The law does not apply when the

foreign country adversely affected does

not provide similar protection to our
diplomatic representatives.

LUCIA M. HIPOLITO -- ROMMEL K. MANWONG -- ALFIE P.

SARMIENTO
CRIMINAL LAW
(REVISED PENAL CODE - BOOK I)

(c) Principles of Public International

Law

CRIMINAL LAW DEFINED

Persons
exempt
from
the
operations of our criminal laws by virtue
of the principles of public international
law:
1) Sovereigns and other chiefs of
state;
2) Ambassadors;
3) Ministers plenipotentiary;
4) Ministers resident; and
5) Charges d affaires.

Criminal Law is that branch or division of law which

defines crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their
punishment.
When did the Revised Penal Code take effect?
The Revised Penal Code took effect on January 1,
1932 (Art. 1, RPC).
Characteristics of Criminal Law

It is well established principle of

international
law
that
diplomatic
representatives, such as ambassadors
or public ministers and their official
retinue, possess immunity from the
criminal jurisdiction of the country of
their sojourn and cannot be sued,
arrested or punished by the law of that
country.

Criminal Law has three main characteristics,

namely (1) general, (2) territorial, and (3) prospective.
A.

General Application
It has General application because Criminal
Law is binding on all persons who reside or sojourn in
Philippine territory.
Art. 2 of the Revised Penal Code states that
the provisions of this Code shall be enforced within the
Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, interior
waters and maritime zone, without reference to the
person or persons who might violate any of its provisions.
Art. 14 of the Civil Code provides that penal
laws shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in
Philippine territory.

Nota Bene:
A consul is not entitled to the
privileges and immunities of an
ambassador or minister.
B. Territorial Application

Exceptions to the General Application of Criminal

It is Territorial, in that criminal law undertakes

to punish crimes committed within the Philippine territory.

There are cases where our Criminal Law does not

apply even if the crime is committed by a person residing
or sojourning in the Philippines. They constitute the
exceptions.

Art. 2 of the Revised Penal Code states that

the provisions of this Code shall be enforced within the
Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its
interior waters and maritime zone, which constitute the
Philippine territory.

Law

(1)

(2)

The opening sentence of Art. 2 of the

Revised Penal Code says that the provisions of
this Code shall be enforced within the Philippine
Archipelago, except as provided in the treaties
and laws of preferential application.
Art. 14 of the Revised Penal Code provides
that penal laws and those of public security and
safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or
sojourn in Philippine territory, subject to the
principles of public international law and to
treaty stipulations.
(a) Treaty or Treaty Stipulations
An example of treaty or treaty
stipulation, as an exception to the
general application of our Criminal Law
is the Base Agreement entered into by
and between the Philippines and the
USA on March 14, 1947 stipulating that
the Philippines consents that the US
have the right to exercise jurisdiction
over
some
particular
offenses.
However, the said Military Bases
Agreement
already
expired
on
September 16, 1991.
(b) Law on Preferential Application
Republic Act No. 75 may be
considered a law of preferential
application in favor of diplomatic
representatives and their domestic
servants.
It is a law to penalize acts which
would impair the proper observance by
the Republic and inhabitants of the
Philippines of the immunities, rights,
and privileges of duly accredited foreign
diplomatic
representatives
in
the
Philippines.

Extent of Philippine Territory for Purposes of Criminal

Law:
Art. 2 of the Revised Penal Code provides that the
provisions of said Code shall be enforced within the Philippine
Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and
maritime zone.
Art. 1 of the 1987 Constitution provides as follows:
The national territory comprises the Philippine
Archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein,
and all other territories over which the Philippines has
sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial
and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed,
the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas.
The waters around, between and connecting the islands of the
Archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form
part of the internal waters of the Philippines.
Exceptions to the Territorial Application of Criminal
Law
Art. 2 of the Revised penal Code provides:
Except as provided in the treaties and laws of
preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be
enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including
its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but also
outside of its jurisdiction against those who:
1)
2)

3)
4)
5)

Nota Bene:

6)

Should commit an offense while on a Philippine

ship or airship;
Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency
note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and
securities issued by the Government of the Philippine
Islands;
Should be liable for acts connected with the
introduction into these islands of the forged or
counterfeited obligations and securities;
While being public officers or employees, should
commit an offense in the exercise of their functions;
or
Should commit any of the crimes against
national security and the law of nations;
Should destroy or cause destruction to the
maritime/marine zone, the Exclusive Economic Zone
(EEZ) and the natural resources within the EEZ of the
Philippines.

C. Prospectivity of Criminal Laws

C. CHARACTERISTICS OF ECLECTIC THEORY

It is Prospective, in that a penal law

cannot make an act punishable when committed.
Crimes are punished under the laws in force at the
time of their commission
Art. 21 of the Revised Penal Code
provides that no felony shall be punishable by any
penalty not prescribed by law prior to its
commission.
Art. 366 of the Revised Penal Code
provides that felonies are punishable under the laws
enforced at the time of their commission.

What are felonies (Delitos)?

Felonies are acts and omissions punishable by
law (Art. 3, 1st par., RPC).
What are the two ways of committing felonies?
How are felonies committed?
Felonies are committed by means of deceit
(dolo) or by means of fault (culpa).
Elements of Felonies:

Exception to the Prospective Application of

Criminal Laws

1. That there must be an act or omission.

2. That the act or omission must be punishable
by the Revised Penal Code (RPC).
3. That the act is performed or the omission
incurred by means of dolo or culpa.
4. That the act or omission must have been
voluntarily.

Whenever a new statute dealing with crime

establishes conditions more lenient or favorable to the
accused, it can be given a retroactive effect.
Exceptions to the Exception:
This exception
following instances:

has

no

application

in

the

When is there deceit?

There is deceit when the act is performed with
deliberate intent.

(1) where the new law is expressly made

inapplicable to pending actions or
existing causes of actions.
(2) Where the offender is a habitual
delinquent/criminal under Art. 62 of
the Revised Penal Code.

Requisites of Intentional Felonies

Nota Bene:

In order that an act or omission may be

considered as having been performed or incurred with
deliberate intent, the following requisites must concur:

The new law can still be given a

retroactive effect if the offender is a Recidivist.

1. The offender must have FREEDOM while

doing an act or omitting to do an act;
2. The offender must have INTELLIGENCE while
doing the act or omitting to do the act; and

THEORIES IN CRIMINAL LAW

There are three theories in criminal law, namely: (1)
classical theory, (2) positivist theory, and (3) eclectic
theory.
A.

3. The offender must have INTENT while doing

the act or omitting to do the act.
NECESSITY OF FREEDOM

CHARACTERISTICS OF CLASSICAL THEORY

When a person acts without freedom, he is no

longer a human being but a tool. His liability is as much
as that of the knife that wounds, or of the torch that sets
fire, or of the key that opens a door, or of the ladder that
placed against the wall of a house in committing robbery.

1. The basis of criminal liability is human tree will

and the purpose of the penalty it retribution.
2. That man is essentially a moral creature with an
absolutely free will to choose between good and evil,
thereby placing more stress upon the effect or result of
the felonious act than upon the man, the criminal
himself.
3. It has endeavoured to establish a mechanical and
direct proportion between crime and penalty.
4. There is a scant regard to the human element.
B.

Example:
The following have no freedom: (a) a person
who acts under the compulsion of an irresistible force, or
(b) a person who acts under the impulses of an
uncontrollable fear of an equal of greater injury. Thus,
they are exempt from criminal liability under Art. 12,
paragraphs 5 and 6 respectively of the Revised Penal
Code.

CHARACTERISTICS OF POSITIVIST THEORY

1. That man is subdued occasionally by a strange

and morbid phenomenon which constraints him to do
wrong, in spite of or contrary to his volition.
2. That crime is essentially a social and natural
phenomenon, and as such, (a) it cannot be treated and
checked by the application of abstract principles of law
and jurisprudence nor by the imposition of a punishment
fixed and determined a priori; (b) but rather through the
enforcement of individual investigation conducted by a
competent body of psychiatrist and social scientists.

NECESSITY OF INTELLIGENCE
Intelligence is a necessary factor in determining
the morality of a particular act. Thus without this power,
no crime can exist.
Example:

www.rkmfiles.net

The following are exempt from criminal liability

because of the absence of intelligence:

(1)

(1) An imbecile or an insane person, unless the

latter has acted during a lucid interval (Art.
12, (1), RPC);
(2) A person under nine (9) years of age (Art.
12, (2), RPC);
(3) A person over nine (9) years of age and
under fifteen (15), unless he has acted with
discernment (Art. 12, (3), RPC).

(2)

By any person committing a felony (delito)

although the wrongful act done be different
from that which he intended.
By any person performing an act which
would be an offense against persons or
property, were it not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment or on
account of the employment of inadequate
or ineffectual means (Art. 4, RPC).

Notes:
Under paragraph 1 of Art. 4, a person
committing a felony is criminally liable although the
wrongful act done be different from that which he
intended.

NECCESSITY OF INTENT
Intent to commit he act with malice, being
purely a mental process, is presumed and the
presumption arises from the proof of the commission of
an unlawful act.

The causes which may produce a result different

from that which the offender intended are:

Nota Bene:

1. error in personae or mistake in the identity of

the victim;
2. aberratio ictus or mistake in the blow, that is,
when the offender intending to do an injury to one
person actually inflicts it on another; and
3. praeter intentionem or when the injurious
result is greater than that intended or the act exceeds
the intent.

All the three requisites of voluntariness in

intentional felony must be present because a voluntary
act is a free, intelligent, and intentional act.
When is there fault?
There is fault when the wrongful act results from
imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.

Requisites:

Requisites of Culpa

In order that a person may be held criminally

liable for a felony different from that which he intended
to commit, the following must be present:

In order that the act or omission in felonies

committed by means of fault or culpa may be considered
voluntary, the following must concur:
(1) The offender must have FREEDOM while
doing the act or omitting to do the act;
(2) The offender must have INTELLIGENCE
while doing the act or omitting to do the
act; and
(3) The offender is IMPRUDENT, NEGLIGENT or
LACKS FORESIGHT or SKILL while doing the
act or omitting to do the act.

(1) That an intentional felony has been

committed; and
(2) That the wrong done to the aggrieved party
be the direct, natural and logical
consequence of the felony committed by
the offender.
In simple words, the felony committed must be
the proximate cause of the resulting injury.
PROXIMATE CAUSE DEFINED

Felonies are classified according to the means

by which they are committed into:

That cause, which in natural and continuous

sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause,
produces the injury, and without which the result would
not have occurred.

(1) Intentional Felonies or felonies committed

with malice or deliberate intent, and
(2) Culpable Felonies or felonies committed as
a result of imprudence, negligence, lack of
foresight or lack of skill.

The felony committed is not the proximate

cause of the resulting injury
(1) when there is an active force that
intervened between the felony committed
and the resulting injury, and the active
force is a distinct act or fact absolutely
foreign from the felonious act of the
accused, or
(2) when the resulting injury is due to the
intentional act of the victim.

GENERAL CLASSES OF CRIMES

1. Intentional Felonies;
2. Culpable Felonies; and
3. Those crimes defined and penalized by special laws,
which include crimes punishable by municipal or city
ordinances.
The first two are defined and penalized under
the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines.

IMPOSSIBLE CRIME

Who incurs criminal liability?

Paragraph 2 of Article 4 of the Revised Penal

Code defines impossible crime, to wit, an act which
would be an offense against persons or property. Were it
not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment

Criminal liability shall be incurred:

www.rkmfiles.net

or on account of the employment of inadequate or

ineffectual means.

In impossible crime, the act performed should

not constitute anoher offense, specifically punished by
law.

Why are impossible crimes punishable?

Example of an impossible crime where the means

employed is inadequate

The commission of an impossible crime is

indicative of criminal propensity or criminal tendency on
the part of the actor. Such person is a potential criminal.
Objectively, the offender does not commit a felony, but
subjectively he is a criminal.

Using small quantity of arsenic or poison to kill

a person. The small quantity of poison is inadequate to
kill a person. But the one who used it to kill another is
liable for impossible crime, because subjectively he is a
criminal.

According to the positivist way of thinking, the

community must be protected from anti-social activities,
whether actual or potential, of the morbid type of man
called socially dangerous person.

Example of an impossible crime where the means

employed is ineffectual.

Requisites of Impossible Crime

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Believing that certain white powder was arsenic

or poison, A mixed it with the coffee intended for B.
When B drank it he was not injured at all, because the
white powder was sugar.

