the exact Piescabed in the Revised Penal Code (US 9609-11, Qctaber 2, 1914) a ri PROHII 408 2 osmon OF ITHRERNALT YAN THE PHILIPPINES “the: following shall be n perpetua, when the law ‘of the nomenclature of the offenses punished with whose sentences will be rpetua, by reason of this Act, RA, 9346, Sec. 3) ARTICLE 26 INE — WHEN AFFLICTIVE, CORRECTIONAL OR LIGHT Fine is: (Whether imposed as a single or as an alternative ponalty) 1.Affitive — over P6,000.00; 2 Correctional ~ P200.00 to P6,000.00; or 3.Light penalty ~ less than P200.00 Same basis may be applied by analogy to Bond to keep the peace. The rule herein does not apply where the’ fine involved is in a ‘compound penalty, that is, it is imposed in conjunction with another penalty. In this, cease, the highest penalty shall be made the basis forcomputing the period for the prescription of crimes (RPC, Art. 90) Where the fine in question is exactly P200, under Art. 9 it is a light felony, hence the felony involved is a light felony; whereas under. Art 26, it is a correctional penalty, hence the offense involved is a fess grave felony. it has been held that this discrepancy should be resolved liberally in favor of the accused, hence Art. 9 prevails over Art. 26 (People v. Yu Hai, G.R. No. 9598, August 15, 1956). However, according to Justice Regalado there is no such discrepancy. What istreally in issue is the Prescription ofthe offense vis-a-vis the prescaiasesrd Sats physical of the penalty, the former being the gf judgment against the x Note: In’ determining apply Art. 9 (P200 fine the prescription of penal prescribes in 10 years). Afflictive rer or Eo eile pete yrs and 1 day tot yes, except Gahen Gisqualficaton is an accessory penalty, in which case its duration i that ofthe principal pena ee ee 20 yrs and day to 40 yrs 42 yrs and 4 day to 20yt5 Correctional ens Cora een fr) Cee) 6 mos. and 1 day to 6 yrs., except_whert ra aes Ea Peery Pe -} 1 day to| The period 30days | during which the Le rae ‘Suspension is ] mos. ‘bond shall an accessory be effective penalty, in is which case its discretionar duration is yon. the that of the court principal penalty. Nature of destierro . Destierro is a principal, correctional and divisible Penaity. In what cases is destierro imposed? injuries or death imstances (RPC, Art. 247); good behavior under 6f"temporary penalties and the detention (under preventive ge13 : §. Lethp68iF7 absolute disqualification; EXLEmporary special disqualification; and “e Suspension 2.When the offender is not in prison - the duration of penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty is from the day that the offender is placed at the disposal of jidicial authorities for the enforcement ofthe penalty. This ruie applies in cases of penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty and the offender is not in prison. Examples of Penalties Consisting of Deprivation of Liberty a.mprisonment; and b.Destierro. San Brpa COLLEGE OF LAW 2024 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 653. The Duration of Other Penalties - The duration is from the day on which the offender commences to serve his sentence. Applies in cases of. .Penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty and the offender is undergoing preventive imprisonment; but the offender is entitled to a deduction of full time or 4/5 of the time of his detention; and b.Temporary penalties and the offender Is. not under detention — because the offender is released on bail ARTICLE 29, as amended by R.A. 10592 PERIOD OF PREVENTIVE IMPRISONMEN: Preventive Imprigot ie me peted stMetpion und screed wre he ogy tonsa cover Baile bp ne , Book Ore, oa These rules on Preventives sentences. regardless including the so-called ps destierro (People v. Bast February 2, 1979) When is the detention pi credit of his preventive imprig General Rule: : When the detention prisor writing after being and with the assistance of cauri same disciplinary rules imposed. prisoners. Exceptions: 1., When they are recidivists, convicted previously twice or more times of-dn crime; and [% ‘When upon being summoned for the execution of their sentence they have failed to surrender voluntarily Note: Habitual delinguents are included in No. 1 No. 2 refers to convicts who failed to voluntariy surrender to serve their penalties under a final judgment, since this is indicative of a greater defiance of authority. It does not refer to failure or refusal to voluntarily surrender afer the commission of the crime. SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LA 4g 2014 CENTRALIZED BaROPERATIONS acy When will he be credited only with four-fifths the time during which he has'undergone preventive imprisonment? If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners. Credit for preventive imprisonment for the penalty of rectusion perpetua shall be deducted from thirty (30) years. Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisoriment for a period equal to the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense charged to high-he may be sentenced and his case is not yet i ail be released immediately without ontinuation of the trial thereof or ‘appeal, if he’ same is under hAS imprisonment _ for ease under this paragraph {of detention with good loa Provided, however, That if ally to which the accused erro, he shall be released ot preventive imprisonment.” fear shall‘be"Eredited in the services of his/her Wve fulltime spent in. actual ARTICLE 30 EFFECTS OF THE PENALTIES OF PERPETUAL ‘OR TEMPORARY. ABSOLUTE DISQUALIFICATION 4.Deprivation of the public offices arid employments which the offender may have held, even if conferred by popular election; 2.Deprivation of the right to vote in any election for any popular elective office or to be elected to such office; 3.Disqualification for the offices or public employments and for the exercise of any of the rights mentioned; and4,Loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension for any office formerly heia. Perpetual Absolute Disqualification It is effective during the lifetime of the convict and even after the service of the sentence. ‘Temporary Absolute Disqualification It lasts during the term of the sentence, and is removed after the service of the same. Exceptions: 1;Deprivation of the public office or emplayment; and 2. Loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension for any office formeriy held. A plebiscite is nota 30, par. 2 (deprivg the offender may. provisions of pertinent qtioned or conf ef the right 4.Deprivation of the offic or calling affected; and 4, 2.Disqualification for hoidigsimilar offi ‘employments either p 4.Deprive the offender perpetually tem of the sentence of: .The right to vote in any popular public office; or b.To be elected to suich office. 2.Not be permitted to hold any public office during the period of disqualification. Disqualification is'the withholding of a privilege, not a denial of right — a restriction upon the right of suffrage or'to hold office. . Purpose: To preserve the purity of elections; one rendered infamous by conviction of felony or other base offenses indicative of moral turpitude is unfit to exercise such rights. SEeESEAN BERT gnc COLLEGE OF LAW'S an ARTICLE 33 ‘EFFECTS OF THE PENALTIES OF SUSPENSION FROM ANY PUBLIC OFFICE, PROFESSION, OR CALLING, OR THE RIGHT OF SUFFRAGE 1.Disqualifcation from holding such office or exercising such right or calling or right of suffrage during the term of the sentence; and 2.1f suspended from the public office, the offender Cannot hold another office having similar functions during the period of suspension. ARTICLE 34 CIVIL INTERDICTION Depns ri page his property ch property by any S¢fsuich property by will or jsf Fhe law only. mentioned REYES, Book One, supra at ih the penalty of civil jit an agent to-manage his ét of an agent is the act of Person civilly interdicted is law prohibits to be done |, supra at 231. oe ARTICLE 35 ECTS OF BOND TO KEEP THE PEACE ERETHE Gltender must present two sufficient sureties ‘“Nwtio shall undertake that the offender will not ‘commit the offense sought to be prevented, and that in case such offense be committed they will pay the amount determined by the Court; 2.The offender must deposit such amount with the Clerk of Court to guarantee said undertaking; or 3.The offender may be detained, if he cannot give the bond, for a period not to exceed.6 months if prosecuted for grave or less grave felony, of for a period not to exceed 30'days, iffor a light felony. Bond to keep the peace is different from bail bond which is posted for the provisional release of a person arrested for or accused of a crime. SAN BeDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS — 6Imposed as a penalty in threats (RPC, Art. 284) ARTICLE 36 PARDON; ITS EFFECTS Effects of pardon by the president: 1A pardon shall not restore the right to hold public office or the right of suffrage. Exception: When any or both such rights are expressly restored by the terms of the pardon. 