Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DISCLAIMER: READ AT YOUR OWN RISK. Case titles and/or citations may be wrong. Other
information may be also be wrong or incomplete. For corrections and additions, inform me
ASAP.
5 July 2009
BOOK I
Art. 3
FELONY BY DOLO
Mens rea physical act / overt act
Mens reum mental act voluntariness, intelligence
Without mental act, Art. 11 comes in
Overt act punishable by RPC in Lizada ruling preparatory acts
DELIBERATE INTENT
Intent state of the mind; a determination to do an act or omission;
purpose of the mind, including knowledge
Deliberate with malice; with knowledge that act or omission is a
crime
Presumption of Criminal Intent rebuttable
Accidental without intervention of human free will
People v. Ojeda, 430 S 436
Concurrence of intelligence, voluntariness, and intent
Act which is malicious continues up to the consummation of the crime
General or Specific Intent
General Intent presumed on acts which fall under dolo
Page 1 of 60
CG Meneses
Specific Intent lewd design, i.e., intent to gain, intent to kill;
presumed from crimes which require specific intent as an element of
the crime
Requirement for Crimes by Omission
Positive duty under the law which mandates offender to do
something, and he deliberately refuses to do such duty
Felony by omission may be committed by culpa Art. 365 applies
i.e., misprision of treason, failure to render accounts, failure to issue
receipts, prevaricacion
MISTAKE OF FACT
People v. Ah Chong
Crime committed BUT no criminal liability
Absolutory cause
Available only in felony by DOLO because act was deliberate
There is no such defense as MISTAKE OF LAW
People v. Oanis
Crime cannot exist when the will does not concur
Negligence no mistake of fact
MOTIVE
Not an element of the felony
Important in cases when the identity of the perpetrator is NOT clear
Also IMPORTANT WHEN THE CRIME IS POLITICAL IN NATURE
FELONY BY CULPA
Must be voluntary
Mind is free to act
Difference act is incident to imprudence, negligence, lack of
foresight, or lack of skill
Quizon v. Justice, 97 P 342
Reckless imprudence is a distinct felony by itself
Page 2 of 60
CG Meneses
Malum prohibitum, as element of estafa (Art. 315)
Large Scale Illegal Recruitment two offenses for same delictual act
Art. 4
Liability exists even if crime committed be different that that which
was intended THE LAW IS AFTER THE RESULT
ERROR IN PERSONAE
People v. Nepomuceno, 298 S 450
Intentional felony NOT culpable felony deliberate intent or act is
inconsistent with reckless imprudence
MALA IN SE
Generally, all felonies in the RPC
Criminal intent is required
MALA PROHIBITA
Punished by special penal laws
EXCEPT when act is patently immoral, or when intended otherwise
by Congress, i.e., plunder under RA No. 7080
(Estrada v. Sandiganbayan)
What if law requires special intent?
See RA No. 8294, possession of illegal firearms lack of intent to
possess
Anti-Fencing Law lack of knowledge that item was stolen; lack of
intent to gain
People v. Comadre
RA no. 8294 amended Art. 14 of the RPC
In the crime of homicide or murder, use of unlicensed firearms an
aggravating circumstance
Trust Receipts Law (PD No. 115)
Page 3 of 60
CG Meneses
Art. 5
People v. Narvaez
Property right in relation to Art. 249 of the Civil Code, also in relation
to Art. 11 of the RPC
DEFENSE OF RELATIVES
People v. Bates, 403 S 95
If relative being defended provoked the offended party, person
defending may invoke self-defense if he did not know of such fact
Art. 6
In crimes against persons TO BE FRUSTRATED, WOUND MUST
BE MORTAL (FATAL) to produce all acts of execution
When is the wound mortal?
Depends on the doctor medical opinion
Lazaro v. People
Depends on the circumstances DO NOT RELY ON THE INITIAL
WOUND
Art. 11
Art. 12
13 July 2009
EXEMPTIONS
Ortega v. People, 20 Aug 2008
Page 4 of 60
CG Meneses
Art. 266-A the fact that victim is a minor may be proved by means
without RA No. 9344
ACCIDENT
No fault attributable to offender
No negligence, no intent OTHERWISE, EXEMPTION WILL NOT
APPLY
People v. Galacgac
People v. Flores
SUFFICIENT PROVOCATION
Oriente v. People
Provocation must be SUFFICIENT and IMMEDIATELY PRECEDED
the act
IRRESISTIBLE FORCE
People v. Tami, 234 S 1
UNCONTROLLABLE FEAR
Asehas III v. People, 493 S 292
With respect to entrapment/instigation
Page 5 of 60
CG Meneses
ANALOGOUS CIRCUMSTANCES
Immediate
In the Spanish Penal Code proxima, or proximate
People v. Doca
Lack of education or instruction is NOT MITIGATING IF THERE IS
DISCERNMENT OR INTELLIGENCE
VOLUNTARY SURRENDER
Appreciation is not depended on where accused surrenders
People v. Quimpo
Tabalos v. People
Applies to malversation
If public officer returned money malversed or misappropriated by him
BEFORE being charged or before the institution of the criminal action
VOLUNTARY PLEA OF GUILTY
People v. Calpito, 416 S 491
May be appreciated even if accused offers in evidence other
mitigating circumstances
People v. Noble, 77 P 93
People v. Magallanes, 275 S 222
PHYSICAL DEFECTS/ILLNESS
People v. Antonio, Jr., 431 S 425
Psychosis is mitigating
Art. 14
TREACHERY
People v. Antonio, 390 P 989
No treachery if decision to attack was arrived at at the spur of the
moment
People v. Guzman, 423 P 600
Mere suddenness of the attack does not by itself suffice to appreciate
treachery, even if there was intent to kill, and the helpless position of
the victim was merely accidental
CRUELTY
People v. Sitchon, 428 P 82
Nature of cruelty lies in the fact that the culprit enjoys and delights in
making the victim suffer, which is unnecessary to the commission of
the crime
Page 6 of 60
CG Meneses
Page 7 of 60
CG Meneses
1. It is not possible to determine who among them killed the
victim (see Pineda, Lawas)