That the act performed would be an

offense against persons or property.
That the act was done with evil intent.
That is accomplishment is inherently
impossible, or that the means employed is
either inadequate or ineffectual.
That the act performed should not
constitute a violation of another provision
of the Revised Penal Code.

What is the penalty for impossible crime?

The penalty for impossible crime is arresto
mayor or a fine from 200 to 500 pesos (Art. 59, RPC).
What factors must be considered by the court in
determining the proper penalty for impossible
crime?

Example of an Impossible Crime, where the act

performed by the offender would have been an offense
against persons were it not for the inherent impossibility
of its accomplishment.

The factors that must be considered by the

court in determining the proper penalty are: (1) the
social danger and (2) the degree of criminality shown by
the offender (Art. 59, RPC).

Stabbing a person lying on bed, the offender

having the intent to kill him and thinking that he was
only sleeping, when in fact that person had already been
dead before he stabbed him. The ac performed by the
offender would have been murder, an offense against
persons, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment, it being impossible to kill a person who
is already dead.

Case:
A fired his revolver at B from a distance of one
kilometer. Is A criminally liable?
Ans.:
No. It is believed that A shows stupidity rather
than dangerousness. According to the positivist theory, A
should not be punished, because there is neither social
danger nor any degree of criminality shown by him.
Even subjectively, a man with little common sense will
know that he cannot hit a person by firing a revolver one
kilometer away.

Example of an impossible crime, where the act

performed by the offender would have been an offense
against property were it not for the inherent impossibility
of its accomplishment.
Picking the pocket of another, without his
knowledge and consent, to take with intent to gain any
personal property from that pocket which turned out to
be empty. The act performed by the offender would have
been theft, an offense against property, were it not for
the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment, since
theft cannot be committed when there is no personal
property that could be taken.

What is the duty of the court in connection with

acts, which should be repressed, but which are not
covered by the law?
Whenever a court has knowledge of any act
which it may deem proper to repress and which s not
punishable by law, it shall render the proper decision,
and shall report to the Chief Executive, through the
Department of Justice, the reasons which induce the
court to believe that said act should be made the subject
of legislation (Art. 5, 1st paragraph, RPC).

Case:

A picked the pocket of B and succeeded in

extracting Bs wallet. Once in possession of the wallet, A
opened it, but finding it empty, he threw away the wallet.
Is A guilty of an impossible crime?

What is the duty of the court in cases of excessive

penalties?

Ans:

No, because the wallet has some value and the

crime of theft is consummated from the moment the
offender has taken possession of the wallet with intent to
gain. Hence, that person is guilty, not of an impossible
crime, but of theft.

Whenever the court finds that a strict

enforcement of the provisions of the Revised Penal Code
would result in the imposition of a clearly excessive
penalty, taking into consideration the degree of malice
and the injury caused by the offense, the court shall
submit to the Chief Executive, through the Department
of Justice, such statement as may be deemed proper,

Nota Bene:

www.rkmfiles.net

without suspending the execution of the sentence (Art. 5,

2nd paragraph, RPC).

Frustrated Felony Distinguished from Attempted

Felony

What are the three stages of the acts execution of

a felony?

1. In both, the offender has not accomplished

his criminal purpose.
2. In frustrated felony, the offender has
performed all the acts of execution which would produce
the felony, while in attempted felony, the offender
merely commences the commission of a felony directly
by overt acts and does not perform all the acts of
execution.

The three stages of execution of a felony are

attempted, frustrated and consummated.
Are these stages of execution punishable?
Consummated felonies, as well as those which
are frustrated and attempted, are punishable (Art. 6, 1 st
paragraph, RPC).

In other words, in frustrated felony, the offender

has reached the objective phase; in attempted felony,
the offender has not passed the subjective phase.

Nota Bene:
Discretion prudence discernment verdict
When the crime is punishable by a special law,
the attempted and frustrated stages of the acts of
execution are not punishable, unless the special law
provides a penalty therefor.

SUBJECTIVE PHASE
It is that portion of the execution of the crime,
starting from the point where the offender begins to that
point where he has still control over his acts, including
their natural course.

When is a felony attempted?

OBJECTIVE PHASE

A felony is attempted when the offender

commences the commission of a felony directly by over
acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution
which should produce the felony by reason of some
cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
desistance (Art. 6, 3rd paragraph, RPC).

It is that portion of the acts of the offender,

where he has no more control over the same. All the acts
of execution have been performed by him.
Attempted Felony/Frustrated Felony Distinguished
from Impossible Crime

Elements of Attempted Felony

1. In attempted or frustrated felony and

impossible crime, the evil intent of the offender is not
accomplished.
2. In impossible crime, the evil intent of the
offender cannot be accomplished; in attempted or
frustrated felony the evil intent of the offender is
possible of accomplishment.

1. The offender commences the commission of the felony

directly by overt acts;
2. He does not perform all the acts of execution which
should produce the felony;
3. The offenders act be not stopped by his own
spontaneous desistance; and
4. The non-performance of all the acts of execution was
due to cause or accident other than his own
spontaneous desistance.

3. In impossible crime, the evil intent of the

offender cannot be accomplished or because the means
employed by the offender is inadequate or ineffectual; in
attempted or frustrated felony, what prevented its
accomplishment is the intervention of certain cause or
accident in which the offender had no part.

The external acts must have a direct connection

with the crime intended to be committed by the offender.

Are there felonies that have no attempted or

frustrated stages of execution? If yes what are
they?

What is an indeterminate offense?

It is one where the purpose of the offender in
performing an act is not certain. Its nature in relation to
its objective is ambiguous.

Yes there are felonies that have no attempted

and frustrated felonies. They are:
(1) flight to enemy country,
(2) corruption of minors,
(3) formal crimes, lie slander ad false
testimony;
(4) felonies by omission like misprision of
treason; and
(5) treason.

When is a felony frustrated?

A felony is frustrated when the offender
performs all the acts of execution which would produce
the felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do
not produce it by reason of causes independent of the
will of the perpetrator (Art. 6, 2nd paragraph, RPC).

The crime of flight to enemy country has no

attempted and frustrated stages of execution because in
flight to enemy country, the mere attempt to flee or go
to enemy country consummates the crime.
The same is true with the crime of corruption of
minors. The mere proposal to the minor to satisfy the
lust of another consummates the crime.
In formal crimes, there are no attempted and
frustrated stages of execution because they are
consummated in one instant by a single act.

Elements of Frustrated Felony

1. The offender performs all the acts of execution;
2. All the acts performed would produce the felony as a
consequence;
3. The felony is not produce ;
4. By reason of causes independent of the will of the
perpetrator.

www.rkmfiles.net

In felonies by omission, there is either a felony

when the offender fails to perform an act required by law
to be done, or no felony, if the offender performs the act.
In treason, the overt act I itself constitutes the
crime.

a)
b)

possession
of
picklocks
which
is
preparatory to the commission of robbery
with force upon things;
possession of unlicensed firearm.

Nota Bene:

Nota Bene:

The above mentioned acts are

punished by law not a preparatory acts but
as a distinct crime i.e. possession of
picklocks defined and punished under Art.
304 of the Revised penal Code and illegal
possession of firearm defined and punished
under P.D. 1866 as amended by R.A. 8294.

In the case of People versus Orita,

184 SCRA 1905, the Supreme Court
held there is no such crime as
Frustrated Rape. Rape could either
be attempted of consummated.
When is a felony consummated?

When are light felonies punishable under the

Revised Penal Code?

A felony is consummated when all the elements

necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
present (Art. 6, 2nd paragraph, RPC).
Every crime has its own elements which must
all be present to constitute a culpable violation of a
precept of law.

As a general rule, light felonies are punishable

only when they have been consummated (Art. 7, RPC).
Example of light felonies which are punishable
only when consummated.

What is an overt act?

1. Betting in sport contest,

2. Illegal cock-fighting, and
3. Intriguing against honor.

An overt act is physical activity, more than a

mere planning or preparation, which evinces the
intention of the offender to commit a particular felony.

Nota Bene:

In what stage of the acts of execution is it

important to determine the existence of the overt
act?

These light felonies are

punishable
only
when
consummated because they are not
against persons or property and,
hence, they are covered by the
general rule.

The existence of the overt act is important only

in the attempted stage of the acts of execution.
It is not necessary to determine the existence of
overt act in the other stages of execution, because in
frustrated stage, as well as in the consummated stage of
execution, the offender has performed all the acts of
execution which necessarily implies that the offender has
done more than an overt act.

Reason for the rule:

Light felonies produce such sight, such
insignificant moral and material injuries that public
conscience is satisfied with providing alight penalty for
their consummation. If they are not consummated, the
wrong done is so light that there is no need of providing
a penalty at all.

What is a preparatory act? Give at least two

examples.
Preparatory acts are those initial acts of a
person who has conceived the idea of committing a
crime, but which cannot by themselves logically and
necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. They are not
even overt acts and hence, they do not constitute the
attempted stage of the acts of execution.
The examples of preparatory acts are (1)
conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony, and (2)
buying or securing weapon to commit a crime, i.e.
murder, homicide, robbery, etc.

Is there any exception?

Yes, there is. Light felonies committed against
persons or properties are punishable even if they are
only in the attempted or frustrated stage of execution
(Art. 7, RPC).
Reason for the exception
The commission of felonies against persons or
property presupposes in the offender some moral
depravity

Are preparatory acts punishable?

Generally, preparatory acts are not punishable
because the law regards the as innocent or at least
permissible, except in rare and exceptional cases.

WHEN IS THERE CONSPIRACY?

A conspiracy exists when to or more persons
come to an agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it (Art. 8, 2 nd paragraph,
RPC).

The following preparatory acts are punishable:

1. conspiracy to commit treason, rebellion and sedition;
2. proposal to commit treason and rebellion; and
3. preparatory acts which are considered in themselves,
by law, as independent crimes like the following:

Requisites of Conspiracy
1. That two pr more persons came to an agreement;

www.rkmfiles.net

2. That the agreement concerned the commission of

a felony; and
3. That the execution of the felony be decided upon.

What are less grave felonies?

Less grave felonies are those which the law
punishes with penalties which in their maximum period
are correctional, in accordance with Art. 25 of the
Revised Penal Code (Art. 9, 2nd par. RPC).

Is conspiracy punishable?
Conspiracy is punishable only in the cases in
which the law specially provides a penalty therefor (Art.
st
8, 1 paragraph, RPC).

What are light felonies?

Light felonies are those infractions of law for the
commission of which a penalty of arresto menor or a fine
not exceeding 200 pesos or both, is provided (Art. 9, 3 rd
par., RPC).

Distinguish conspiracy as a felony from conspiracy

as a manner of incurring criminal liability:
Conspiracy is a felony when the law especially
provides a penalty therefor. In such cases, the mere
agreement and decision to commit a particular felony is
punished by law. Thus, conspiracy to commit treason,
rebellion and sedition is punishable.
However, if after the conspiracy the offenders
actually committed treason, rebellion or sedition, the
conspiracy ceases to be a felony and becomes only a
manner of incurring criminal liability, that is, the act of
one conspirator is the act of all the other conspirators.

Are Offenses defined and penalized by special

laws subject to the provisions of the Revised Penal
Code? What is the function of the RPC with regard
to these offenses?
No. Offenses, which are or in the future may be
punishable under special laws are not subject to the
provisions of the Revised Penal Code. The Revised Penal
Code shall be supplementary to such laws, unless the
latter should specially provide the contrary (Art 10, RPC).

In other crimes, like murder or abduction, the

mere agreement and decision to commit them is not
punishable, as there is no provision in the RPC which
punishes conspiracy to commit murder or abduction. The
conspirators become liable only when the crime, like
murder or abduction, is actually committed. But they are
liable for the crime actually committed, not for
conspiracy to commit it. The conspiracy will be
considered only to make the offenders equally liable,
that is, in the same degree and to the same extent.

What are the circumstances which affect criminal

liability?
are:

The circumstances which affect criminal liability

(1)
(2)

justifying circumstances (Art. 11,

RPC),

exempting circumstances (Art. 12,

RPC) and other absolutory causes (Art. 20,
Art. 124, last paragraph, RPC),
(3)
mitigating circumstances (Art. 13,
RPC),
(4)
aggravating circumstances (Art.
14, RPC), and
(5)
alternative circumstances (Art. 15,
RPC).