2.It shall not exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil iabitty. Limitations upon the exercise of the pardoning power: 1.The power can be exercised only, ‘COMELEC. General Rule; When penalty is. extinguished, Penalties attached to it. Temoves what is left -conviction (REYES, Book Or rsa Ceres eo Pouce! Can extend to any crime, unless otherwise provided by or subject fo conditions in the | rape Constitution othe laws eRe eee LE Cannot affect the civil | The offended party can liability ex delicto of the | waive the civil liability offender ESE Extinguishes criminal | Does NOT. extinguish liability criminal lability co mate ese) Although it may constitute a bar to the prosecution of the offender in seduction, abduction and acts of SAN BEDA COLLEGE OR Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS Tasciviousness by the valid marriage of the im and the offender, and in. adultery and concubinage, by the express or implied pardon by the offended spouses Ee ‘Can be extended only | Can be validly granted after conviction by final | only before the judgment ofthe | institution ofthe criminal actior mR) in seduction, abduction of "adultery and yncubinage, pardon, include "both Cannot valdly be made ifsubject to a condition: <> re chargeable to the accused only in cases “of eonviction. In case of acquittal, the costs are de meaning each party bearing his own expenses. No costs shall be allowed against the Republic of the Philippines, unless otherwise provided by law (RULES OF COURT, Rule 142, Sec. 1). ‘The payment of costs is a matter that rests enti‘ly upon: the discretion of courts (Bacolod-Murcia Planters’ Association, no. v. Chua, G.R. No. L-1662, September 27, 1942).ARTICLE 38 PECUNIARY LIABILITIES What are the pecuniary liabilities of persons criminally liable? They are, in the following order: (RIFC) 4.Chvil a. The reparation of the damage caused; b. Indemnification of the consequential damages; 2.Pecuniary a.Fine; Costs of proceedings. When Article 38 is applicable In case the property of the offender shou! sufficient for the payment of all liabilities. y The courts cannot ard the order of, payment. Teens own fi 06.6675. sf OLL EG PENAL ‘Subsidiary penalty is.a Sit to be suffered by the convig with which to meet the fine, New Basis for Dally Compil Penalty at the rate of one day for caer x Note: This amended the pre\ day for each eight (8) pesos. 1 ‘Subsidiary’ pénalty shall. be pr and not as a matter of choice on his part by opt 0 to jail instead of paying. Subsidiary penalty is _not an accessory penalty, hence it must be specifically imposed by thé court in its judgment, otherwise the accused cannot be made to serve the corresponding subsidiary imprisonment (Ramos v. Gonong, G.R. No. L- 42010, August 31, 1961). 1 1. Prision correccional or arresto AND fine ‘Subsidiary imprisonment is not to exceed 1/3 of the term of the sentence, and in no case to continue for more than one year. Fraction or part of a day, ‘not counted. ‘Subsidiary imprisonment: a. not to exceed 6 months — if the culprit is prosecuted for grave or less grave felony, and 2. Fine only b. not to exceed 15 days — if prosecyted for light shail same shall pay the _ fine, that the convict suffered thé-penalty is imprisonment, the subsidiary penalty “muistbe imprisonment also. If the penalty imposed is destiérro, the subsidiary penalty is also destierro (REYES, Book One, supra at 636) No subsidiary penalty shall be imposed where: 1.The penalty imposed is higher than prision correccional or’6 years; 2.Additional penalty for habitual delinquency should be inclided in determining whether or not subsidiary penalty should be imposed; 3.For non-payment of reparation or indemnification; 4.For non-payment of cost; 5.Where the penalty imposed is a fine and another penalty without fixed duration, like censure (Id at 637); and SAN BeDs COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OFERATIONS. 