2. The accused showed a SINGLE criminal impulse (but see Art.
48, which is clear)
3. There was conspiracy
Justice Callejo: the reason of conspiracy is enough
People v. Dalmacio, 426 P 563, citing People v. Pineda
Where accused used armalites, grenades, and explosives
Ruling: Art. 48 is not applicable because:
1. The injuries were the result of successive volleys of gunshots
2. Deaths of the victims were from several shots
People v. Maghoy, 180 S 111
Art. 48 applied SINGLE ACT
People v. Peralta, 193 S 9
There are as many crimes as victims IF THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE
THAT VICTIMS DIED BY SINGLE DISCHARGE OR BULLET
People v. Mision
People v. Obillo
People v. Tabako, 270 S 32
Evidence must be presented that victim/s died of a SINGLE ACT or
BULLET or DISCHARGE OF FIREARM
DELITO COMPLEJO
(2nd portion of Art. 48)
DOES NOT APPLY IF:
1. Felony is INDISPENSABLE to another felony
2. Felony is an ESSENTIAL ELEMENT of, or MODE of, or is
ABSORBED, by another felony
3. Felony is USED TO CONCEAL another felony
Page 8 of 60
CG Meneses
2. Punishing the robber for COERCION or TRESPASS TO
DWELLING in a prosecution for ROBBERY
In these cases, the acts sought to be punished separately are
INHERENT in the commission of the crime already being prosecuted
This would NOT PREVENT the punishment of the foregoing acts
which are crimes in themselves as such if the government should
elect to prosecute the culprit specifically for those crimes and not as
elements of another
Hernandez v. People, 99 P __
Doctrine of Absorption for political crimes, i.e., rebellion, treason
How about terrorism in RA No. 9372?
Terrorism as a crime ABSORBS crimes, Art. 48 will NOT APPLY
People v. Sendaydiego
Samson v. CA, 103 P 277
Will Art. 48 apply if one of the constituent felonies is a felony by
culpa? YES
Falsification by culpa when one does not check the identity of
payees
Dissenting (JBL Reyes): Art. 48 contemplates intentional felonies
People v. Rodis, 105 P 1284
Estafa through falsification by culpa
DELITO CONTINUADO
Abduction is a continuing crime
In forcible abduction with rape, the additional rapes are absorbed, the
FIRST RAPE consummates the complex crime of forcible abduction
with rape
Page 9 of 60
CG Meneses
The moment the convict serves the MINIMUM OF THE IS, convict
may be considered for PAROLE
If the purpose was to abduct TO RAPE, RAPE only, and the taking is
absorbed as a means to carry out the intent
APPLICATION OF IS LAW
Consider
24 Aug 2009
INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW
Without IS Law, penalties are FIXED, and the specific penalty will be
a straight penalty within the range provided by law
People v. Asturias
People v. Lampara
People v. Enriquez
De Joya v. Jail Warden, 417 S 636
What about special penal laws, does IS Law apply? YES
People v. Martin Simon, 234 S 555
BUT NOTE that if the law does not follow the nomenclature of the
RPC, then aggravating and mitigating circumstances of RPC DO
NOT APPLY, ALTHOUGH JUDGES ARE NOT PROSCRIBED FROM
CONSIDERING THEM (this is because the IS Law considers the
penalty IMPOSED, NOT the penalty IMPOSABLE)
Court must take into account:
1. Circumstances of the crime
2. Circumstances of the offender
Homicide
Penalty: Reclusion temporal
No mitigating or aggravating circumstances
Minimum
Reduce by 1 degree the penalty this is the MINIMUM of the IS
Reclusion temporal lowered by 1 degree, PRISION MAYOR
NOTE that the minimum is WITHIN THE WHOLE RANGE and may
be set by the Court in its discretion, IT NEED NOT BE IN THE SAME
PERIOD as the maximum the discretion is unqualified
Maximum
If there are mitigating or aggravating circumstances, apply
modification to the MAXIMUM of the IS
When with Privileged Mitigating Circumstances
Also consider privileged mitigating circumstances, as many as there
are if these exist, REDUCE BY 1 DEGREE AS WELL
Thus:
Reclusion temporal, with privileged mitigating circumstances
Lower by 1 degree PRISION MAYOR
Lower by 1 degree following IS Law PRISION CORRECCIONAL
When Penalty Does Not Exceed 1 Year
If penalty DOES NOT EXCEED 1 year, STRAIGHT PENALTY, DO
NOT APPLY IS Law
Page 10 of 60
CG Meneses
In Relation to Art. 48
Maximum of IS follows Art. 48, BUT FOR MINIMUM, REDUCE FIRST
THE ORIGINAL PENALTY
In robbery with homicide, all other homicides after the first are
absorbed. How many sets of civil liability? AS MANY HOMICIDES
COMMITTED
Page 11 of 60
CG Meneses
27 Aug 2009
BOOK II
ART. 114 TREASON
Page 12 of 60
CG Meneses
People v. Martin
Page 13 of 60
CG Meneses
ART. 124 ARBITRARY DETENTION
Astorga v. People, 412 S 512
Elements:
1. Public officer or employee
2. Detains another
3. Without legal ground for detention
Relate to Art. 267 (kidnapping) and Art. 269 (unlawful arrest)
In Art. 267 offender is a private individual, and purpose is to
deprive liberty
In Art. 269 person is arrested without lawful cause to deliver to
judicial authorities
Arrest in Art. 124 merely INCIDENTAL
Page 14 of 60
CG Meneses
2. For delivery to judicial authorities
DETENTION
US v. Cabaag, 8 P 64
Actual confinement or any manner or deprivation of liberty
People v. Baldago, 396 S 31
Astorga v. People, 412 S 512
Curtailment of liberty NEED NOT INVOLVE PHYSICAL RESTRAINT;
liberty may be restricted by PSYCHOLOGICAL RESTRAINT