When is there a proposal to commit a felony?

There is proposal when the person who has
decided to commit e felony proposes its execution to
some other person or persons (Art. 8, 3rd paragraph,
RPC).
Is proposal to commit a felony punishable?

Justifying Circumstances

Proposal to commit a felony is punishable only

in cases in which the law specially provides a penalty
therefor (Art. 8, 1st paragraph, RPC).

Any person acting under any of the justifying

circumstances does not incur criminal liability.

May a person be held liable for proposal to commit

rebellion if the proposal is rejected by the person
to whom the proposal is made? Why?

The act of a person under any of the justifying

circumstances is in accordance with law, so that such
person is deemed not to have transgressed the law and
is free from both criminal and civil liability.

Yes, because what the law punishes is the mere

proposal to commit rebellion or treason by one who is
decided to commit it. The acceptance of such proposal is
not necessary.

Exempting Circumstances
Technically, one who acts by virtue of any of the
exempting circumstances commits a crime, although by
the complete absence of any of the conditions which
constitute free will or voluntariness of the act, no
criminal liability arises. Hence, there is wanting in the
agent of the crime any of the conditions which make the
act voluntary, or negligent. There is however, civil
liability.

What are the three classifications of felonies

according to gravity?
According to gravity, felonies are classified as
grave felonies, less grave felonies and light felonies.
What are grave felonies?

Mitigating Circumstances

Grave felonies are those to which the law

attaches the capita punishment or penalties which in any
of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with Article
25 of the Revised Penal Code (Art. 9, 1st par., RPC).

These circumstances are based on the

diminution of either the freedom of action, intelligence,
or intent, or on the lesser perversity of the offender.

www.rkmfiles.net

Aggravating Circumstances

(6) Any person who acts in obedience to an

order issued by a superior for some lawful
purpose.

These are based on the greater perversity of the

offender manifested in the commission of the felony as
shown by (1) the motivating power itself, (2) the place of
commission, (3) the means and ways employed, (4) the
time, or (5) the personal circumstances of the offender or
of the offended party.

What constitutes unlawful aggression?

The act must be unjustified and sufficient to
imperil ones life, limb or right.

Alternative Circumstances

Is threat an unlawful aggression?

The basis of these alternative circumstances is

the nature and effects of the crime and the other
conditions attending its commission.
What are the justifying circumstances?

Mere threatening attitude is not unlawful

aggression. But if the threat is offensive and positively
strong, showing the wrongful intent to cause an injury,
that threat is an unlawful aggression.

The justifying circumstances provided for under

Art. 11 are the following:

Unprovoked
Who are exempt from criminal liability?

(1) Anyone who acts in defense of his person

or rights, provided that the following
circumstances concur:
1.
2.
3.

The following are exempt from criminal liability:

(1)

Unlawful aggression.
Reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel it.
Lack of sufficient provocation on the
part of the person defending himself.

An imbecile or an insane person,

unless the latter has acted during a
lucid interval.

When the imbecile or an insane person

has committed an act which the law defines as
a felony (delito), the court shall order his
confinement in one of the hospitals or asylums
established for persons thus afflicted, which he
shall not be permitted to leave without first
obtaining the permission of the same court.

(2) Any one who acts in defense of the person

or rights of his spouse, ascendants, or
legitimate natural or adopted brothers or
sisters, or of his relatives by affinity in the
same degrees and those by consanguinity
within the fourth civil degree, provided the
following requisites are present:
1. Unlawful aggression.
2. Reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel it.
3. In case the provocation was given by
the person attacked, that the one
making defense had no part therein.

(2)

A person under nine years of age.

(3)

A person over nine years of age and

under fifteen, unless he has acted with
discernment, in which case, such
minor shall be proceeded against in
accordance with the provisions of
Article 80 of the Revised Penal Code.

When such minor is adjudged to be

criminally irresponsible, the court, in conformity
with the provisions of this and the preceding
paragraph, shall commit him to the care and
custody of hi family who shall be charged with
his surveillance and education otherwise, he
shall be committed to the care of some
institutions or person mentioned in said Art. 80.

(3) Anyone who acts in defense of the person

or rights of a stranger, provided that the
following requisites concur:
1. Unlawful aggression.
2. Reasonable necessity of the means
employed to prevent or repel it.
3. The person defending be not induced
by revenge, resentment, or other evil
motive.

(4)

(4) Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or

injury, does an act which causes damage to
another, provided that the following
requisites are present:

Any person who, while performing a

lawful act with due care, causes an
injury by mere accident without fault
or intention of causing it.

Nota Bene:
What is the penalty
imposable
when
all
the
conditions required are not
present?

1. That the evil sought to be avoided

actually exists.
2. That the injury feared be greater than
that done to avoid it.
3. That there be no other practical and
less harmful means of preventing it.

required
liability
number
present,
upon the

(5) Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a

duty or in the lawful exercise of a right or
office.

When all the conditions

to exempt from criminal
(under
circumstance
4 of Art. 12) are not
the penalty imposable
culprit is

www.rkmfiles.net

(a)

(b)

arresto mayor in its

maximum period to
prision
correccional
in its minimum period
if he shall have been
guilty of a grave
felony, and
arresto mayor in its
minimum
and
medium periods, if of
a less grave felony
(Art. 67, RPC).

action, defense or communication with his

fellow beings.

exempting
requisites
to exempt
respective

That the offender had no intention to

commit so grave a wrong as that
committed.

(4)

That sufficient provocation or threat on

the
part
of
the
offended
party
immediately preceded the act.

(5)

That the act was committed in the

immediate vindication of a grave offense
to the one committing the felony (delito),
his spouse, ascendants, descendants,
legitimate, natural, or adopted brothers or
sisters, or relatives by affinity within the
same degrees.

(6)

(7)

(8)

circumstances

are

the

(3) That the act be committed with insult or in

disregard of the respect due the offended
party on account of his rank, age, or sex, or
that it be committed in the dwelling of the
offended party, if the latter has not given
provocation.

The following are mitigating circumstances:

(3)

aggravating

(2) That the crime be committed in contempt

of or with insult to the public authorities.

What are the mitigating circumstances?

That the offender is under eighteen years

of age or over seventy years. In the case
of the minor, he shall be proceeded
against in accordance with the provisions
of Article 80.

Any other circumstances of a similar

nature and analogous to those above
mentioned.

(1) That advantage be taken by the offender of

his public position.

(7) Any person who fails to perform an act

required by law, when prevented by some
lawful insuperable cause.

(2)

(10)

The
following:

(6) Any person who acts under the impulse of

an uncontrollable fear or an equal or
greater injury.

Those
justifying
and
circumstances when all the
necessary to justify the act or
from criminal liability in the
cases are not attendant.

Such illness of the offender as would

diminish the exercise of the will power of
the offender without however depriving
him of the consciousness of his acts.

What are the aggravating circumstances?

(5) Any person who acts under the compulsion

of irresistible force.

(1)

(9)

(4) That the act be committed with abuse of

confidence or obvious ungratefulness.
(5) That the crime be committed in the palace
of the chief executive, or in his presence, or
where public authorities re engaged in the
discharge of their duties, or in a place
dedicated to religious worship.
(6) That the crime be committed in the night
time, or in an uninhabited lace, or by a
band, whenever such circumstances may
facilitate the commission of an offense.
Whenever more than three armed
malefactors shall have acted together in
the commission of an offense, it shall be
deemed to have been committed by a
band.
(7) That the crime be committed on the
occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck,
earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or
misfortune.
(8) That the crime be committed with the aid
of armed men or persons who insure or
afford impunity.

That of having acted upon an impulse so

powerful as naturally to have produced
passion or obfuscation.

(9) That the accused is a recidivist.

That
the
offender
had
voluntarily
surrendered himself to a person in
authority or his agents, or that he had
voluntarily confessed his guilt before the
court prior to the presentation of the
evidence for the prosecution.

A recidivist is one who, at the time of his

trial for one crime, shall have been previously
convicted by final judgment of another crime
embraced in the same title of this Code.
(10) That the offender has been previously
punished by an offense to which the law
attaches an equal or greater penalty or
for two or more crimes to which it
attaches a lighter penalty.

That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind

or otherwise suffering some physical
defect which thus restricts his means of

www.rkmfiles.net

(11) That the crime be committed

consideration of a price, reward
promise.

in
or

When
is
the
alternative
relationship be considered?

When shall the alternative

intoxication mitigating?

(13) That the act committed with evident

premeditation.
fraud

or

disguise

of

The alternative circumstance of relationship

shall be taken into consideration when the offended
party is the (a) spouse, (b) ascendant (c) descendant, (d)
legitimate, natural or adopted brother or sister, or (e)
relative by affinity in the same degrees of the offender.

(12) That the crime be committed by means

of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
stranding of a vessel or intentional
damage thereto, derailment of a
locomotive, or by the use of any other
artifice involving great waste and ruin.

(14) That craft,

employed.

circumstance

circumstance

of

The intoxication of the offender shall be taken

into consideration as a mitigating circumstance when the
offender has committed a felony in a state of
intoxication, if the same is (a) not habitual or (b) not
subsequent to the plan to commit said felony.

be

(15) That advantage be taken of superior

strength, or means be employed to
weaken the defense.

Nota Bene:
For an accused to be entitled to the
mitigating
circumstance
of
intoxication, it must be shown that:

(16) That the act be committed with treachery

(alevosia).
There is treachery when the offender
commits any of the crimes against the
person, 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
party might make.

(1)

(2)

(17) That
means
be
employed
or
circumstances brought about which add
ignominy to the natural effects of the act.

at the time of the commission

of the criminal act, he has taken
such quantity of alcoholic drinks as
to blur his reason and deprive him
of a certain degree of control; and
that such intoxication is not
habitual, or subsequent to the plan
top commit the felony.

When is intoxication aggravating?

The intoxication of the offender is aggravating
(a) when the intoxication is habitual or intentional or (b)
when it is intentional or subsequent to the plan to
commit the crime.

(18) That the crime be committed after an

unlawful entry.
There is an unlawful entry when an
entrance is effected by way not intended
for the purpose.

Habitual Drunkard
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.

(19) That as a means to the commission of a

crime a wall, roof, floor, door, or window
be broken.
(20) That the crime be committed with the aid
of persons under fifteen years of age or
by means of motor vehicles, motorized
watercraft, airships, or other similar
means (as amended by RA 5438).

DEGREE
OF
EDUCATION

INSTRUCTION

AND

Low degree of instruction and education or lack

of it is generally mitigating.

(21) That the wrong done in the commission

of the crime be deliberately augmented
by causing other wrong not necessary for
its commission.

High degree of instruction and education is

aggravating when the offender avails himself of
his learning in committing the crime.
Nota Bene:

What are alternative circumstances? What are

they?

Night time and dwelling

are not qualifying aggravating
circumstances. They are merely
ordinary or generic aggravating
circumstances that could elevate
the impossible penalty to its
maximum period.
The qualifying aggravating
circumstances are those provided
for in Art. 248 of the Revised Penal

Alternative circumstances are those which must

be taken into consideration as aggravating or mitigating
according to the nature and effects of the crime and the
other conditions attending its commission.
The
alternative
circumstances
are
(1)
relationship, (2) intoxication, and (3) the degree of
instruction and education of the offender.

10

www.rkmfiles.net

Code. If any qualifying aggravating

circumstance
attended
the
commission of the crime it elevates
the crime to a graver offense and
gives it its proper designation. For
example when the killing is
attended with any of the qualifying
aggravating
circumstances
like
dwelling, the offender will be liable
for
murder
and
not
merely
homicide.

committed in the dwelling of the

offended party.
Why? Because of two
reasons, namely:
(1)

when
the
offender
was
welcomed in the home of the
offended party and the offender
committed the crime against the
latter, there was ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE; and
(2)
when the offender forced his
way into the dwelling of the
offended party to commit the crime
therein, there was VIOLATION OF
THE SANCTITY OF THE HOME.

NIGHT TIME
That period of darkness
beginning at end of dusk and
ending at dawn. The Civil Code
defines it as from sunset to sunrise.
(Art. 13, Civil Code of the
Philippines).