696.The subsidiary penalty, though property posable isnot expressiy stated in the judgment, 7.For non-payment of taxes in case of insolvency (People v. Balagtas, G.R. No. L-19210, July 29, 1959). Note: The rules on subsidiary penalty in Art. 39 are applicable to crimes punishable by special laws by force of Art. 10 of the Code. ‘There is no subsidiary penalty in cases of censure since it has no fixed duration and is not to be executed by confinement (REYES, Book One, supra at 635). ero fai Has a specific duration of 20 years and 1 day to 40 Has no definite term imposabie on | Imposable on crimes felonies punished by | punishable by the RPC special laws Carries with it} Does not carry wilt accessory penalties. | it accessory Penatties It is only when death penalty is not executed by Saspneot. commutation or pardon that the accessory SAN BEDAcsegth \ COLLEGE OF PAWS ORY PENALTI IALTIE: ‘commutation or pardon iE yf A a. Perpetual absolute disgigitication; Srid |! b.Civil interdiction during aaivears, Hf not ope remitted in the pardon. 2:Reolusién perpetua and redlasign tek a.Civil interdiction for fo ‘and b.Perpetual sbsolute sxpressly remitted in the penatty 3.Prisin mayor: ‘a. Temporary absolute disqui b. Perpetual special disquaiifcatio unless expressly remitted in th principal penalty. 4.Prision correccional: a.Suspension from public office, prise calling; and Perpetual Special Disqualification from sufrage, if the duration of imprisonment exceeds 18 months, uniess expressly remitted in the pardon of the principal penalty There is perpetual special disqualification from suffrage, only when the duration of ‘the imprisonment exceeds 18 months. 5.Arresio ~ suspension of the right to hol office and the right of suffrage during the term of the sentence. Note: The Code does not provide for any accessory penalty for destierro. SAN BRDA COLLEGE OF LAW 192014 CENTRALIZED Bam OMERATIONS on not liable for the offense ation and forfeiture. iV/prevails notwithstanding the on who is the owner of the en convicted if indicted with ents of a crime is an accessoty penalty. Thus, where the penalty imposed did not include the confiscation of the property, the confiscation or forfeiture of the property would be an additional penalty and would tantamount to an increase of the penalty already imposed, thereby placing the accused in double jeopardy (People v. Sanchez, G.R. No. L-9768, June 21, 1987). Articles which are forfeited, when the order or forfeiture is already final, cannot be returned even in case of an acquittal (Commissioner of Customs v. Encamacion, G.R: No. L-7598, July 26, 1954). ‘The provisions of Art. 45 cannot apply when: 1. The instruments belong to innocent third parties;2.Such properties have not been placed under the jurisdiction of the court because they must be presented in evidence and identified in judgment (US v. Filart, G.R. No, 10263 March 13, 1918); and. 3. When it is tegally or physically impossible. This accessory pénalty presupposes. a judgment of conviction. However, even if the accused is acquitted on reasonable doubt, but the instruments. ‘or proceeds are contraband, the judgment of acquittal shall order. their forfeiture for appropriate disposition (People v, Salanguit, G.R. No, 133254- 55, April 19, 2607). UABLE AND FOR THI DUATION OF THE a a] COLLEGE SECTION ONE - RUL APR a PENALTIES £0 THE NS ERIMIN, w 2 : The penaliyg general terms shall be impose for a consummated felony. Exception: When the pen: the principal in frustrated or atter by law. Graduation of penalties: 1. By degrees — refers to: a.Stages of execution (consummated . of attempted); and oer b.Degree of the criminal participation éfthe ‘offender (whether as principal, accomplice. or accessory) 2:By periods — refers to the proper period of the penalty which should be ‘Aggravating or mitigating circumstances attend the commission of the crime (REYES, Book One, ‘Supra at 650): ARTICLE 47 CASES WHEREIN THE DEATH PENALTY SHALL NOT BE IMPOSED No longer of any force’ or effect because the substantive provisions thereof being inconsistent imposed when . with RA: 9346, while the procedural measures is superseded by the present revised Rules of