NOTE Rule 113, Sec. 5, which allows arrests without warrants
People v. Tudtud, 458 P 752 (Sec. 5[a])
David v. Arroyo
Ylagan v. Enrile (Sec. 5[b])
People v. Misa
People v. Oliva
Arbitrary detention with physical injuries complex crime
Periods imposed in Art. 124 NOT ELEMENTS of the crime
SEE Sec. 8 of the IS Law
Page 15 of 60
CG Meneses
RELATE to perjury
RELATE to Rule 126
Modes:
1. Procured search warrant without just cause felony by dolo,
must be malicious
2. Exceeds authority in executing the same uses unnecessary
severity OR seizing property not included in the warrant,
EXCEPT those in plain view
Good faith a defense
US v. Arceo, 3 P 381
Page 16 of 60
CG Meneses
ART. 134, 134-A REBELLION/INSURRECTION, COUP DETAT
Both private individuals and public employees may be liable for
rebellion or insurrection
Rebellion objective is to overthrow the government and supersede
with a new one
Insurrection objective is to effect minor change with respect to
particular matters or subjects
REBELLION
Delito continuado by nature
A political crime crime against a political order; objective is a
political purpose
There must be concurrence of:
1. Intent to achieve political objective mental act
2. Overt acts of public uprising and taking up arms
Is there FRUSTRATED rebellion? NONE, it is NOT NECESSARY
THAT THE OBJECTIVE IS OBTAINED, crime is still consummated
US v. Vergara, 3 P 432
Mere membership in the Communist Party of the Philippines is NOT
REBELLION
_____, 46 OG 4412
BUT, a person openly becoming a member of the NPA, EVEN
WITHOUT ANY PARTICIPATION IN ANY OVERT ACT, is LIABLE
FOR REBELLION, since the NPA is engaged in CONTINUING
COMBAT with the government of the Philippines
Rebellion necessarily connotes violence ABSORBS COMMON
CRIMES WHEN COMMITTED TO ATTAIN PURPOSE Art. 48
inapplicable
Page 17 of 60
CG Meneses
OBJECTIVE is IMMATERIAL
PAR. 1
Includes laws political in nature, laws in general, and civil and penal
laws
Includes ordinances
In relation to REBELLION
1. Purpose of the commission
2. Manner of commission
3. Sedition DOES NOT absorb common crimes
PAR. 2
Includes judges and the judiciary
Includes the Constitutional Commissions (Art. IX of Constitution)
PAR. 3
(and by implication, NOT INCLUDED in Par. 2)
Barangay public officers
Page 18 of 60
CG Meneses
NOT PROTECTED BY THE GUARANTEE OF FREE SPEECH OF
THE CONSTITUTION
Inciting to sedition is a misprision felony
ART. 143 PREVENTING MEETINGS
Meeting of BARANGAY COUNCIL IS NOT INCLUDED liability if
this is done will be for GRAVE COERCION
ART. 144 DISTURBANCE
May be by word or by deed
Crimes of violence are complexed with Art. 144 pursuant to Art. 48
WHEN USED AS A MEANS TO COMMIT IT OR WHEN
COMMITTED ON THE OCCASION OF THE OTHER
Page 19 of 60
CG Meneses
First Mode
People v. Recto, 419 P 674
The first mode is tantamount to rebellion or sedition WITHOUT THE
ELEMENT OF A PUBLIC UPRISING
Second Mode
Who may be victims?
Art. 152 of the RPC persons of authority AND agents of persons in
authority
Justo v. CA, 99 P 452
While engaged in the performance of duties even if at the time
of the assault the officer IS NOT PERFORMING HIS DUTIES, AS
LONG AS THE ATTACK WAS BY REASON OF HIS OFFICIAL
DUTIES, or of past official duties
Second Mode
The organizers are those guilty of Art. 146, BUT THE INCITEMENT
IS AN ELEMENT ONLY IF THE AUDIENCE IS IN FACT INCITED
Francisco
Page 20 of 60
CG Meneses
Is Art. 48 applicable? YES
Direct assault with homicide
Direct assault with frustrated or attempted homicide
BUT if SLIGHT physical injuries DO NOT COMPLEX, Art. 48
inapplicable, as this is absorbed
People v. Ladjaalam
Justo v. People
When a district supervisor of public schools assaulted another district
supervisor BEFORE ARRIVING AT AGREED PLACE where they
would fight DIRECT ASSAULT, since one in bad faith
People v. Garcia, 79 OG 4586
To lay a hand inflict physical injuries; to strike; to shove; cause
damage or injury
People v. Tabiana, 37 P 515
Force must be serious, and must be of such character as to show
contempt for authority
People v. Gumban
SLAPPING is included
Crime is QUALIFIED when a weapon is used to assault firearm,
knives
_____, 45 OG 838
It is NOT ENOUGH that a weapon was carried by the offender,
WEAPON MUST BE ACTUALLY USED TO ASSAULT
Qualifying circumstances:
1. Use of a weapon
2. When offender is himself a public officer or employee
3. When offender lays hands upon a person in authority
RELATE to RA No. 75, Sec. 6 assault on ambassador or foreign
public minister
Page 21 of 60
CG Meneses
ART. 150 DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS
SEE Senate v. Ermita, 488 S 1
RELATE to RA No. 4200, Sec. 4, and RA No. 9372, Sec. 25
Page 22 of 60
CG Meneses
NOTE that in inciting to rebellion or sedition, the act was
DELIBERATE in Art. 153, the act was SPONTANEOUS
Art. 153 is a felony by dolo, and NOT culpa
People v. Bacolod, 89 P 621
No double jeopardy in charging accused of serious physical injuries
through reckless imprudence and causing disturbance under Art. 153
even if both resulted from the defendants act of having fired a submachine gun
Villanueva v. Ortiza
Art. 153 may be a constituent crime of a complex crime may be
complexed with DIRECT ASSAULT
There is also TUMULTUOUS DISTURBANCE with HOMICIDE
Page 23 of 60
CG Meneses
How is the crime committed?