Dwelling is not aggravating in

the following instances;

Not all the time, night time

may
be
appreciated
as
an
aggravating circumstance.
Night
time
may
be
appreciated as an aggravating
circumstance in the following
instances:
1)
2)
3)

1)

The offended party loses

his right to be respected in his
home, because he gave sufficient
provocation to the offender. But the
provocation
contemplated
has
three requisites:
(a)
it must be given in his
dwelling;
(b)
it must be sufficient;
and
(c)
it must be immediate.

when
it
facilitated
the
commission of the crime;
when it is especially sought for
by the offender to insure the
commission of the crime; or
when
the
offender
took
advantage thereof for the purpose
of impunity.
Night time is not aggravating,
even
if
the
crime
was
committed during night time in
the following instances:

1)

2)

3)

When the offended party in his

dwelling gave sufficient and
immediate provocation to the
offender.

2)

3)

When the crime was the result

of a succession of acts which took
lace within the period of two hours
commencing at 5:00 p.m. to 7:00
p.m.;
When treachery concurred with
night time in the commission of the
crime because night time is
absorbed in treachery; and

When both the offender and

the
offended
party
are
occupants
of
the
same
dwelling.
When dwelling is inherent in
the crime, such as in robbery
with force upon things and in
trespass to dwelling.

Pursuant to the 2000 Rules

on Criminal procedure specifically
Rule 110 qualifying aggravating
circumstances as well as ordinary
or
generic
aggravating
circumstances must be alleged in
the information in order to be
appreciated.

When the meeting between

the offender and the offended party
at night time is causal and the idea
of committing the crime came into
the mind of the offender only at
that time.
The reason for this is that
night time was not especially
sought for by the offender.
But, it may still be
aggravating,
if
the
darkness
facilitated the commission of the
crime or that the offender took
advantage of it.

WHO ARE CRIMINALLY LIABLE?

Ans.: The following are criminally liable for
grave and less grave felonies:
1) Principals.
2) Accomplices.
3) Accessories.
The following are liable for light felonies:
1)
2)

DWELLING

Principals.
Accomplices.

WHO ARE CONSIDERED AS PRINCIPALS?

Dwelling is an aggravating
circumstance when the crime is

The following are considered principals:

11

www.rkmfiles.net

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.

(1) Those who take a direct part in the

execution of the act;
(2) Those who directly force or induce others
to commit it;
(3) Those who cooperate in the commission of
the offense by another act without which it
would not have been accomplished (Art.
17, RPC).

Two Ways of Becoming a Principal by

Induction

Three Kinds of Principals:

1.
2.
3.

1. By directly forcing another to commit a

crime, either
(a) by using irresistible force, or
(b) by causing uncontrollable fear.

Principal by Direct Participation (PDP) Those who take a direct part in the
execution of the act.
Principal by Induction (PI) - Those who
directly force or induce others to commit a
crime.
Principal by Indispensable Cupertino (PIC) Those who cooperate in the commission of
the offense by another act without which
the
crime
would
not
have
been
accomplished.

2. By directly inducing another to commit a

crime, either
(a) by giving price, or offering
reward or promise, or
(b) by using words of command.
PRINCIPAL
BY
COOPERATION

PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION

Cooperates
participation.

The principal by direct participation personally

takes part in the execution of the act constituting the
crime. For example, one who with intent to gain,
personally shoots another is liable as principal by direct
participation in the crime of homicide or one who burns
the house of another is a principal by direct participation
in the crime of arson.

(2)

with

the

principal

by

direct

Requisites:
1. Participation in the criminal resolution, that is,
there is either anterior conspiracy or unity of criminal
purpose and intention immediately before the
commission of the crime charged; and

Nota Bene:
Two or more persons may
take direct part in the execution of
the act, in which case they may be
principals by direct participation,
provided, the following requisites
are present:
(1)

INDISPENSABLE

2. Cupertino in the commission of the offense

by performing another act without which the crime would
not have been accomplished.
Nota Bene:
Determine the cooperation
rendered by the offender whether
dispensable or indispensable. If
indispensable, liable as principal by
indispensable cooperation, but if
the cooperation is dispensable,
liable as an accomplice.

That
they
participated in the
criminal
resolution.
Absent this requisite,
the offender cannot
be made liable as
principal.
That they carried out
their
plan
and
personally took part
in its execution by
acts, which directly
tended to the same
end.

WHO ARE CONSIDERED AS ACCOMPLICES?

Accomplices are those who, not being principals
cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous or
simultaneous acts (Art. 18, RPC).
Requisites:

PRINCIPAL BY INDUCTION

In order that a person may be considered as

accomplice, the following requisites must concur:

Becomes liable only as such when

the
principal
by
direct
participation
committed the act induced.

1. There must be a community of design; that

is, knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct
participation, he concurs with the latter in his purpose;
2. He cooperates in the execution of the offense
by previous or simultaneous acts, with the intention of
supplying material or moral aid in the execution of the
crime in an efficacious way; and

Requisites:
In order that a person may be
convicted as principal by inducement, the
following requisites must be present:

12

www.rkmfiles.net

3. There must be a relation between the acts

done by the principal and those attributed to the person
charged as accomplice.

should be committed, they merely assent to the

plan and cooperate in its accomplishment.
3.

Examples of Cooperation by an Accomplice

1. By Previous Act -- Lending of a dagger or
pistol to the murderer, knowing the latters criminal
purpose.

Conspirators are the authors of the crime;

accomplices are merely their instruments who
perform acts not essential to the perpetration o
the offense.

WHO ARE CONSIDERED AS ACCESSORIES?

2. By Simultaneous Act The defendant who

held one of the hands of the victim and tried to take
away the latters revolver, while his co-defendant was
attacking him, is an accomplice for he cooperates in the
execution of the crime by simultaneous act without any
previous agreement or understanding.

Accessories are those who having knowledge of

the commission of the crime, and without having
participated therein, either as principals or accomplices,
take part subsequent to its commission in any of the
following manners:
(1)
(2)

Nota Bene:
(3)

1. An accomplice is neither
a principal nor an accessory but
who cooperates with the principal
by direct participation by previous
or simultaneous acts.
2. An accomplice concurs
or approves the act of the principal
by direct participation and performs
other acts showing his conformity
to the act of the principal by direct
participation.
3. An accomplice is not a
part of the plan or conspiracy.
4. The act or acts of the
accomplice must be lesser than the
act or acts done by the principal by
direct participation, that is, they
must not be equal to or graver than
the act or acts of the principal by
direct participation.
5. The cooperation of the
accomplice is only necessary, not
indispensable.

Paragraph 3 of Article 19 contemplates two

kinds of accessories. They are:
1. Public officers who harbor, conceal or assist in the
escape of the principal of ANY CRIME (except for light
felony) with the abuse of his pubic functions.
Requisites:
(a) The accessory is a public officer.
(b) He harbors, conceals, or assists in
the escape of the principal;
(c) The public officer acts with abuse
of his public functions.
(d) The crime committed by the
principal is any crime, provided it
is not a light felony.

How an Accomplice Acquires Knowledge of the

Criminal Design of the Principal?
1.
2.

When the principal informs or tells the

accomplice of the formers criminal purpose.
When the accomplice saw the criminal acts of
the principal.

2. Private persons who harbor, conceal or assist in the

escape of the author of the crime or the principal:
(1)

Distinction between Conspirators and Accomplices

1.

2.

By profiting themselves or assisting the

offender to profit by the effects of the
crime.
By concealing or destroying the body of
the crime, or the effects or instruments
thereof, in order to prevent its discovery.
By harboring, concealing or assisting in the
escape of the principal of the crime,
provided the accessory acts with abuse of
his public functions or whenever the author
of the crime is guilty of treason, parricide,
murder, or an attempt to take the life of
the Chief Executive, or is known to be
habitually guilty of some other crime (Art.
19, RPC).

who is guilty of (a) treason, (b) parricide,

(c) murder, or (d) an attempt against the
life of the Chief Executive, or
who is known to be habitually guilty of
some other crime.

Conspirators and accomplices have one thing in

common; they know and agree with the criminal
design. Conspirators, however, know the
criminal intention because they themselves
have decided upon such course of action.
Accomplices come to know about after the
principals have reached a decision and only
then do they agree to cooperate in its
execution.

(2)

Conspirators decide that a crime should be

committed; accomplices merely concur in it.
Accomplices do not decide whether a crime

Presidential Decree No. 1612 (AntiFencing Law of 1979)

Nota Bene:
The accessory, to be liable, must
have knowledge that the principal
is habitually guilty of some other
crime.

13

www.rkmfiles.net

FENCING. DEFINED (Sec. 2, par.

A, PD 1612)

No. Article 21 of the Revised Penal Code

provides that No felony shall be punishable by any
penalty not prescribed by law prior to its commission.

The act of any person who,

with intent to gain for himself or for
another shall buy, receive, possess,
keep, acquire, conceal, sell or
dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or
in any other manner deal in any
article, item, object or anything of
value which he knows or should be
known to him, to have been
derived from the proceeds of the
crime of robbery or theft.

The penalties under the Revised Penal Code have threefold purposes, namely:
1.
2.
3.

Retribution of Expiation the penalty is

commensurate with the gravity of the offense.
Correction or Reformation those penalties
consisting deprivation of liberty.
Social Defense shown by its inflexible severity
to recidivists and habitual delinquents.

May penal laws be given retroactive effect or

application?

FENCE, DEFINED (Sec. 2, par. B)

Any
person,
firm,
association,
corporation
or
partnership or other organization
who/which commits the act of
fencing.

Yes. Penal laws shall have retroactive effect

insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony, who
is not a habitual criminal, although at the time of the
publication of such laws a final sentence has been
pronounced and the convict is serving the same (Art. 22,
RPC).

WHO ARE THE ACCESSORIES THAT ARE EXEMPT

FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY? IS THERE ANY
EXECPTION?

What is the effect of pardon given by the offended

party?
A pardon by the offended party does not
extinguish criminal action, but civil liability with regard to
the interest of the injured party is extinguished by the
express waiver of the offended party (Art. 23, RPC).
However, if the pardon is given prior to the
institution of the criminal action, it shall extinguish
criminal liability

Those accessories with respect to their spouses,

ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, and
adopted brothers and sisters, or relatives by affinity
within the same degrees.
The only exception is those accessories who
incurred such liability by profiting themselves or assisting
the offender to profit by the effects of the crime. These
accessories are criminally liable even if the principal be
their spouse, ascendant, descendant, legitimate, natural
and adopted brother or sister, or relative by affinity with
in the same degree (Art. 20, RPC).

What are the measures of prevention or safety

which are not considered penalties?
The
penalties:

Notes:

following

shall

not

be

considered

as

(1) The arrest and temporary detention of

accused persons, as well as their detention
by reason of insanity or imbecility, or
illness requiring their confinement in a
hospital.
(2) The commitment of a minor:

1. An accessory is exempt from criminal liability, when

the principal is his-(a) spouse, or
(b) ascendant, or
(c) descendant, or
(d) legitimate, natural or adopted brother or
sister, or
(e) relative by affinity within the same degrees.

(a)

2. Nephew or niece not included among such relatives.

3. Accessory is not exempt from criminal liability even if
the principal is related to him, if such accessory:

(b)

(a) profited by the effects of the crime, or

(b) assisted the principal to profit by the
effects of the crime.

to a public or private, benevolent or

charitable
institution,
established
under the law for the care, correction
or education of orphaned, homeless,
defective, and delinquent children, or
to the custody or care of any other
responsible person in any other place
subject
to
the
visitation
and
supervision by the Director of Public
Welfare or any of his agents or
representatives, if there be any, or
otherwise by the Superintendent of
Public Schools or his representatives.

(3) Suspension from 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
disciplinary powers, superior officials may
impose upon their subordinates.

PENALTIES
Can you punish an act which is not defined and
penalized by any statute at the time of its
commission?

14

www.rkmfiles.net

(5) Deprivation of rights and the reparations

which the civil laws may establish in penal
form.

DURATION OF PENALTIES (Art. 27, RPC as amended by

RA 7659)
Reclusion Perpetua 20 years and 1 day to 40 years
Reclusion Temporal 12 years and 1 day to 20 years
Prision Mayor and Temporary Disqualification 6
years and 1 day to 12 years, except when the penalty of
disqualification is imposed as an accessory penalty, in
which case, its duration shall be that of the principal
penalty.
Prision Correccional, Suspension, and Destierro 6
months and 1 day to 6 years, except when suspension is
imposed as an accessory penalty, in which case, its
duration shall be that of the principal penalty.
Arresto Mayor 1 month and 1 day to 6 months
Arresto Menor 1 day to 30 days
Bond to Keep the Peace The bond to keep the peace
shall be required as to cover such period of time as the
court may determine.