Court. ARTICLE 48 COMPLEX CRIMES Plurality of Crimes It consists in the successive execution, by the same individual, of diferent criminal acts, ‘upon any of ‘which no conviction has yet been deciared Kinds: 1.Real or material plurality ~ different crimes in law, as well as in the conscience of the offender, gffender shall be punished for each and every 2,committed. lurality - only one criminal ly fixes a single penalty es committed (Special fitted, they constitute only es of the law as well as in bt ‘only one criminal intent, lente theraife-enly one penalty imposed for if cominstin°ot a complex crime (People v. IR. No. L-6026-26, uly. 18, Se menace ac meny ee only a single offense, there being a singlé \> criminal imputse (People v..Lawas, G.R. No. L-7618, June 30, 1995). When a single burst from aulomatic gun resulted, inthe mumerous kings fers 8 number of bullets fred, there ts no complex crime but there are ae many offenses as the numbers of victims of the bullets fired in view Of the special characteristic or mechanism of automate machine gure and the offender wino Knew this fact (People v. Pineds, GR. No. L-26222 July 21, 1970). SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPéRATIONS. 11.Compound crime (delito compuesto) - a single act constitutes 2 or more grave or less grave felonies. Requisites: a. That only a single act is performed by the offender; and . That the single act produces: |. Two or more grave felonies, or ji, One or more grave and one or more less grave felonies, or ii, Two 'or more less grave felonies. Light felonies produced by the should be treated and punis! 2.When one offense is committed to conceal the other; '3,When the other crime is an indispensable part or an element of the other offenses; 4.Where one of the offenses is penalized by a special law; and 5.When the provision provides for a two-tiered penalty, e.g. usurpation of property (RPC, Art 312), malicious procurement of a search warrant (RPC, Art 129), bribery (RPC, Art 210 par 1), maltreatment of prisoners (RPC, Art 235). Note: Art. 48 is intended to favor the culprit. \der is deemed less perverse than ‘said crimes thru separate and lo v. Hoy . July T8986). Bee. violence, slight dbsbrbéd: Buch as in dire the slight physicals consequernce of the-#fca or in: the crimes of \di ass (People ¥- ApladoxG 12, 1929). Art. 48 speaks of grave felonies resu which excludes crinigs laws (People v. Ara vanuary 28, 1926). 2.Complex crime prop b.That one or some of the offenses myst be necessary to commit the other Note: The phrase “necessary means” has been interpreted not to mean indispensable means, because if it did, then the offense as “necessary means” to commit another would be an indispensable element of the latter and would be an ingredient thereof (Dissenting Opinion, People v. Hemandez, GR. No. L-6025-26, July 18, 1956); and That both of all of the offenses must be Punished under the same statute. C. No.complox crime in the following cases: 1.In case of continuous crimes; SAN BeDa COLLrce OF Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS & SELAGT by a single act are usive jurisdiction of two ent, jufisgiction, the court of higher ie smplex crime (Angeles, etc. ‘No. L-6494, November 24; 1g from one single act are penalty, the penalty for any imposed, the same to be GSpstituting a complex crime are a)yAfiprisonment and fine, respectively, ‘of imprisonment should be ‘order of severity, and it is the last in the “ote Sragyated scales in At 71 of the RPC (People ¥ Yongco, C.A- G.R. No. 18252-CR, January 26, 1977). ‘When a complex crime is charged and one offense is not proven, the accused can be convicted of the other (People v. Maribung, G.R. No. L-47500, April 29, 1987) No complex crime of Estafa Thru Falsification of Private Document ‘Thare is no complex crime of estafa thru falsification of private document as both crimes require damage ‘as an element which if used for one tenders the‘other incomplets, hence the query is as to which time was committed first If the falsification of a private document is committed as a means to commit estafa, the proper crime to be charged is falsification; If the estafa can be committed without the ‘necessity of falsifying a document, the proper crime to be charged is estafa (Batulanon