1. By violence
2. By intimidation
3. By bribery
4. By other means
1-3 higher penalty
Page 24 of 60
CG Meneses
RELATE to Art. 88, since arresto menor can be served in the house
of the defendant himself under the surveillance of an officer of the law
RELATE to Art. 8, since in Art. 157, connivance is a QUALIFYING
circumstance
10 Sept 2009
ART. 160 QUASI-RECIDIVISM
People v. Aling y Majuri, 96 S 472
Quasi-recidivism is a special aggravating circumstance, and cannot
be offset by generic mitigating circumstances
Offended party is entitled to exemplary damages when accused is
found to be a quasi-recidivist
It does not matter that the felony is a crime defined by an SPL, what
matters is WHEN THE 2ND CRIME IS PUNISHED BY AN SPL
WHICH DOES NOT APPLY THE NOMENCLATURE OF THE RPC
in this latter instance, NO quasi-recidivism, otherwise, Art. 160 may
apply
Also, IF THE 2ND CRIME IS PUNISHABLE BY RECLUSION
PERPETUA, Art. 160 DOES NOT APPLY since the latter is a single
indivisible penalty
Art. 62, par. 1 provides that aggravating circumstances which are
punished by law AS AN ELEMENT OF THE OFFENSE CHARGED
SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT in imposing the penalty
i.e., evasion of sentence included in quasi-recidivism
What about destierro? [no answer]
What if the offender is a recidivist and a quasi-recidivist?
Impose MAXIMUM OF THE MAXIMUM PENALTY
Page 25 of 60
CG Meneses
Liability is under Art. 171 if the falsification was committed by any
other mode or means than that provided in Art. 170
ART. 171 FALSIFICATION
Page 26 of 60
CG Meneses
_____, 16 CAR 2s 1393
The translation IMITATING is erroneous, since the word used in the
Spanish Penal Code is FINDIENDO, which is properly translated as
FEIGNING FEIGNING a signature DOES NOT REQUIRE
IMITATION, BUT IS A FORGERY OF A SIGNATURE THAT DOES
NOT IN FACT EXIST
COUNTERFEITING is the IMITATION of an original or genuine
signature
US v. Paraiso, 5 P 149 (see also, Paraiso v. US, 207 US 368 same
case, on writ of error to the Supreme Court of the United States)
For one to be guilty of counterfeiting a signature THERE MUST BE
AN ATTEMPT TO IMITATE THE SIGNATURE OF ANOTHER
US v. Rampas
It is NOT NECESSARY FOR THE IMITATION TO BE PERFECT it
is sufficient is there is a resemblance
People v. Isla, 42 P 485 [Justice Callejo: does not follow previous
rulings]
There must be an attempt to imitate IF THERE IS NO
RESEMBLANCE, not under par. 1 of Art. 171
PAR. 2
Bernardino v. People
The act or proceeding must in fact exist in par. 2 of Art. 171
12 Sept 2009
THUS, a public official not included in Art. 171 may be liable under
Art. 172 because he may not have taken advantage of his official
position in so doing
ALSO, Art. 171 presupposes that the officer or notary public IS THE
CUSTODIAN OF THE DOCUMENT if he issues an authenticated
copy, he is liable under Art. 171, not Art. 172
PAR. 2 [continued]
Bernardino v. People, 546 S 237
Elements:
1. Offender is a public officer or employee or notary public
2. Takes advantage of official position
3. Falsifies a document
Page 27 of 60
CG Meneses
Samson v. CA
Par. 2, Art. 171
Mallari v. People, 168 S 432
When it was made to appear that real owner mortgaged property
falsification
Accused borrowed money from 2 lenders on same occasion ONE
CRIME OF ESTAFA, delito continuado
People v. Stella Romualdez, 57 P 148
PAR. 4
Siquian v. People
Elements:
1. Offender a public officer or employee, or a notary public
2. Made untruthful statements in a narration of facts
3. Had a legal obligation to disclose the truth
People v. Yanza(?)
Must be a narration of facts, NOT CONCLUSION OF LAW
Amora, Jr. v. SB
Conviction shall not be sustained WHEN OFFENDER ACTED IN
GOOD FAITH
Page 28 of 60
CG Meneses
People v. Po Giok To
Is there legal obligation to disclose truth in residence
certificate? YES, in CA No. 465(?)
[3 CJS 905]
The alteration speaks a different language where:
1. Affects legal identity of parties
2. Affects rights, duties, and obligations
3. Changes scope of document
PAR. 5
The date altered MUST BE ESSENTIAL TO THE DOCUMENT
The alteration MUST BE INTENTIONAL
What dates?
Dates of birth, date of marriage, date of death, date of payment of
obligations
US v. Mateo, 25 P 324
Alteration must be one which causes the document to speak a
language different
PAR. 6
Garcia v. CA, citing RP v. CA, 116 S 505
Elements:
1. Person alters or changes or intercalates an entry or statement
in a document
2. Document is genuine
3. Alterations or intercalations speak something false
May be committed by any person, BUT if private individual in a
private document Art. 172 applies, AND if Art. 172 applies, then
there must be damage caused or intent to cause damage
Alterations erasures, interlineations, addition, substitution of
material matter
Pacana v. People, 47 P 48
Ignorance or mistake as to particular facts WILL, GENERALLY,
EXEMPT from liability GOOD FAITH IS A DEFENSE
PAR. 7
Two Modes:
1. Issuance in an authenticated form purporting to be a copy of
the original when no such original exists (ORIGINAL DOES
NOT EXIST)
2. Including a statement contrary to or different from original
(ORIGINAL EXISTS)
Second mode
By DOLO
Alteration must be material which changes the document
Usually committed by persons in custody of the document, including
notary public
A private individual who conspires with a public officer or notary
public is also liable under par. 7
Flores v. Layosa
Consuelo v. Mallari
Falsification of a public, official, or commercial document may be a
constituent felony under Art. 48 as a means to commit another crime
Page 29 of 60
CG Meneses
Judicial proceedings all-embracing: criminal, civil, special
proceedings
People v. Prudente, 1 CAR 759
INTENT TO CAUSE DAMAGE OR DAMAGE CAUSED, NOT AN
ELEMENT WHAT IS PUNISHED IS THE USE
ART. 177 USURPATION OF AUTHORITY
People v. Segovia
People v. Ponferrada
Samson v. CA
Batulanon v. People
PAR. 2
Dava v. People
The offender is a person other than the author of the falsification, and
uses the document as evidence in any judicial proceeding
Page 30 of 60
CG Meneses
4. complex crime delivery of prisoner from jail with use of
fictitious name (Justice Callejo)
If a person was able to conceal the escape of a convict by use of a
fictitious name 2 CRIMES
US v. Piu, 35 P 4
Fictitious name in a passport, liable? YES
What is the damage contemplated?