What are the different classes of penalties which

may be imposed under the Revised Penal Code?
The different classes of penalties which may be
imposed under the Revised Penal Code are the following:
1. PRINCIPAL PENALTIES
(1) Capital Punishment
Death
(2) Afflictive Penalties
Reclusion Perpetua
Reclusion Temporal
Perpetual or Temporary Absolute
Disqualification
Perpetual
or
Temporary
Special
Disqualification
Prision Mayor
Fine
Bond to Keep the Peace
(3) Correctional Penalties
Prision Correccional
Arresto Mayor
Suspension
Destierro
Fine
Bond to Keep the Peace
(4) Light Penalties
Arresto Menor
Public Censure

COMPUTATION OF PENALTIES
Rules:
1.

If offender be in prison, the term of the duration

of the temporary penalties shall be computed
from the day on which the judgment of
conviction shall have become final

2.

If the offender be not in prison, the term of the

duration of the penalty consisting of deprivation
of liberty shall be computed from the day that
the offender is placed at the disposal of the
judicial authorities for the enforcement of the
penalty.

3.

The duration of other penalties shall be

computed only from the day on which the
defendant commences to serve his sentence
(Art. 28, RPC).

Nota Bene: Penalties common to Afflictive

penalties, Correctional Penalties and Light penalties are:
(1) Fine, and
(2) Bond to Keep the Peace
2. ACCESSORY PENALTIES
(1) Perpetual
or
temporary
absolute
disqualification
(2) Perpetual
or
temporary
special
disqualification
(3) Suspension from public office, the right to
vote and be voted for, the profession or
calling
(4) Civil interdiction
(5) Indemnification
(6) Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments
and proceeds of the offense
(7) Payment of costs (Art. 25, RPC).
When
is
a
penalty
correctional, or light?

considered

When may the period of preventive imprisonment

be allowed to be deducted from the term of
imprisonment?
Offenders who have undergone preventive
imprisonment shall be credited in the service of their
sentence consisting of deprivation of liberty,
(a)

with the full time during which they have

undergone preventive imprisonment, if the
detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in
writing to abide by the same disciplinary
rules imposed upon convicted prisoners; or

(b)

four-fifths (4/5) of 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
persons (Art. 29, RPC as amended by RA
6127).

afflictive,

A fine whether imposed as a single or as an

alternative penalty shall be considered:
(a) an afflictive penalty, if it exceeds 6,000
pesos;
(b) a correctional penalty, if it does not exceed
6,000 pesos but is not less than 200 pesos;
and
(c) light penalty if it be less than 200 pesos
(Art. 26, RPC).

Requisites:
1.

15

The sentence imposed by the court consists of

deprivation of liberty or imprisonment;

www.rkmfiles.net

2.

3.

The offender has undergone preventive

imprisonment during the pendency of the
criminal proceeding until the finality of the
judgment; and

What are the effects of the penalties of perpetual

or temporary special disqualifications?
The penalties of perpetual or temporary special
disqualification for public office, profession or calling
shall produce the following effects:

The detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in

writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules
imposed upon convicted prisoners.

1. The deprivation of the office, employment,

profession or calling affected.
2. The disqualification or holding similar offices
or employments either perpetually or during the term of
the sentence according to the extent of such
disqualification (Art. 31, RPC).

Who are not entitled to be credited with the full

time or four-fifths of the time of preventive
imprisonment?
The following offenders are not entitled to be
credited either with the full time or four-fifths of the time
of preventive imprisonment:
1.
2.

What are the effects of the penalties of perpetual

or temporary special disqualification for the
exercise of the right of suffrage?

Recidivist, or those convicted previously twice

or more times of any crime; and
Those who, upon being summoned for the
execution of the their sentence have failed to
surrender voluntarily (Art. 29, RPC).

The
perpetual
or
temporary
special
disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage
shall:
(a) deprive the offender perpetually or during the
term of the sentence, according to the nature of
said penalty, of the right to vote in any popular
election for any public office or to be elected to
such office; and
(b) the offender shall not be permitted to hold any
public office during the period of his
disqualification (Art. 32, RPC).

Rule When Preventive Imprisonment for a Period

Equal to or more than the Possible Maximum
Imprisonment
Whenever
the
accused
has
undergone
preventive imprisonment or a period equal to or more
than the possible maximum imprisonment of the offense
charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is
not yet terminated, he shall be released immediately
without prejudice to the continuation of the trial thereto
or the proceeding on appeal, if the same is under review
(Art. 29, RPC as amended by EO 214, July 10, 1987).

What are the effects of the penalties of

suspension from any public office, profession or
calling, or the right of suffrage?
The penalties of suspension from any public
office, profession or calling, or the right of suffrage shall
disqualify the offender from holding such office or
exercising such profession or calling or right of suffrage
during the term of the sentence.
The person suspended from holding public
office shall not hold another having similar functions
during the period of his suspension (Art. 33, RPC).

Rule in Case the Maximum Penalty is Destierro

In case the maximum penalty to which the
accused may be sentenced is Destierro, he shall be
released after 30 days of preventive imprisonment
(Ibid).

What are the effects of civil interdiction?

EFFECTS OF THE PENALTIES ACCORDING TO THEIR

RESPECTIVE NATURE

Civil interdiction shall deprive the offender

during the time of his sentence of the rights of parental
authority, or guardianship, either as to the person or
property of the ward, of marital authority, of the right to
manage his property and of the right to dispose of such
property by any act or any conveyance inter vivos (Art.
34, RPC).

What are the effects of the penalties of Perpetual

or Temporary Absolute Disqualification?
The penalties of perpetual or temporary
absolute disqualification for public office shall produce
the following effects:

What are the effects of bond to keep the peace?

1. The deprivation of the public offices and

employment which the offender may have held, even if
conferred by popular election.
2. The deprivation of the right to vote in any
election for any popular office or to be elected to such
office. In case of temporary disqualification, the
disqualification shall last during the term of the
sentence.
3. The disqualification for the offices or public
employments and for the exercise of any of the rights
mentioned. In case of temporary disqualification, the
disqualification shall last during the term of the
sentence.
4. The loss of all rights to retirement pay or
other pension for nay office formerly held (Art. 30, RPC).

It gives the person sentenced to give bond to

keep the peace the duty to present two sufficient
sureties who:
(a) shall undertake that such person will not
commit the offense sought to be prevented, and
(b) in case such offense be committed they will pay
the amount determined by the court in the
judgment, or otherwise to deposit such amount
in the office of the clerk of the court to
guarantee said undertaking (Art. 35, RPC).
What is the effect if the person sentenced failed to
give the bond required by the court?

16

www.rkmfiles.net

Should the person sentenced fail to give

the bond as required he shall be detained for a
period which:
(a) shall in no case exceed six (6) months, if
he shall have been prosecuted or a grave
or less grave felony, and
(b) shall not exceed thirty (30) days if for a
light felony (Art. 35, RPC).

What is subsidiary penalty?

What is the period of duration of the bond?

Is subsidiary penalty deemed imposed in case the

convict could not pay certain pecuniary liabilities
by reason of insolvency? Explain.

Subsidiary penalty is a subsidiary personal

liability to be suffered by the convict who has no
property with which ti meet the pecuniary liabilities for
the reparation of the damage caused, indemnification of
consequential damages, and fine, at the rate of one day
for each 8.00, subject to the rules provided for by law.

The period of duration of the bond depends

upon the discretion of the court. The court shall
determine, according to its discretion, the period of
duration of the bond (Art. 35, RPC).

No, subsidiary penalty must be expressly

imposed by the Court in order that the convict may be
required to serve it. It is not an accessory penalty. It is
imposed upon the accused and served by him in lieu of
certain pecuniary liabilities which he fails to pay on
account of insolvency.

What are the effects of pardon given by the

President in the exercise of his pardoning power?
The pardon given by the President have the
following effects:

What are the rules relative to subsidiary penalty?

(1)

It shall not work the restoration of the right

to hold pubic office, or the right of suffrage
except when such rights were expressly
restored by the terms of the pardon, and
(2)
It shall in no case exempt the culprit from
the payment of the civil indemnity imposed
upon him by the sentence (Art 36, RPC).

1.

2.

What are included in the costs of the proceeding

in criminal cases?
Costs shall include fees and indemnities in the
course of the judicial proceedings, whether they be fixed
or unalterable amounts previously determined by law or
regulations in force, or amounts not subject to schedule
(Art. 37, RPC).

3.
4.

What are pecuniary liabilities of a person guilty of

a crime?
The
following:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

5.

pecuniary liabilities of the offender are the

The reparation of the damage caused;
Indemnification of consequential damages;
The Fine; and
The cost of the proceedings.

The rules are:

If the penalty imposed if Prision Correccional or
arresto and fine subsidiary imprisonment, 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.
When the penalty imposed is fine only
subsidiary imprisonment, not to exceed 6
months, if the offense is grave or less
grave felony; and not to exceed 15 days, if
light felony.
When the penalty imposed is higher than
prision
correccional

no
subsidiary
imprisonment.
If the penalty imposed is not by confinement,
but of fixed duration the nature of the
subsidiary penalty is the same as that of the
principal penalty under the same rules in
number 1, 2, and 3 above.
In case the financial circumstances of the
convict should improve he shall pay the fine
(Art. 39, RPC as amended by RA 5465, April 21,
1969).

Notes:
In what case is there no subsidiary penalty, even if the
offender cannot pay the pecuniary liabilities by reason
insolvency?

What is the order of payment in case the property

of the offender is not sufficient for the payment of
all his pecuniary liabilities?

Even if the offender cannot pay the pecuniary

liabilities by reason of insolvency, the offender cannot be
required to undergo subsidiary penalty in the following
instances:

In case the property of the offender is not

sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary liabilities,
the same shall be met in the following order:
1. The reparation of the damage caused.
2. Indemnification of consequential damages.
3. The fine.
4. The cost of the proceedings.

1.

2.
When should this order of payment be availed of?

3.

The order of payment provided for under Art. 28

of the Revised Penal Code should be availed of only
when the offender is insolvent or his property is not
sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary liabilities.

When the penalty imposed is higher than

Prision correccional, such as Prision mayor,
Reclusion temporal and Reclusion perpetua. In
this case, there is no subsidiary penalty.
For failure to pay the costs of the proceedings
there is no subsidiary penalty.
When the penalty imposed is fine and a penalty
not to be executed by confinement in a penal
institution and has no fixed duration, there is no
subsidiary penalty.
Nota Bene:

17

www.rkmfiles.net

Subsidiary
penalty
is
possible only when any of the
following penalties is imposed:
(1) prision correccional;
(2) suspension and fine;
(3) destierro
(4) arresto mayor;
(5) arresto menor; and
(6) fine only.

principal penalty EXCEPT when such accessory penalties

have been expressly remitted in the pardon (Art. 42,
RPC).
What are the
Correccional?

If the penalty imposed is prision correccional

or arresto mayor and fine it shall not exceed onethird (1/3) of the term of the sentence, and in no case
shall it continue for more than one (1) year.
But if the penalty imposed if fine only, it
shall not exceed six (6) months, if the offender is
prosecuted for grave or less grave felony; and not
more than fifteen (15) days, if prosecuted for a light
felony.

Note:

Every penalty imposed for the commission of a

felony carries with it the forfeiture of the proceeds of the
crime and the instruments or tools with which it was
committed.
What should be done to the proceeds, instruments
or tools?
Such proceeds and instruments or tools are
confiscated and forfeited in favor of the Government
EXCEPT when such property belongs to a third person not
liable for the offense.
Those articles which are not subject of lawful
commerce shall be destroyed (Art. 45, RPC).

What is an accessory penalty?

An accessory penalty is that penalty which is
deemed included in the imposition of the principal
penalty.

Is subsidiary penalty an accessory penalty?

What are the accessory penalties of death?

No. Subsidiary penalty is a personal penalty

prescribed by law I substitution of the pecuniary liability
when the latter cannot be satisfied because of the
culprits insolvency. Hence, subsidiary imprisonment
cannot be served unless the judgment so provides in
case the accused is insolvent (People vs. Fajardo, 65 Phil.
539).

If the penalty of death is executed, it has no

accessory penalties for obvious reasons.
If the penalty of death not executed by reason
of commutation or pardon, its accessory penalties are (1)
perpetual absolute disqualification, and (2) civil
interdiction during thirty (30) years EXCEPT when such
accessory penalties have been expressly remitted in the
pardon (Art. 40, RPC).