v. People, G.R. No. 139857, September 15, 2006) ‘Complex crime of Abduction with Rape If at the outset, the accused took a woman away against her will and with lewd designs on his part, and he thereafter raped her, this would, cleatlyebessm ene ESR. right unde coe the, f= fe crime ag: L-8227, May 25, 1956) Subsequent acts of abduction with rape, are even while the first act of the crime of forcible No complex crime of Rebel ‘There is no complex’ crime of later killed when no such ransom was paid’ the complex crime of kidnapping with murder was committed (REGALADO, supra at 189). Article 48 Does not Apply to Acts Penalized Under Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code. Article 48 is a procedural device allowing single prosecution of multiple felonies falling under either of two categories: (1) when a single act constitutes, two or more grave or less grave felonies. (thus excluding from its operation light felonies; and (2) when, an offense’ is a necessary means. for committing the other. The iegislature crafted this procedural tool to benefit the accused who, in lieu of ‘serving multiple penalties, will only serve the ‘maximum of the penalty for the most serious crime. In contrast, Article 365 is a substantive rule Penalizing not an act defined as a felony but “the Mental attitude x x x behind the act, the dangerous. ecklessness, lack of care or foresight x x x," a single mental attitude regardless: of the resulting ‘consequences. Thus, Article 365 was crafted as one ‘uasi-crime resulting in one or more consequences. ‘Article 48 is incongruent to the notion of quasi- crimes under Article 365. It. is . conceptually impossible for a quastoffense to stand for (1) a single act constituting two or more grave or less yawe.felonies; or (2) an offense. which is a for committing another. facing an Article protection oth Double Jeopardy ‘Tug, they. arge-thereby denied the or ofc \Baansttayo formula oe vantage thus caused te the certainty of non: oO prime effects qualifying as (oragrhere, for the more serious Groeqcue pelatedy) tis 00 minded, aftcle 268 by extending to cing formula of Arle 48 so ger and ion of all resulting acts, grave, less grave or light fl keep intact the distinct (ler v. San Pedro and November 17, 2010) Ne? ret Sale te en 5 ~afe Specifically punished as a single crime, such “Sas}less. serious physical injuries with serious slander of deed, since this is punished under Art. 265 par. 2, as the single crime of less serious physical injuries with ignominy; 4.In special complex crimes or composite crimes; ‘and 5.When the crimes involved cannét be. legally ‘complexed, viz a. Malicious obtention or abusive setvice of search warrant (Art. 129) with perjury; b. Bribery (Az. 276} with infidelity in the custody of prisoners; ¢. Maltreatment of prisoners (Art. 235) with serious physical injuries; SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 73.Usurpation of real rights (Art. 312) with serious ‘physical injuries; and e.Abandonment of persons in danger (Art. 275) and crimes against minors (Arts. 276 fo 278) with any other felony. \LSpecial Complex Crimes — those which are treated as single indivisible offenzes although ‘comprising more than one specific crime and with specific penalty. These refer to two or more crimes that the law treats as a single indivisible and unique offense for being the product of a single criminal impulse (People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. Na. 183084 2013) Examples: The homicide mu otherwise, separalé\ either be consumritai attempted and a Teason of on the oc shall be reclusion permet homicide’ is committed, | death. The legisiative Pipt‘on th phrase.on the occasioft of kiting that ocours immedtal ‘consummated rape, wi homicide may be a pe vietim herself for as long to the rape, became Villaflores, G.R. No. 1849264 2. Kidnapping with homicide; 3. Kidnapping with rape; Kidnapping with rape is different from abduction with rape. In the latter,"there is lewd Gesign (People v. Jose, G.R No. L-28232, Feb. 6, 1971). 