NOT TO A PRIVATE PERSON, BUT TO PUBLIC INTEREST
Page 31 of 60
CG Meneses
People v. Gutierrez
Serrano v. Asturias, 476 S __
Provision does not apply to false testimony in SPECIAL
PROCEEDINGS, or petition for naturalization
What applies? Art. 183, perjury
ART. 183 - PERJURY
Perjury is the willful and corrupt assertion of a falsehood under oath
or affirmation administered by authority of law on a material matter
Villanueva v. Sec. of Justice, 475 S 495
Requirements:
1. Accused made a statement under oath or executed an
affidavit upon a material matter
2. Statement or affidavit made before a competent officer,
authorized to receive and administer oath
3. Statement or affidavit contained a willful and deliberate
assertion of a falsehood
4. The statement or affidavit was required by law, or for a legal
purpose
What is material matter?
Villanueva v. Sec. of Justice
The main fact subject of the inquiry, or any circumstance which tends
to prove that fact, or any fact or circumstance which tends to
corroborate or strengthen the testimony related to the subject of the
inquiry, or which legitimately affects the credence of any witness who
testified
14 Sept 2009
ART. 203 PUBLIC OFFICERS
Agencies of the government include:
1. GOCCs
Page 32 of 60
CG Meneses
May be committed by dolo or by culpa
Agbayani v. Sayo
People v. Sandiganbayan, 451 S 413
US v. Mendoza, 23 P 194
What crime/offense?
RPC or SPL
Abuse of public position is an ELEMENT OF THE CRIMES UNDER
CHAPTER 2, SECTION 1 Arts. 204-209
What about private individuals?
Liable under PD No. 1829 and Art. 19 of the RPC, NOT UNDER ART.
208
Merencillo v. People, 521 S 31
A public officer or employee liable under Art. 208 or under Art. 209
(bribery) may also be made liable under RA No. 3019 Sec. 3
provides IN ADDITION to acts or omissions of public officers already
penalized by existing law
NOTE that prevaricacion is a constituent element of QUALIFIED
BRIBERY
ART. 210, 211 DIRECT/INDIRECT BRIBERY
Page 33 of 60
CG Meneses
De los Angeles v. People, 103 P 295
Merencillo v. People***
A comparison of the elements of the crime of bribery defined and
punished under Art. 210 and those of violation of Sec. 3(b) of RA No.
3019 shows that there is neither identity nor necessary inclusion
between the two offenses
Tad-y v. People, 466 S 474***
Elements:
1. The offender is a public officer
2. The offender accepts an offer or promise or receives a gift or
present by himself or through another
3. Acceptance is with a view to commit some crime, to do an act
which is not a crime but is unjust, or refrain from doing
something which is his official duty to do
4. The act is in connection with the performance of his official
duties
Official duties include any action authorized it is sufficient if the
officer has the official power, ability, or apparent ability to bring about
or to contribute to the desired end
It is also sufficient if the action of the officer is part of any established
procedure consistent with the authority of the government agency
BUT where the act is ENTIRELY OUTSIDE OF THE OFFICIAL
FUNCTIONS OF THE OFFICER TO WHOM THE MONEY IS
OFFERED, THE OFFENSE IS NOT BRIBERY
Use public officers definition in Art. 203
What are official duties?
Such duties with official power who can contribute to the end sought
to be achieved by bribery
Can bribery be attempted or frustrated?
ATTEMPTED yes
FRUSTRATED no
US v. Te Tong, 26 P 453
General rule always consummated
Liabilities of the Parties
RECEIVER bribery
GIVER corruption of public officer
Justice Callejo: for the giver, if bribery is attempted, offense is
ATTEMPTED CORRUPTION
First Mode
US v. Gimena, 24 P 464
It is NOT NECESSARY that the GIFT WAS RECEIVED, IT IS
ENOUGH IF THERE WAS A PROMISE from which the public official
bases his performance, or the refraining of the act, or as
consideration
What about a judge who receives a bribe to render an unjust
judgment?
TWO SEPARATE OFFENSES bribery AND knowingly rendering
unjust judgment
Soriano v. Sandiganbayan, 31 July 1984
Prevaricacion AND bribery are SEPARATE offenses do not apply
Art. 48
It is enough that the act is CONNECTED TO THE PERFORMANCE
OF DUTIES it is NOT A DEFENSE that the offender EXCEEDED
HIS AUTHORITY
Valderama v. Nagal
Receiving money on different occasions in consideration of one act
AS MANY CRIMES AS BRIBES GIVEN AND RECEIVED
Page 34 of 60
CG Meneses
NOTE the decision of the SC in Liban v. Gordon, 15 July 2009, which
overturned Camporedondo v. NLRC and declared the Philippine
National Red Cross as a private corporation as it is not owned nor
controlled by the government
Mariano Ocampo v. People, 4 Feb 2008
Ocampo, a governor of Tarlac, entered into an agreement with NGO
Lingkod Tarlac for livelihood projects, and spent the amount for other
purposes.
Are loans given by the province to a foundation in the nature of
public funds? NO, money given as a loan LOSES ITS CHARACTER
AS PUBLIC FUND OR PROPERTY even if prior to the loan is a
public fund
How is malversation committed?