APPLICATION OF PENALTIES
Generally, the Penalty Imposed by Law is to be
Imposed Upon Principals

What are the accessory penalties of Reclusion

Perpetua and Reclusion Temporal?

The penalty prescribed by law for the

commission of a felony shall be imposed upon the
principals in the commission of such felony (Art. 46,
RPC).

The accessory penalties of Reclusion Perpetua

and Reclusion Temporal are (1) civil interdiction for life or
during the period of the sentence as the case may be,
and (2) perpetual absolute disqualification which the
offender shall suffer even though pardoned as to the
principal penalty EXCEPT when such accessory penalties
have been expressly remitted in the pardon (Art. 41,
RPC).
penalties

of

Prision

The accessory penalties of arresto are (1)

suspension of the right to hold office, and the right of
suffrage during the term of the sentence (Art. 44, RPC).

Subsidiary penalty does not always consist

of imprisonment.
If the penalty imposed is prision correccional
or arresto mayor and fine, the subsidiary penalty
shall consist in imprisonment.
If the penalty imposed is destierro, the
subsidiary penalty is also destierro.
If the penalty imposed is suspension, the
subsidiary penalty is also suspension.

accessory

of

What are the accessory penalties of arresto?

In what does the subsidiary penalty consist?

the

penalties

The accessory penalties of prision correccional

are (1) suspension from public office, from the right to
follow a profession or calling, and (2) perpetual special
disqualification from the right of suffrage, if the duration
of said imprisonment shall exceed eighteen (18) months
even though pardoned as to the principal penalty
EXECPT when such accessory penalties have been
expressly remitted in the pardon (Art. 43, RPC).

What is the maximum duration of the

subsidiary penalty?

What are
Mayor?

accessory

Penalty Imposed Applies to Consummated Felony

Whenever the law prescribed a penalty for a
felony in general terms, it shall be understood as
applicable to the consummated felony (Art. 46, RPC).

Prision

WHAT IS A COMPLEX CRIME?

The accessory penalties of prision mayor are (1)

temporary absolute disqualification, and (2) perpetual
special disqualification from the right of suffrage which
the offender shall suffer although pardoned as to the

A complex crime is one where a single act

constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies or
where an offense is a necessary means for committing
the other (Art. 48, RPC).

18

www.rkmfiles.net

Two Kinds of Complex Crime

(1)

(2)

PENALTY TO BE IMPOSED IN CASE OF COMPLEX

CRIMES

Delito Compuesto or Compound Crime When a single act constitutes two or more
grave or less grave felonies.

The penalty for the more or most serious crime

shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum
period (Art. 48, RPC).

Delito Complejo or Complex Crime Proper When an offense is a necessary means for
committing the other.

Nota Bene:
The penalty to be imposed in case
of complex crime is the penalty imposable
to the gravest offense notwithstanding the
presence of mitigating circumstances. This is
so because the maximum of the maximum
cannot be offset by any mitigating
circumstance.

Nota Bene: A complex crime is

only one crime as contemplated by
law because the offender has only
one criminal intent.
DELITO COMPUESTO (Compound Crime)
Requisites:
1.
2.

This does not mean however that

the Indeterminate Sentence Law does not
apply to complex crimes. As long as the
case does not belong to the exceptions
provided for under Sec. 2 of Act 4103 as
amended (Indeterminate Sentence Law), the
provisions of such law shall be applied.
However, in fixing the maximum penalty
imposable to the offender, the maximum
shall be imposed regardless of the presence
of any mitigating circumstance.

That only a single act is performed by the

offender.
That the single act produces two or more grave
or less grave felonies.

Examples: Murder
Frustrated Homicide

with

Homicide,

Homicide

with

DELITO COMPLEJO (Complex Crime Proper)

Requisites:
1.
2.
3.

Penalty to be Imposed upon the Principals when

the Crime Committed is Different from That
Intended

That at least two offenses are committed.

That one or some of the offenses must be
necessary means for committing the other.
That both or all the offenses must be punished
under the same statute.

In cases in which the felony committed is

different from that which the offender intended to
commit, the following rules shall be observed:
(1) If the penalty prescribed for the felony
committed
be
higher
than
that
corresponding to the offense which the
accused intended to commit the penalty
corresponding to the offense which the
accused intended to commit shall be
imposed in its maximum period.
(2) If the penalty prescribed for the felony
committed be lower than that corresponding
to the one, which the accused intended to
commit the penalty prescribed for the
felony committed shall be imposed in its
maximum period.
(3) The rule established by the next preceding
paragraph shall not be applicable if the acts
committed by the guilty person shall also
constitute an attempt or frustration of
another crime, if the law prescribes a higher
penalty for either of the latter offenses, in
which case the penalty provided for the
attempted or the frustrated crime shall be
imposed in its maximum period (Art. 49,
RPC).
Nota Bene:

Examples:
Estafa
through
falsification
of
commercial documents.
Malversation through falsification of a
public document.
Nota Bene:
No complex crime when one of the
offenses was committed for the purpose of
concealing the commission of the other.
Example:
After committing homicide, the
accused in order to conceal the crime, set
fire to the house where it had been
perpetrated.
Setting fire to the house is arson
(Art 321). But in this case, neither homicide
nor arson was necessary to commit the
other. Hence, the offender committed two
separate crimes of Homicide and Arson.
No complex crime where
offense is penalized by a special law.

the

Art. 49 does not apply to aberratio

ictus because I this hypothesis there is a
complex crime and Art. 48 applies.

In the case of Reocdica versus

Court of Appeals, a grave or less grave
felony cannot be complex with a light felony.
The light felony should be separated, no to
be complexed.

It does not apply also to praeter

intentionem, because in this hypothesis, the
crime befalls the same person, whereas Art.

19

www.rkmfiles.net

49 has no application to cases where a more

serious consequence not intended by the
offender befalls the same person (People
versus Alburquerque, 59 Phil. 150).

Answers: Yes. The court, considering the

facts of the case, may likewise reduce by
one degree the penalty which under Art. 51
should b imposed for an attempt to commit
any of such crimes (Art. 250, 2nd par.).

ARTICLES 50 - 57

Inasmuch as Art. 51 provides that a

penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed b law for the consummated
felony shall be imposed upon the principal in
an attempt to commit a felony, and Art. 250
provides that the court may reduce by one
degree the penalty which under Art. 51
should be imposed for a attempt to commit
the crime of parricide, murder or homicide,
it is clear that he court can impose a penalty
lower by three degrees.
Note that Art. 250 only applies in
three crimes, namely: (1) PARRICIDE, (2)
MURDER, and (3) HOMICIDE.

Penalty to be imposed upon PRINCIPALS of a

FRUSTRATED CRIME:
The penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be
imposed upon the principal in a frustrated felony (Art. 50,
RPC).
Penalty to be imposed
ATTEMPTED CRIMES:

upon

PRINCIPALS

of

A penalty lower by two degrees than that

prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be
imposed upon the principals in an attempt to commit a
felony (Art. 51, RPC).

Penalty to be imposed upon ACCOMPLICES in a

CONSUMMATED CRIME:
The penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be
imposed upon the accomplices in the commission of a
consummated felony (Art. 52, RPC).

Nota Bene:
Art. 250. Penalty for frustrated
parricide, murder or homicide. The courts
in view of the facts of the case may impose
upon the person guilty of the frustrated
crime of PARRICIDE, MURDER or HOMICIDE
a penalty lower by one degree than that
which should be imposed under the
provisions of Art. 50.

Penalty to be imposed upon ACCESSORIES to the

commission of a CONSUMMATED FELONY:
The penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed by law or the consummated felony shall be
imposed upon the accessories to the commission of a
consummated felony (Art 53, RPC).

The courts, considering the facts of

the case may likewise reduce by one degree
the penalty which under Art. 51 should be
imposed for an attempt to commit any of
such crimes (Art. 250, RPC).

Penalty to be imposed upon ACCOMPLICES in a

FRUSTRATED CRIME:
The penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for the frustrated felony shall be
imposed upon the accessories to the commission of a
frustrated felony (Art. 54, RPC).

Question:
May the court impose a
penalty lower by two degrees than hat
prescribed by law for the consummated
felony
upon
the
principal
in
a
frustrated felony?

Penalty to be imposed upon ACCESSORIES of a

FRUSTRATED CRIME:
The penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed by law for the frustrated felony shall be
imposed upon the accessories to the commission of a
frustrated felony (Art. 55, RPC).

Answer:
Yes. The court, in view of
the facts of the case, may impose upon the
person guilty of the frustrated crime of
parricide, murder or homicide a penalty
lower by one degree than that which should
be imposed under the provisions of Art. 50
(Art. 250, RPC).

Penalty to be imposed upon ACCOMPLICES in an

ATTEMPTED CRIME:
The penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for an attempt to commit a felony shall
be imposed upon the accomplices I an attempt to commit
the felony (Art. 56, RPC).

Inasmuch as Art. 50 provides that

the penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed by law for the consummated
felony shall, and Art. 250 provides that the
court may impose a penalty lower by one
degree than that which should be imposed
under Art. 50, it is clear that the court can
impose a penalty lower by two degrees.

Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of an

ATTEMPTED CRIME:
The penalty lower by two degrees than that
prescribed by law for the attempted felony shall be
imposed upon the accessories to the attempt to commit a
felony (Art. 57, RPC).
Exception to Arts. 50 57:
The provisions contained in Articles 50 to 57
shall not be applicable to cases in which the law expressly
prescribes the penalty provided for a frustrated or
attempted felony, or to be imposed upon accomplices or
accessories (Art. 60, RPC).

Question: May the court impose a

penalty lower by three degrees than
that prescribed by law for the
consummated felony upon the principal
in an attempted felony?

20

www.rkmfiles.net

Additional penalty to be imposed upon certain

accessories:

8. Arresto Menor,
9. Public Censure,
10. Fine.

Those accessories falling within the terms of

paragraph 3, Art 19 of the RPC who should act with abuse
of their public functions, shall suffer the additional penalty
for absolute perpetual disqualification of the principal
offender hall e guilty of a grave felony, ad that of absolute
temporary disqualification if he shall be guilty of a less
grave felony (Art. 58, RPC).

One of them is a degree in relation to the others.

Prision mayor is one degree lower from reclusion
temporal. Prision correccional is two degrees lower from
reclusion temporal.
Effects of the attendance
aggravating
circumstances
delinquency:

RULES FOR GRADUATING PENALTIES

For the purpose of graduating the penalties
which according to the provisions of Arts. 50 57 are to
be imposed upon persons guilty as principals of any
frustrated or attempted felony, or as accomplices or
accessories, the following rules shall be observed:
1.

2.

4.

5.

6.

Mitigating or aggravating circumstances and

habitual delinquency shall be taken into account for the
purpose of diminishing or increasing the penalty in
conformity with the following rules:
1.

When the penalty prescribed for the

felony is single and indivisible, the penalty next
lower in DEGREE shall be that immediately
following that indivisible penalty in the
respective graduated scale prescribed in Art. 71.
When the penalty prescribed for the
crime is composed of two indivisible penalties, or
of one or more divisible penalties to be imposed
to heir full extent, the penalty next lower in
degree shall be that immediately following the
lesser of the penalties prescribed in the
respective graduated scale.
When the penalty prescribed for the crime is
composed of one or two indivisible penalties and
the maximum period of another divisible penalty,
the penalty next lower in degree shall be
composed of three medium and minimum
periods of the proper indivisible penalty and the
maximum period of that immediately following in
said respective graduated scale.
When the penalty prescribed for the crime is
composed of several periods, corresponding to
different divisible penalties, the penalty next
lower in degree shall be composed of the period
immediately following, which shall be taken from
the penalty prescribed, if possible; otherwise
from the penalty immediately following in the
above mentioned respective graduated scale.
When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in
some manner not especially provided for in the
four preceding rules, the courts proceeding by
analogy, shall impose corresponding penalties
upon those guilty as principals of the frustrated
felony, or of attempt to commit the same, and
upon accomplices and accessories (Art. 61, RPC).

Aggravating circumstances which in

themselves constitute a crime especially
punishable by law or which are included by the
law in defining a crime and prescribing the
penalty therefor shall not be taken into account
for the purpose of increasing the penalty.