4.Robbery with homicide; and ‘Additional homicide is not aggravating ‘5. Robbery with rape, Additional rape is not aggravating, Note: There is no complex crime of Arson with (Multiple) Homicide. Accordingly, in cases where both burning and death occur, in order to determine What crime/crimes washwere perpetrated — whether arson, murder or arson and homicidelmurder, itis de rigueur ‘to ascertain the main objective of the malefactor: SAN Bava Coutrct oF Law 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS a.lf the main objective is the buring of the building or edifice, but death results by reason or on the occasion of arson, the crime is simply arson, and the resulting homicide is absorbed; b.lf, on the other hand, the main objective is to kil a Particular person.who may be in a building or editice, when fire is resorted to as the means to accomplish such goal the crime committed is ‘murder only; and lastly c.if the objective is, likewise, to kill a particular Person, and in fact the offender has already done 50, but fite Is resorted to as a means to cover up the killing, then there are two separate and distinct crimes committed ~ homicide/murder and arson pot tne Phitopinesv. the Melgar G. R and Beers ear Cameco cnr oon Ciacci It is made up of two or more crimes which are considered - only as components of a single indivisible offense being punished — in one Provision of the Revised Penal Code. because they "were brought about by a ssingle felonious act or because one offense. is a necessary means for committing the other offense or offenses. es Penalty for the most/it- is the penalty serious crime shall be| specifically provided. for imposed and in its|the special complex maximum period. crime that shall be‘applied according to the rules on imposition of the penalty. Note: One information should be filed when a complex crime is committed (People v. Estipona, GR No. 46978, November 14, 1940) lll Continuous crime ~ a single crime, consisting of series of acts, but all arising from one criminal resolution; length of time in the commission is immaterial (REYES, Book One, supra at 683). Requisites: 1.Mutiplicty of acts; 2.Unity of eri ‘3.Unity of crim! eal or Material Plurality There is a series of acts performed by the offender. Each act performed by the offender constitutes a separate crime, each act is generated by a criminal impulse. Note: A continued/continuing crime is not a complex crime because the offender ‘in continuedicontinuing crime does not perform a single act, but a series of acts, and one offense is, not a necessary means for committing the other (id. at 686) ARTICLE 49 PENALTY TO.BE IMPOSED UPON THE PRINCIPALS WHEN THE CRIME COMMITTED IS DIFFERENT FROM THAT INTENDED 4.If the penalty for the felony committed be higher than the penalty for the offense which the accused intended to commit, the lower penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period. 2.f the penalty for the felony committed. be lower than the penalty for the offense which the accused intended to commit, the lower penalty shall be imposed in its maximum period. Art. 49 applies only when there is a:mistake in the identity of the victim of the crime, and the penalty for the crime committed is different from that for the crime intended to be committed. Also, itis applicable ‘only when the intended crime and the crime actually 1d are punished with different penatties. praeter_intentionem crime befalls the same not intended by the me person (People _v. 8773, December 19, 1933). Article 48 Penalty for the more| ‘or most serious crime| shall be imposed, 1o| be applied in its maximum period. ARTICLE 58 ‘ODITIONAL PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED UPON CERTAIN ACCESSORIES Public officers who help the author of the crime by misusing their office and duties shall suffer the additional penalties of: ‘Absolute perpetual disqualification, if the principal offender is quill of a grave felony; or 2.Absolute temporary disqualification if the principal offender is guilty of less grave felony. This article applies only to public officers who abused their public functions. SAN BeDa CoLLEce oP Law 2014 CENTRALIZED Ban OPERATIONS 78ARTICLE 59 PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED IN CASE OF FAILURE TO COMMIT THE CRIME BECAUSE THE MEANS EMPLOYED OR THE AIMS SOUGHT ARE IMPOSSIBLE Impossible Crime ‘The penalty for impossible crime is arresto mayor (imprisonment of 1 month and 1 day to 6 months) or fine ranging from 200-500pesos. Basis