Pontevida v. People, 467 S 219
1. Misappropriation
2. Taking for personal use
3. Allowing another
Concept of taking in malversation, same as that in theft
COMPLETE
Malversation may be committed by dolo or by culpa
ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER
Quenejero v. People, 397 S 465
Consider duties of the officer:
1. Custody of funds PART OF DUTY
2. Duty-bound to ACCOUNT
Bariga v. Sandiganbayan, 457 S 301
TITLE of the office is IMMATERIAL, it is the NATURE OF THE JOB
WHICH IS DECISIVE OR CONTROLLING
Frias v. People, 4 Oct 2007
Local government officials become accountable public officers either:
Page 35 of 60
CG Meneses
Giving of vale or loan from public funds prohibited by Sec. 105 of the
Government Auditing Code
Enriquez v. People, 331 S 538
The law creates a prima facie presumption of malversation WHEN AN
ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER FAILS TO ACCOUNT WHEN
DEMANDED nevertheless, THERE MUST STILL BE EVIDENCE
OF THE SHORTAGE
THERE ARE AS MANY CRIMES AS OCCASIONS WHEN MONEY
TAKEN malversation may be complexed with other crimes, BUT
NOT when the other is used TO CONCEAL the crime
San Jose v. Camorongan, 488 S 102
When the officer is not an accountable officer, NO MALVERSATION
There may be liability for MALVERSATION BY CULPA
Pontevida v. Sandiganbayan
Quimpo v. Sandiganbayan
Magsino v. People, 57 OG __
Includes objects seized by virtue of a search warrant
Magsuci v. Sandiganbayan
NOTE that abuse of public position is INHERENT in malversation
ART. 218 FAILURE TO RENDER ACCOUNT
Campomanes v. People, 511 S 285
Requisites:
1. Required by law to render account
2. Did not render account
Page 36 of 60
CG Meneses
Suppose a person arrested without a warrant who, while
undergoing preliminary investigation executed an affidavit
waiving Art. 125, and then escapes, is the officer liable? YES
Rodillas v. Sandiganbayan, 244 P 266
Petitioner acted negligently and beyond the scope of his authority
when he permitted his charge to create the situation which led to her
escape it is the duty of any police officer having custody of a
prisoner to take the necessary precautions to assure the absence of
any means to escape, and a failure in this will make his act one of
definite laxity or negligence amounting to deliberate non-performance
of duty
People v. Bandino, 29 P 249
Connivance tolerance of infraction
CONNIVING OR CONSENTING TO EVASION is penalized under
Art. 223; EVASION THROUGH NEGLIGENCE is under Art. 224
What if the officer, without conniving, ALLOWED a DETENTION
PRISONER to escape? NO LIABILITY Art. 223 requires
connivance; Art. 224 covers only prisoners by final judgment
[BUT Art. 223 also uses the word CONSENTING, and to allow is
similar to to consent; also, Art. 224 mentions prisoner merely
which is not as expressly qualified as in Art. 223 which provides that it
be by final judgment]
The OFFENDER MUST BE THE ONE IN CUSTODY OF THE
PRISONER
17 Sept 2009
Page 37 of 60
CG Meneses
BUT, IF THERE WAS NO INTENT TO KILL physical injuries
RELATE to Art. 263, par. 2 relationship is a special aggravating
circumstances
ART. 247 DEATH UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES
People v. Araquel, 106 P 677
Art. 247 does not define a felony it merely grants a privilege or
benefit amounting to an exemption
Destierro in this instance is NOT A PENALTY, but TO PROTECT
THE ACCUSED FROM REVENGE
People v. Coricor, 79 P 627
The rationale for imposing destierro is a product of twisted logic
[Justice Perfecto]
People v. Paycana
Court applied Art. 48 parricide with unintentional abortion
People v. Rubinos, 432 P __
Parricide is POSSIBLE in the ATTEMPTED and FRUSTRATED
stages
Page 38 of 60
CG Meneses
People v. Galura
Treachery inherent in use of POISON, if there is intent to kill, and the
victim dies IF THERE IS NO INTENT TO KILL, treachery is
qualifying if victim dies
General Rule
ATTEMPTED injuries are NOT life-threatening
FRUSTRATED injuries life-threatening
Page 39 of 60
CG Meneses
US v. Andrada, 5 P 464
ART. 255 INFANTICIDE
Page 40 of 60
CG Meneses
ART. 263 SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES
RELATE to Justo v. CA, where Justo hit the victim before reaching
the venue even if there was agreement to fight
Page 41 of 60
CG Meneses
Second Form
By a man OR a woman SEXUAL ASSAULT
People v. Abello, 25 Mar 2009
Elements of Sexual Assault:
1. Offender commits act of sexual assault
2. By means of inserting penis in anothers mouth or anal orifice,
OR any instrument or object into anothers genital or anal
orifice
3. Under the circumstances enumerated in Art. 266-A, par. 1
Page 42 of 60
CG Meneses
What if the crime was committed with the use of a weapon, and
committed by two persons? BOTH QUALIFY THE CRIME, no legal
basis to use the other as generic since either is not in Art. 14
BUT this can be a basis for imposition of exemplary damages,
following People v. Catubig
People v. Almanzor, 433 P 667
If LICENSED FIREARM is used QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE
If UNLICENSED FIREARM is used NOT AGGRAVATING,
NEITHER IS IT A SEPARATE CRIME
RAPE WITH HOMICIDE/ATTEMPTED RAPE WITH HOMICIDE
Special complex crime, DO NOT APPLY Art. 48
Homicide MUST BE CONSUMMATED
Must be committed BY REASON of the rape
People v. Ramos, 94 S 842
BY REASON with a logical connection
LIABILITIES
If the accused TRANSMITS STD TO THE VICTIM AND VICTIM DIES
RAPE WITH HOMICIDE
People v. Honra, Jr., 295 P 299
If homicide is NOT consummated, there are TWO CRIMES (what
about attempted homicide with rape?)
What if the victim suffers serious or less serious physical
injuries?
People v. Apiado, 53 P 325
Apply Art. 48 SINGLE ACT
People v. Lizada
PREPARATORY ACTS may be ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS IF
THERE IS NO INTENT TO LIE WITH THE VICTIM
People v. Cordonio, 319 P 169
If the PURPOSE is TO RAPE RAPE
Page 43 of 60
CG Meneses
If the court looks at the victim to determine age, THIS IS NOT
JUDICIAL NOTICE, but a VIEW OF OBJECT EVIDENCE
What is the probative weight of this view by the judge?