(a). When in the commission of the crime,

advantage was taken by the offender of his public
position, the penalty to be imposed shall be in its
maximum regardless of mitigating circumstances. The
maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was
committed by any person who belongs to an
organized/syndicated crime group.
An
organized/syndicated
crime
group
means a group of two or more persons
collaborating, confederating or mutually helping
one another for purposes of gain in the commission
of any crime.
2.

The same rule shall apply with respect

to any aggravating circumstances inherent in the
crime to such a degree that it must of necessity
accompany the commission thereof.

3.

Aggravating
or
mitigating
circumstances which arise from the moral
attributes of the offender, or from his private
relations with the offended party, or from any
other personal cause, shall only serve to
aggravate or mitigate the liability of the
principals, accomplices and accessories as to
whom such circumstances are attendant.

4.

The circumstances which consist in the

material execution of the act, or in the means
employed to accomplish it, shall serve to
aggravate or mitigate the liability of those
persons only who had knowledge of them at the
time of the execution of the act or their
cooperation therein.

5.

Habitual delinquency shall have the

following effects:

What is a degree in relation to the penalties

provided by the Revised Penal Code?
A degree is one unit penalty or one of the
penalties enumerated in the graduated scales in Art. 71 of
the Revised Penal Code.
Thus, Scale No. 1 of said article mentions the
penalties in the following order:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

of mitigating or
and
of
habitual

Death,
Reclusion Perpetua,
Reclusion Temporal,
Prision Mayor,
Prision Correccional,
Arresto Mayor,
Destierro,

(a)

21

Upon a third conviction the culprit shall be

sentenced to the penalty provided by law
for the last crime of which he be found
guilty and to the additional penalty of
prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods;

www.rkmfiles.net

(b)

(c)

Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall

be sentenced to the penalty provided for
the last crime of which he be found guilty
and to the additional penalty of prision
mayor in its minimum and medium periods;
and
Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the
culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty
provided for the last crime of which he be
found guilty and to the additional penalty of
prision mayor in its maximum period to
reclusion temporal in its minimum period.

according to whether there are or are not mitigating or

aggravating circumstances:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Notwithstanding the provisions of this

Article, the total of the two penalties to be
imposed upon the offender, in conformity
herewith, shall in no case exceed 30 years.

(5)

For the purpose of this article, a person shall

be deemed to be habitual delinquent, if within a
period of ten (10) years from the date of his release or
last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious
physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is
found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener
(Art. 62, RPC as amended by RA 7659).

(6)

Rules for the application of indivisible penalties

(7)

In all cases in which the law prescribed a single

indivisible penalty, t shall be applied by the courts
regardless
of
any
mitigating
or
aggravating
circumstances that may have attended the commission
of the deed.
In all cases in which the law prescribes a
penalty composed of two indivisible penalties, the
following rules shall be observed in the application
thereof:

When there are neither aggravating nor

mitigating circumstances, they shall impose the
penalty prescribed by law in its medium period.
When only a mitigating circumstance is present
in the commission of the act, they shall impose
the penalty in its minimum period.
When only an aggravating circumstance is
present in the commission of the act, they shall
impose the penalty in its maximum period.
When
both
mitigating
and
aggravating
circumstances are present, the court shall
reasonably offset those of one class against the
other according to their relative weight.
When there are tow or more mitigating
circumstances
and
no
aggravating
circumstances are present, the court shall
impose the penalty next lower to that
prescribed by law, in the period that it may
deem applicable, according to the number and
nature of such circumstances.
Whatever may be the number and nature of the
aggravating circumstances, the courts shall not
impose a greater penalty than that prescribed
by law, in its maximum period.
Within the limits f each period, the court shall
determine the extent of the penalty according
to the number and nature of the aggravating
and mitigating circumstances and the greater or
lesser extent o the evil produced by the crime
(Art. 64, RPC).

Notes:
What is a period n relation to a penalty?
A period is one of the three equal portions of a
divisible penalty known as minimum, medium and
maximum.
However, when the penalty prescribed by the Code is
composed of three distinct penalties each forming a
period, a period is one of those three penalties.

(1) When in the commission of the deed there

is
present
only
one
aggravating
circumstance, the greater penalty shall be
applied.
(2) When there are neither mitigating nor
aggravating
circumstances
in
the
commission of the deed, the lesser penalty
shall be applied.
(3) When the commission of the act is
attended by some mitigating circumstances
and there is no aggravating circumstance,
the lesser penalty shall be applied.
(4) When the litigating and aggravating
circumstances attended the commission of
the act, the court shall reasonably allow
them to offset one another in consideration
of their number and importance, for the
purpose of applying the penalty in
accordance with the preceding rules,
according
to
the
result
of
such
compensation (Art. 63, RPC).

What is a complex penalty?

A complex penalty is a penalty prescribed by
law, composed of three distinct penalties, each forming
a period. The lightest of them shall be the minimum
period; the next the medium period and the most severe
shall be the maximum period.
Example:
Reclusion Temporal to Death.
minimum period Reclusion temporal
medium period Reclusion Perpetua
maximum period Death
Is a complex penalty the penalty for a complex
crime?

Rules for the application of penalties which

contain three periods:

No, it is not the penalty for complex crime. The

penalty for a complex crime is that provided for under
Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, that is, the penalty
for the graver or gravest offense, the same to be
imposed in its maximum period.

In cases in which the penalties prescribed by

law contain three periods, whether it be a single divisible
penalty or composed of three different penalties, each
one of which forms a period in accordance with the
provisions of Arts. 76 and 77, the court shall observe for
the application of the penalty the following rules,

Rules in cases in which the penalty is not

composed of three periods

22

www.rkmfiles.net

When the culprit has to serve two or more

penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously if the
nature of the penalties will so permit.

In cases in which the penalty prescribed by law

is not composed of three periods, the courts shall apply
the rules provided under Art. 64, dividing into three
equal portions of time included in the penalty prescribed
and forming one period or each of the three portions
(Art. 65, RPC).

If the nature of such penalties is not possible for

simultaneous service, the order of their severity shall be
followed so that they may be executed successively or as
nearly as may be possible, should a pardon have been
granted as to the penalty or penalties first imposed, or
should they have been served out (Art. 70, 1 st and 2nd
paragraphs, RPC).

IMPOSITION OF FINES
May the court impose a fine at its own discretion?
Art. 66 provide that in imposing fines the courts
may fix any amount within the limits established by law.
Hence, even though the law authorizes the court to
impose any amount of fine, said amount should be within
the limits provided for by law.

According to severity, what is the order of the

penalties provided for by law?
The respective severities of the penalties are
arranged in the following scale:

What are the factors that should be taken into

consideration by the court in fixing the amount of
fine?

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.

Death,
Reclusion Perpetua,
Reclusion Temporal,
Prision Mayor,
Prision Correccional,
Arresto Mayor,
Arresto Menor,
Destierro,
Perpetual Absolute Disqualification,
Temporary Absolute Disqualification
Suspension for public office, the right to
vote and be voted for, the right to follow a
profession or calling,
12. Public censure.

In fixing the amount in each case, attention

shall be given, not only to the mitigating and
aggravating circumstances, but more particularly to the
wealth or means of the culprit (Art. 66, RPC).

Penalty to be imposed upon a person under

eighteen years of age
When the offender is a minor under eighteen
years and his case s one coming under the provisions of
the paragraph next to the last of Art. 80 of the Revised
Penal Code, the following rules shall e observed:

What is the three-fold rule in Criminal Law?

It is the rule providing that the maximum
duration of the convicts sentence shall not be more than
three-old the length of tie corresponding to the most
severe of the sentence imposed. No other penalty to
which he may be liable shall be inflicted after the sum
total of those imposed equals the sae maximum period.
Such maximum period shall in no case exceed
forty (40) years (Art. 70, PRC).

(1) Upon a person under fifteen but over nine

years of age, who is not exempted from
liability by reason of the court having
declared that he acted with discernment
discretionary penalty shall be imposed, but
always lower by two degrees at least than
that prescribed by law for the crime which
he committed.
(2) Upon a person over fifteen and under
eighteen years of age the penalty next
lower than that prescribed by law shall be
imposed, but always in the proper period
(Art. 68, RPC).

What is the duration of perpetual penalties (pena

perpetua)?
The duration of perpetual penalties (pena
perpetua) shall be computed at thirty (30) years (Art. 70,
RPC).

Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed

is not wholly excusable:

GRADUATED SCALE
In the case in which the law prescribed a
penalty lower or higher by one or ore degrees than
another given penalty, the rules prescribed in Art. 61
shall be observed in graduating such penalty.

A penalty lower by one or two degrees than that

prescribed by law shall be imposed if the deed is not
wholly excusable by reason of the lack of some of the
conditions required to justify the same or to exempt from
criminal ability in the several cases mentioned in Arts. 11
and 12 provided that the majority of such conditions are
present. The courts shall impose the penalty in the
period which may be deemed proper, in view of the
number and nature of the conditions of exemption
present or lacking (Art. 69, RPC).

The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from

the graduated scale in which s comprised the given
penalty.
The courts in apllying such lower or higher
penalty shall observe the following graduated scales:
SCALE NO. 1

SERVICE OF SENTENCE

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

How should the offender serve his penalties when he has

to serve two or more penalties?

23

Death,
Reclusion Perpetua,
Reclusion Temporal,
Prision Mayor,
Prision Correccional,

www.rkmfiles.net

6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

Arresto Mayor,
Destierro,
Arresto Menor,
Public Censure,
Fine.

but without hitting the offended party or

without inflicting a mortal wound on him.

2. When is the killing of a child below seven

years of age (1) murder, (2) parricide, or
(3) infanticide?

SCALE NO. 2
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Perpetual absolute disqualification,

Temporary absolute disqualification,
Suspension from pubic office, the right to
vote and bevoted for, and the right to
follow a profession or calling,
Public censure,
Fine (Art. 71, RPC).

What is the order of preference in the payment of

civil liabilities of a person found guilty of two or
more offenses?
The civil liability of a person found guilty of two
or more offenses shall be satisfied by following the
chronological order of the dates of the judgments
rendered against him, beginning with the first in order of
time (Art. 72, RPC).
What is the presumption in regard
imposition of accessory penalties?

to

the

3. Distinctions of Reclusion Perpetua from

Life Imprisonment

Whenever the courts shall impose a penalty

which, by provision of law, carries with it other penalties
such as death if not executed by reason of commutation
or pardon, reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal,
prision mayor, prision correccional, and arresto, it must
be understood that the accessory penalties are also
imposed upon the convict (Art. 73, RPC).

Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua in certain

cases

In cases in which the law prescribe a penalty

higher than another given penalty, without specifically
designating the name of the former, if such higher
penalty should be that of death, the same penalty and
the accessory penalties of Art. 40, shall be considered as
the next higher penalty (Art. 74, RPC).

1. When is the discharge of firearm (1) alarm,

(2) illegal discharge of firearm, or (3)
attempted homicide, or attempted murder
or attempted parricide?

The penalty of life imprisonment is

applicable to special laws, reclusion
perpetua is applicable to felonies punished
under the Revised Penal Code.
Reclusion perpetua entails imprisonment
for at least thirty (30) years after which
convict becomes eligible for pardon; Life
imprisonment has no definite extent or
duration.
Reclusion perpetua carries with it accessory
penalties while life imprisonment does not
carry with it any accessory penalty.

4. Distinguish Syndicated Crime Group from a

Conspiracy of Two or More Persons.

DIFFERENTIATIONS

The killing of a child less than seven years

of age is murder when the relation of the
offender with the child is not one of those
mentioned in the definition of the crime of
parricide and the child is at least three (3)
days old.
It is parricide when the victim is the child,
whether legitimate or illegitimate or the
legitimate other descendant of the offender
and the age of the child is at least three (3)
days old.
It is infanticide when the child killed is less
than three (3) days old, regardless of
whether or not the offender is related to the
child.

The discharge of firearm is considered as

an alarm when the offender merely
discharges his firearm within a town or
public place, which produces alarm or
danger, without aiming the firearm at or
against any person.
It is illegal discharge of firearm when
the offender discharges the firearm against
or at a certain person, without any intent to
kill, but merely to frighten the offended
party.
It is attempted homicide, or attempted
murder or attempted parricide, when
the firearm is discharged at or against
another person with intent to kill the latter,

In syndicated crime group, an offense is

committed by a group actually organized
for gain purposes. Such is not necessary in
the latter.
A syndicate crime group is an organized
group. Such oganization is not required in
mere conspiracy.
In syndicate, there is a group that is
actually organized for crime purposes.
When two or more persons just agree to
commit a crime, there is conspiracy.

