Criminal Law 1 Reviewer (Padilla cases and notes combined with Ortega Notes)
Verga
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER
I. History of the Revised Penal Law
A. Codification Movement -- sought to have all laws codified or
written
in a single body of aw.
B. Spanish Codigo Penal
The royal order dated December 17, 1886, directing the
execution of the royal decree of September 4, 1884, wherein it
was ordered that the Penal Code in force in the Peninsula, as
amended in accordance with the recommendations of the code
committee, be published and applied in the Philippine Islands, as
well as the Provisional Law of Criminal Procedure which
accompanied it. These two laws, having been published in the
Official Gazette of Manila on March 13 and 14, 1887, became
effective in July 14, 1876. (US. vs. Tamparong)
C. Codigo Penal ng Pilipinas – modified the Spanish Penal Code.
D. US Period – they tried to translate the Penal code but certain
areas
were defectively translated
II. Definition of Penal Law and Criminal Law
A. Penal laws – laws which relates to penalties
B. Criminal laws – laws which relates to crimes
C. Felony -- A crime under the Revised Penal Code is referred to
as a
felony. Do not use this term in reference to a violation of special
law.
D. Offense -- A crimes punished under a special law is called as
statutory
offense.
E. Misdemeanor --A minor infraction of the law, such as a
violation of an
ordinance, is referred to as a misdemeanor.
F. Crime -- Whether the wrongdoing is punished under the
Revised Penal
Code or under a special law, the generic word crime can be used.
Lorenzo vs. Posadas
Issue: W/N Art. 3606 of a tax law is a penal law thus can be
applied
retroactively in conformity with the provisions of Art. 22 of RPC.
/vvverga
100
Vena V.
Decision: A statute is penal when it imposes punishment for an
offense committed against the state. “Penal Statutes” are
statutes, which command or prohibit certain acts and establish
penalties for their violation, and even those,
which, without expressly prohibiting certain acts, impose a
penalty on their commission.
Note: Non-payment of taxes is merely a civil liability/indemnity.
The tax code as it exists today which carries punishments may
be considered penal provisions.
People vs. Moran
Facts: The accused violated the election code and was
sentenced by the lower court. He was asking for
reconsideration and filed a special motion alleging that the
crime complained of had prescribed under the provision of
section 71 of Act 3030, enacted by the Legislature on March 9,
1922.
Issue: W/N penal laws provide for not only penalty but also
prescription.
Decision: Yes.
Decision: The court found the crime to have prescribed (in
accordance with the new law) and set aside the decision. The
Election law contained in the Administrative Code and Act 3030
which amended and modified the former, it is evident that the
provision declaring that offenses resulting from the violations
of said Act shall prescribe one year after their commission
must have retroactive effect, the same being favorable to the
accused. An exception- to give them retroactive effect when
favorable to accused. The exception applies to a law dealing
with prescription of crime: Art 22 applies to a law dealing with
prescription of an offense which is intimately connected with
that of the penalty, for the length of time for prescription
depends upon the gravity of the offense. Penal laws not only
provide for penalties but also prescriptions.
III. Rationale of Penal Laws
US vs. Sotto
Facts: Vicente Sotto is the director, editor, publisher and
printer of a weekly paper. On May 1915, he edited the paper
with the intention of attacking them reputation of Lope K.
Santos and two other principals of a labor group. He was found
guilty of libel.
Page 2 of
Criminal Law 1 Reviewer (Padilla cases and notes combined with Ortega Notes)
Issue: W/N Sotto was guilty
Decision: Yes. Penalties are used to deter people from doing the
same crime. A deterrent effect upon others is one of the
purposes of the infliction of a penalty for the violation of the
criminal law (Exemplarity).
People vs. Carillo and Raquenio
Facts: Carillo was sentenced with death penalty for the crimes of
robbery, attempted rape and homicide. His accomplice was only
charged for robbing Emma Abaya and Marcelino Lontok.
Issue: W/N the penalty for Carillo was justified.