Depends on each case; this is but an approximation of age, NOT
ACTUAL PROOF
People v. Garcia, 346 P 475
People v. Delantar, 514 S 115
Guardian legal or judicial guardian
People v. Watiwat, 410 S 324
People v. Morillo, 434 P 743
Under custody of police or military CONVICT OR DETENTION
PRISONER
PARDON
Pardon of one of the principals, by marriage, affects the
ACCOMPLICES and/or ACCESSORIES, BUT NOT THE OTHER
PRINCIPALS the only benefit the other principals will derive is with
respect to a lesser count of the commission of the offense
ART. 267 KIDNAPPING
Committed by a PRIVATE individual, otherwise, crime is ARBITRARY
DETENTION
People v. Pickerell, 414 S 19
Although the victim may have consented initially, but subsequently
wanted to return or go back KIDNAPPING
Serious Illegal Detention deprivation of liberty in whatever form
People v. Astorga, 283 S 420
People v. Mercy Santos, 283 S 543
Length of detention is IRRELEVANT
Page 44 of 60
CG Meneses
respect to murder WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED GENERIC
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
Kidnapping is moved by a SPECIFIC INTENT intent TO DEPRIVE
LIBERTY
If the detention is merely INCIDENTAL to the killing MURDER,
NOT KIDNAPPING (same rule applies to rape if detention is merely
incidental, crime is rape)
KIDNAPPING WITH RANSOM
Mere INTENT TO DEMAND is enough, no need for actual demand
in fact, NO NEED FOR ACTUAL MONEY DEMAND, ANY OTHER
BENEFIT IS SUFFICIENT
People v. Mesina, 142 S 761/671
The victim is already dead but offender still asked for ransom
MURDER, not kidnapping with murder or kidnapping with ransom
People v. Regala
People v. Reynes, 423 P 363, cited in Muit
People v. Salvilla
People v. Larraaga
Dehumanization deprivation of qualities of humanity, i.e.,
compassion to victim
People v. Astorga
If victim is NOT YET LOCKED UP, GRAVE COERCION, not
kidnapping
5 Oct 2009
[continued]
If KILLING is merely an AFTERTHOUGHT kidnapping with rape
OR kidnapping with homicide
In kidnapping with homicide or rape, the homicide or rape MUST BE
CONSUMMATED if merely ATTEMPTED or FRUSTRATED either
TWO SEPARATE CRIMES, or Art. 48 will apply
Is there a complex crime of kidnapping WITH MURDER? YES,
People v. Mercado, 346 S 256, but the qualifying circumstances with
Page 45 of 60
CG Meneses
Fortuno v. People, 426 S __
ART. 286 GRAVE COERCIONS
Page 46 of 60
CG Meneses
US v. Albao
Theft of DANGEROUS DRUGS possible, or robbery, if with VIP or
FUT
What if AFTER the taking, VIP committed? THEFT, NOT
ROBBERY, except when it comes within the special complex crimes
or robbery with homicide or rape as the case may be
What is intimidation?
Sazon v. Sandiganbayan, 10 Feb 2009
Intimidation is unlawful coercion, extortion, duress, or putting in fear.
In robbery with VIP, the intimidation consists in causing or creating
fear in the mind of a person or bringing in a sense of mental distress
in view of a risk or evil that may be impending, real or imagined
What about SNATCHING?
Liability depends
if NO INJURY committed
If with VIP
THEFT
ROBBERY
People v. Reyes
The owner of a property who STEALS HIS OWN PROPERTY WHEN
UNDER THE CUSTODY OR IN THE POSSESSION OF A BAILEE
liable for either robbery or theft as the case may be
PERSONAL PROPERTY
Any property no defined as real property by the Civil Code, AND
capable of APPROPRIATION
Page 47 of 60
CG Meneses
What if victim was killed first, and his property was taken?
HOMICIDE AND THEFT, theft merely an afterthought
NOTE that INTENT to rob IS NOT THE ONLY GAUGE OF
LIABILITY(?)
People v. Tidong, 225 S 324
Intent TO GAIN is enough, even if there is no intent to rob
What about multiple deaths? INCLUDED, no crime of robbery with
MULTIPLE homicide
People v. Caroso
People v. Quejada, 425 S __
ROBBERY WITH RAPE
Rape ACCOMPANIED the robbery
Thus, original intent is to ROB
Rape MUST BE CONSUMMATED
What if robbery is a mere afterthought after rape and killing?
RAPE WITH HOMICIDE AND THEFT
What about multiple rapes? INCLUDED, and irrespective of
number of times
People v. Suyu
SEXUAL ASSAULT IS ABSORBED by robbery with rape there is
no such crime as robbery with sexual assault
People v. Angeles, 224 S 251
Rape is not to be complexed IF IT DID NOT ACCOMPANY THE
ROBBERY, meaning, the RAPE IS NOT DONE AT THE SITUS OF
THE ROBBERY
Page 48 of 60
CG Meneses
7 Oct 2009
ART. 306 BRIGANDAGE
RELATE Arts. 306 and 307 to PD No. 532
Highway robbery may be committed by only one person, provided
that there is evidence that on prior occasions the accused have been
engaged in similar robberies attempts or prior consummation
The SC has ruled that uninhabited place in Art. 302 actually means
uninhabited HOUSE (in contrast to Art. 299)
Page 49 of 60
CG Meneses
Laurel v. Judge Abrogar, 13 Jan 2009
What is personal property that may be the object of theft? Any
property, tangible or intangible, corporeal or incorporeal, capable of
appropriation
Is business capable of appropriation? YES, under Sec. 2 of the
Bulk Sales Law
Is there such a thing as theft of services? YES, the petitioners use
of Laurels communications facilities without PLDTs permission is
theft a voice call is transmitted as electricity, and electricity, from
the Civil Code, is personal property, and thus, international or
domestic telephone service may be the subject of theft
What are covered as personal properties?