for the imposition of proper penalty 1. Social danger; and 2. Degree of criminality shown by the offender impossible mate this Article as the agmicbe RULES OF GRADUA According to Arts. 50-67, tho peb law for the felony shall be Io degrees, as follows: tower, 2.For the 3.For the accomplice in consummated felony > degree lower,-and Gr 4.For the accessory in consummated felony — two degrees lower, Per tai Peace) Cou C Principal ‘Accomplice 1 2 3 ‘Accessory 2 3 4 In this diagram, “O° represents the penalty prescribed by law in defining a crime, which is to be imposed on Sat BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OVERATIONS the principal in. a consummated offense, in accordance with the provisions of Art. 46. The other figures represent the degrees to which. thie penalty must be lowered, to meet the different situations anticipated by law, Bases for the determination of the extent of penalty to be imposed under the RPC: 1.Stage reached by the crime in its development {either attempted, frustrated or consummated); 2.Participations therein of the persons liable; and 3.Aggravating or mitigating circumstances. which attended the commission of the crime. ‘enumerated in the graduated inant 71. 7 or aggravating red or increased by ‘apply to cases where the law Penalty for a frustrated or r to be imposed upon ésories (RPC, Art. 60). The following accomplices are ptinished with the ‘same penalty imposed upon the principal: 1.The ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers and any person’ who by abuse’ of authority or confidential relationship, shall cooperate as accomplices in the crimes of rape, acts of lasciviousness, seduction, corruption of -minors, white slave trade or abduction (RPC, Art. 346): and 2.One who furnished the place for the perpetration of the crime of slight illegal detention (RPC, Art. 268)‘When penalty prescribed is single and indivisible - the penalty next lower in degree shall be that immediately following that indivisible penalty in the respective graduated scale in Article 71 If the penalty prescribed by the Code consists in three periods, corresponding to different divisi penalties, the penalty next lower in degree penalty consisting in the three periods down in the scale, the If the penalty prescribed by the Code consists in two periods, the penalty next lower in degree is the penalty consisting in two periods down in the scale. only one period, the next period Example: (Note the dif and Degree when refer When the penalty pre: composed of orie or two int maximum period of ano! penalty next lower in d the medium and minim: indivisible penalty and the’ immediately following Reclusion temporal in reclusion perpetua is an exar divisible penalty and indivisi reclusion temporal in its mi periods, Death “medium COLE GE BEC (REYES, Book One, supraat 704) Note: Death is included in the above example only to show the scale of penalties. However, pursuant. to RA 9346, death penalty can no longer be imposed. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of several periods, corresponding to different dvisible penalties, the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the period immediately following the minimum prescribed and of the two next following, which shall be taken from the penalty sspsteprescribed if possible; otherwise from the penalty ing in the above mentioned Scale (RPC, Artiste 61, par. 4). lef penalty\Miposed of several responding PMa maximum to RT in the minimum period. is |, the medium period is MINIMUM. “MAXIMUM = 1EDIUM “minimum, Penalty for accomplice; or penalty for principal murder Priston Mayor (PMa) Reclusion Perpetua | One indivisible ‘penal IS (BP) and the maximum of. Prigion Correccional ‘Reclusion __ Temporal (PC) -maximum RD Penalty for the principal -maximum | in consummated -medium murder. minimum ision Temporal | One degree lower is i. at 705) RD) Main its maximum -medium | period to RT in its minimum | minimum and medium SECTION TWO — RULES FOR THE APPLICATION Prision Mayor(PMa) —_| periods OF PENALTIES WITH REGARD TO THE maximum | MITIGATING AND AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES, AND HABITUAL DELINQUENCY SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2014 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 7