Decision: The accused is a dangerous enemy of the society thus,
imposition of the highest penalty if justified. Carillo has proved himself
to be a dangerous enemy of society. The latter must protect itself from
such enemy by taking his life in retribution for his offense and as an
example and warning to others. In these days of rampant criminality it
should have a salutary effect upon the criminally minded to know that
the courts do not shirk their disagreeable duty to impose the death
penalty in cases where the law so requires.
People vs. Young
Facts: Jimmy Young is a hired killer who committed a crime of murder
under Art 248 of the RPC. He refused to plea guilty because according to
him, his guilt is lighter than those who ordered the killing of Alfonso
Liongto. He was sentenced with death penalty in accordance with Art
248 in relation to Art 64 of the RPC. However, RA 296, which was
approved 17 June 1948, provides that for a penalty of death is imposed,
all justices of the Supreme Court must first concur. Said law is
procedural thus can be applied to cases pending at the time of its
approval.
Issue: W/N Young should be charged with the crime of murder.
Decision: One of the justices dissented, thus death penalty was not
imposed. The killing in question was attended by evident premeditation
which qualified the crime as murder: (a) it was committed in
consideration of a price reward or promise and (b) with treachery. This
case also provides the notion of aggravating circumstances (acts that
would provide for higher penalties – art 14) and mitigating
circumstances (provides for lighter penalties – art 13). Death penalty
was imposed to rationalize the concept of Exemplarity: making a person
example to serve as a deterrent)
People vs. Revilla
Facts: The accused was charged for the crime of infidelity in the custody
of the prisoners. Nicasio Junio, the prisoner, was only sentenced to
/vvverga
100
Vena V. Verga
suffer six days of arresto menoronly, a penalty that may be served in
the house of the offender because of the condition of his health. The
municipality also could not feed him Nicasio for lack of appropriation,
Revilla then believed that this act in permitting Nicasio to sleep in his
own house was not grave in nature, being at most a mere relaxation
of the rules prescribed for the care and custody of municipal
prisoners. Revilla was charged under Art 223 for his actions.
Issue:
W/N the charge against Revilla is proportionate to the act he
committed.
Decision: No. His action then was due to a mistaken conception of his
duty, hence it is obvious that the penalty imposed against him is
notoriously excessive to the extent of being cruel for being out of
proportion with the crime committed. The penalty was not
proportionate to the evil to be curbed.
Retribution, the penalty should be commensurate with the gravity of
the offense.
The penalty imposed upon the accused for infidelity in the custody of
a prisoner sentenced to only six days of arresto menor being
excessive, such fact should be brought to the attention of His
Excellency, the President of the Philippines for him to decide whether
or not it would be convenient to recommend to the national assembly
the amendment of art 223 of RPC (conniving with or consenting to
evasion) so as to make it more in consonance with the amplitude of
the matters that a court must consider in meting out punishment to
whoever may have the misfortune f infringing the precept regarding
infidelity in the custody of prisoners or detained prisoners.
People vs. Galano
Facts: Galano was accused of falsification of one peso bill, which he
used to purchase four eggs. He was found guilty and was sentenced
to suffer intermediate penalty ranging from 10 years and 1 day to 12
years and 10 months. The Solicitor General believes that the
punishment is too harsh.
Issue: W/N the penalty if too harsh
Decisions: The punishment is too harsh and it may not actually serve
the purpose of the legislator. Imprisonment may change an individual
but it can also expose the person to hardened criminal. Thus,
punishments should be applied with care. A copy of the decision was
sent to the president for the exercise of executive clemency.
IV. Two theories in Criminal Law
A.
Classical Theory
1. Basis of criminal liability is human free will and purpose of penalty
is retribution
2. “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.” – Oculo pro oculo, dente
Page 2 of
Criminal Law 1 Reviewer (Padilla cases and notes combined with Ortega Notes) Vena V. Verga

pro dente.]
3. Man is a moral creature with absolute free will to choose between
good and evil, thereby placing more stress upon the effect or result of
felonious act than upon the man.
4. Endeavored to establish a mechanical and dire
ct proportion
between crime and penalty

/vvverga Page 2 of
100