1. Intangibles
2. Electrical energy
3. Gas
4. Commercial documents
5. Checks
6. Promissory notes
7. Invoices
8. Evidence in credit, even if credit is valueless
THUS, appropriation of forces of nature under the control of man by
means of tampering, may now be penalized as theft
San Jose v. Kamurungan, 488 S 102
People v. De Leon, 49 P 437
If theft of several property is committed in one occasion, even if
owned by different people, ONE THEFT single criminal intent
Lauro Santos v. People, 29 Jan 1990
When no repairs made on a car delivered by owner, and shop owner
sold the same to another person THEFT
Page 50 of 60
CG Meneses
People v. Sison, 322 S 345
Accused, branch manager of a bank, took money from vault of bank
QUALIFIED THEFT
People v. Lucson, 57 P 325
How about bank teller? QUALIFIED THEFT, not merely theft
People v. Bago, 330 S 115
Person in-charge of materials and head of the department
QUALIFIED THEFT
Rebucan v. People, 507 S 332
Cashier of a company or a bank QUALIFIED THEFT
People v. Mercado, 397 S 746
Manager of a jewelry store QUALIFIED THEFT
People v. Seranilla, 244 P 295
Trusted employee connives with a non-employee? ONLY
EMPLOYEE LIABLE FOR QUALIFIED THEFT, person who
connives, with no relation to company, SIMPLE THEFT (even if there
is conspiracy)
MAIL MATTER
Avecilla v. People, 11 June 1992
Mail matter subject of qualified theft RA No. 7354 all matters
authorized by the government to be delivered through the postal
service; includes letters, parcels, printed materials, money orders
Does not matter if registered mail matter or not
Marcelo v. Sandiganbayan, 302 S 102
Whether employee or not qualified theft; private individual who
steals mail matter
CARNAPPING
Art. 310 amended by RA No. 6539
Page 51 of 60
CG Meneses
Page 52 of 60
CG Meneses
Castrodes v. Ponelo, 83 S 670
If accused usurps real rights of another, and commits violence by
killing another TWO CRIMES usurpation, and homicide
NO crime of usurpation with homicide
ART. 315 ESTAFA
MISAPPROPRIATION/CONVERSION
Salazar v. People, 437 S 41
Elements:
1. Money, goods, or other personalty received by offender in
trust or on commission or for administration, with duty to
return the SAME (not a substitute)
2. Misappropriation or conversion OR denial of having received
property
3. To the prejudice of another
4. There is demand by the other party
US v. Pascual, 10 P __
Goods or property anything which, owing to its value, may be an
article of trade; includes documents, deeds of sale, PNs, checks,
receipts
Murao v. People, 462 S 366
Phrase with obligation to return the same thing contracts of
bailment, i.e., lease, personal property, lease, commodatum, deposit
Page 53 of 60
CG Meneses
Estafa is malum in se
Page 54 of 60
CG Meneses
TAKING UNDUE ADVANTAGE OF SIGNATURE
Prejudice same prejudice as in par. 1(b)
Crime is committed with abuse of confidence
Ang v. Lucero, 449 S 157
Page 55 of 60
CG Meneses
Lopez v. People, 555 S 523***
It is criminal fraud or deceit in the issuance of a check which is made
punishable under the Revised Penal Code, and not the nonpayment
of a debt
Deceit the false representation of a matter of fact whether by words
or conduct by false or misleading allegations or by concealment of
that which should have been disclosed which deceives or is intended
to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury
Fraudulent concealment implies a purpose or design to hide facts
which the other party ought to have
The postdating or issuing of a check in payment of an obligation when
the offender had no funds in the bank or his funds deposited therein
are not sufficient to cover the amount of the check is a false pretense
or a fraudulent act
People v. Ojeda, 430 S 436
For the drawer of the check to be liable, prosecution must prove that
the deceit or fraudulent means existed AT THE TIME OF THE
ISSUANCE OF THE CHECK
People v. Panganiban, 390 P 673
Prosecution must prove that offender obtained goods or money BY
REASON OF THE CHECK, whether the check postdated or not
People v. Cuyugan, 390 S 140
Offended party WOULD NOT HAVE PARTED WITH HIS MONEY
WERE IT NOT FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THE CHECK
Nagrampa v. People, 445 P 440
Check should have been issued AS AN INDUCEMENT, NOT IN
PAYMENT OF A PRE-EXISTING OBLIGATION
Check issued in payment of a pre-existing obligation DOES NOT
CONSTITUTE ESTAFA even if at the time the check was issued, no
funds in account against which check was drawn in the issuance of
a check in payment of a pre-existing obligation, THE OFFENDER
DOES NOT DERIVE ANY BENEFIT OR CONSIDERATION AT THE
Page 56 of 60
CG Meneses
People v. Cuyugan
People v. Pacheco
If check issued, without funds, is a guarantee in payment of obligation
of another person DRAWER OF CHECK NOT LIABLE FOR
ESTAFA because it is only an evidence of the loan
People v. Gullion
Recuerdo v. People, 493 S 547
Criminal intent and intent to defraud ARE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS
OF THE CRIME GOOD FAITH IS A DEFENSE
If at the time of the issuance of the check, no funds, but at the time
amount was due, there are funds, NO ESTAFA
Page 57 of 60
CG Meneses
Dumagsang v. CA, 5 Dec. 2000
Notice of dishonor MUST BE IN WRITING
May person other than drawer be liable for estafa on account of
the dishonored check?
Andan v. People, 484 S 611
Person other than drawer of a check IS LIABLE FOR ESTAFA IF HE
CONSPIRES WITH THE DRAWER OF THE CHECK TO DECEIVE
OR DEFRAUD the offended party
Sagado v. CA, 170 S 146
People v. Sagado
ONE MAY BE LIABLE FOR BOTH ESTAFA AND BP 22
People v. Nitafan, 215 S __
In BP 22, mere issuance of the check a violation, EVEN IF PAYMENT
OF PRE-EXISTING OBLIGATION
FRAUDULENT MEANS
Inducing another to sign a document
RELATE to Art. 298 violence or intimidation
This provision deceit
Under BOTH the victim who signs and delivers the document
assumes a legal obligation so that offender gains
The document MUST BE A COMPLETE DOCUMENT
Evangelista v. People, 277 S __***
Where the victim was deceived by the petitioner to part with his
money in exchange for winning a game ESTAFA
Page 58 of 60
CG Meneses
People v. Regalado, 1 P 125
Relate to Art. 2125 of the Civil Code, which requires recording
Page 59 of 60
CG Meneses
ART. 349 BIGAMY
Manuel v. People, 470 S 461
Elements:
1. He has been legally married
2. He contracts a subsequent marriage without the former
marriage having been lawfully dissolved
Page 60 of 60
CG Meneses