5. Distinguish Piracy from Mutiny

24

In piracy, the persons who attack a vessel

or seize its cargo are strangers to said
vessel. In mutiny, they are members of the
crew or passengers.
Gain is essential in piracy. In mutiny, the
offenders may only intend to ignore the
ships officers or to commit plunder.

6. Distinguish Cuadrilla from Syndicate

www.rkmfiles.net

11.

Syndicate involves two or more persons not

necessarily armed. Cuadrilla refers to at
least four (4) armed persons.
Cuadrilla generally applies to all crimes.
Syndicate applies to crimes committed for
purposes of gain.

In both, two or more persons come to an

agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it. Hence, the
definition of conspiracy in Art 8 applies to both.

7. Distinction between general intent and

specific intent.

When the conspiracy relates to crimes other

than treason, rebellion or sedition, it is not a
felony but only a manner of incurring criminal
liability. When the felony is committed after the
conspiracy, the act of one offender is the act of
all the other offenders.

In felonies committed by dolus, the

third element of voluntariness is a general
intent; whereas, in some particular felonies
proof of particular or specific intent is required.
Thus in certain crimes against property, there
must be the intent to gain (Art. 293, Robbery,
Art 308, Theft). Intent to kill is essential in
frustrated or attempted homicide (Art. 249). In
forcible abduction (Art 342), the specific intent
of lewd designs must be proved.

Even if the conspiracy relates to the crime of

treason, rebellion or sedition, if the latter is
actually committed, the conspiracy is not a
separate offense, but only a manner of incurring
criminal liability in treason, rebellion or sedition.
The offenders are liable for treason, rebellion or
sedition as the case may be, and the conspiracy
is absorbed.

8. Intent to commit the crime and intent to

perpetrate the act, distinguished.
A person may not have consciously
intended to commit a crime; but he did intend
to commit an act, and that act is, by the very
nature of things the crime itself.
In the first (intent to commit the
crime), there must be criminal intent; in the
second (intent to perpetrate the act), it is
enough that the prohibited act is done freely
and consciously.
9.

Mala
in
se
distinguished.

and

mala

Distinguish conspiracy as a felony from

conspiracy as a manner of incurring
criminal liability.

(12) Imbecility distinguished from insanity.

While the imbecile is exempted in all cases from
criminal liability, the insane is not so exempted
if it can be shown that he acted during a lucid
interval.
(13) Entrapment and instigation, distinguished.

prohibita,

There is a wide difference between entrapment

and instigation, fir while in the latter case the
instigator practically induces the would-be
accused into the commission of the offense and
himself becomes a co-principal, in entrapment
ways and means are resorted to for the purpose
of trapping and capturing the law-breakers in
the execution of his criminal plan. Entrapment is
no bar to the prosecution and conviction of the
lawbreaker. But when there is instigation, the
accused must be acquitted.

There is a distinction between crimes

which are mala in se, or wrongful from their
nature, such as theft, rape, homicide, etc., and
those that are mala prohibita, or wrong merely
because prohibited by statute, such as illegal
possession of firearm.
Crimes mala in se are those so serious
in their effects to society as to call for the
almost
unanimous
condemnation
of
its
members; while crimes mala prohibita are
violations of mere rules of convenience
designed to secure a more orderly regulation of
the affairs of society.

(14)

In acts mala in se, the intent governs; but

in those mala prohibita, the only inquiry is,
has the law been violated?
Criminal intent is not necessary where the
act is prohibited for reasons of public
policy, as in illegal possession of firearm.
(2) The term mala in se refers generally to
felonies defined and penalized by the RPC.
The term mala prohibita refers generally to
acts made criminal by special laws.

Ordinary
mitigating
and
privileged
mitigating circumstances, distinguished.
1)

An ordinary mitigating circumstance is

susceptible of being offset by any
aggravating
circumstance;
while
a
privileged mitigating circumstance cannot
be offset by aggravating circumstance.

2)

Ordinary mitigating, if not offset by an

aggravating circumstance, produces only
the effect of applying the penalty provided
by law in its minimum period; whereas,
privileged mitigating produces the effect of
imposing upon the offender the penalty
lower by one or two degrees that that
provided by law.

(1)

10. Intent distinguished from motive.

(15)

Motive is the moving power which impels one to

action for a definite result. Intent is the purpose
to use a particular means to effect such result.

25

Qualifying aggravating circumstance

distinguished from generic aggravating
circumstance.

www.rkmfiles.net

1)

2)

3)

The effect of a generic aggravating

circumstance, not offset by any mitigating
circumstance, is to increase the penalty
which should be imposed upon the accused
to the maximum period, but without
exceeding the limit prescribed by law; while
that of a qualifying circumstance is not only
to give the crime its proper and exclusive
name but also to place the author thereof
in such a situation as to deserve no other
penalty than that specifically prescribed by
law for said crime.
A qualifying aggravating circumstance
cannot
be
offset
by
a
mitigating
circumstance;
a
generic
aggravating
circumstance may be compensated by a
mitigating circumstance.
A qualifying aggravating circumstance to
be appreciated must be allege in the
information If it is not alleged, it becomes a
generic aggravating circumstance only.

4)
5)

(19) Conditional pardon distinguished from

parole.

(16) With the aid of armed men distinguished

from by a band.

1)

Conditional pardon, which may be given at

any time after final judgement is granted
by the Chief Executive under the provisions
of the Administrative Code; parole, which
may be given after the prisoner has served
the minimum penalty, is granted by the
Board of Pardons and Parole under the
provision of the Indeterminate Sentence
Law.

2)

For violation of the conditional pardon, the

convict may be ordered rearrested or
reincarcerated by the chief executive, or
may be prosecuted under he RPC; for
violation of the terms of the parole, the
convict cannot be prosecuted under the
RPC. He can be rearrested and incarcerated
to serve the unserved portion of his original
penalty.

By a band requires that at least four armed

malefactors shall have acted together in the
commission of an offense. Aid of armed men is
present even if the principal offender merely
relied on their aid, for actual aid not necessary.
(17) Recidivism and reiteracion, distinguished.
The circumstance of reiteracion may be
distinguished from recidivism in the following
ways:
(a) In reiteracion, it is necessary that the
offender
shall
have
served
his
sentence; whereas, in recidivism it is
enough that a final judgement has
been rendered.
(b) In reiteracion, the previous and
subsequent offenses must not be
defined in the sae title of the RPC;
whereas, recidivism requires that the
offenses be included in the sae title of
the Code.
(c) Reiteracion
is
not
always
an
aggravating circumstance; whereas,
recidivism is always o be taken into
consideration in fixing the penalty to
be imposed upon the accused.

(20) Illegal association,

illegal assembly.

2)

3)

distinguished

from

(1)

In illegal assembly, it is necessary that

there is an actual meeting or assembly of
armed persons for the purpose of
committing any o the rimes punishable
under the PRC, or of individuals who,
although not armed, are incited to the
commission of treason, rebellion, sedition,
or assault upon a person in authority or his
agent.
Such requisite is not necessary in the crime
of illegal association.
(2) In illegal assembly, it is the meeting and
attendance at such meeting that are
punished.
In illegal associations, it is ha act of forming
or organising and membership of the
association that are punished.
(3) If the purpose of the meeting is to commit
crimes punishable by special laws, such
meeting is not an illegal assembly.
In illegal association, the purpose may
include
the
commission
of
crimes
punishable by special laws, because when
the purpose of the organization is contrary

(18) Amnesty and pardon, distinguished.

1)

public office or the right of suffrage, unless

such rights be expressly restored by the
terms of the pardon. On the other hand,
amnesty looks backward and abolishes and
puts oblivion the offense itself; it so
overlooks and obliterates the offense with
which he is charged that the person
released by amnesty stands before the law
precisely as though he had committed no
offense.
Both do not extinguish the civil liability of
the offender.
Pardon, being a private act of the President,
must be pleaded and proved by the person
pardoned;
while
amnesty
being
by
Proclamation of the Chief executive with
the concurrence of Congress is a public act
of which he courts should take judicial
notice.

Pardon includes any crime and is exercise

individually by the President; amnesty is a
blanket pardon granted o classes of
persons or communities who may be guilty
of political offenses.
Pardon is exercised when the person is
already convicted; amnesty may be
exercised even before trial or investigation
is had.
Pardon looks forward and relieves the
offender from the consequences of an
offense of which he has been convicted,
that is, it abolishes or forgives the
punishment, and for that reason it does not
work the restoration of the rights o hold

26

www.rkmfiles.net

to public morals the acts which are contrary

to public morals may constitute crimes
punishable under the special laws.

Imprudence indicates a deficiency of action,

negligence indicates a deficiency of perception.
Hence, failure in precaution is termed
imprudence. Failure in advertence is known as
negligence.

(21) Prevaricacion, distinguished from bribery.

The third form of direct bribery is committed by
refraining from doing something which pertains
to the official duty of the officer. Prevaricacion is
committed in the same way.
In this regard, the two felonies are similar.
But they differ in that in bribery the offender
refrained from doing his official duty in
consideration of a gift received or promised.
This element is not necessary in the rime of
prevaricacion.

The wrongful acts may be avoided on two

levels:
(1) by paying proper attention and using due
diligence in foreseeing them, and
(2) by taking the necessary precaution once
they are foreseen.
Failure to do the first is negligence. Failure o do the
second is imprudence.
(25)

(22) Direct bribery, distinguished from indirect

bribery.
1)
2)

3)

Held: The crime is not kidnapping with rape, but

forcible abduction with rape. When the violent
taking of a woman is motivated by lewd
designs, forcible abduction is the offense. When
it is not so motivated, such taking constitutes
kidnapping. Forcible abduction is against
chastity; kidnapping is against personal liberty.
CASES
1.

Both brigandage and robbery in band require

that the offenders form a band of robbers.
In brigandage, the purpose of the offenders is
any of the following:
to commit robbery in the highway, or
to kidnap persons for the purpose of
extortion or to obtain ransom, or
(3) for any other purpose to be attained by
means of force and violence; in robbery in
band, the purpose of the offenders is only
to commit a particular robbery not
necessarily in the highway.

2.

If the agreement among more than three (3)

armed men was to commit only a particular
robbery, the offense is not brigandage, but only
robbery in band.

A broke the wooden gate of the stone wall

around the premises of B and once inside took
from the yard of B building materials, which
were lying there. What crime was committed by
A? Explain with reasons.

Answer:
Theft, because although he broke open
the gate, he did not enter the house with force
upon things. He entered the yard only.

In brigandage, the mere formation of a band for

any of the purposes mentioned in the law is
sufficient as it would not be necessary to show
that the band actually committed robbery in the
highway, etc.; in robbery in band, it is necessary
to prove that the band actually committed
robbery, as a mere conspiracy to commit
robbery is not punishable
distinguished

A entered the house of B through the window

and once inside took money and jewelry
belonging to B after intimidating him with a
pistol. What kind of robbery was committed by
A? Why?

Answer: A committed a complex crime of Robbery

with Force Upon Things with Robbery with
Intimidation. This is in accordance with the
ruling laid down by the Supreme Court in the
case of Napoles versus Court of Appeals.

(1)
(2)

Imprudence
negligence.

rape,

A, B, C and others grabbed a girl, 16 years of

age and then dragged her to a nearby forest.
There she was brutally ravished, first by A and
afterwards by B. Are they guilty of kidnapping
with rape?

In both, the public officer receives gift.

While in direct bribery there is an
agreement between the public officer and
the giver of the gift or present, in indirect
bribery usually no such agreement exists.
In direct bribery, the offender agrees to
perform or performs an act or refrains from
doing something, because of the gift or
promise; in indirect bribery, it is not
necessary that the officer should do any
particular act or even promise to do an act,
as it is enough that e accepts gifts by
reason of his office.

(23) Brigandage, distinguished from robbery in

band.

(24)

Forcible
abduction
with
distinguished from kidnapping.

3.

from

A removed the radio of B from the car of the

latter and began to leave the place. On the way,
B met A and, having recognized the radio, B
asked A where he had gotten it; but A drew out
and opened his knife and threatened to kill B.
What crime or crimes were committed by A?
Explain your answer.

Answer: A committed two distinct and separate

crimes of Theft and Grave Threats. To constitute
robbery with violence against or intimidation of
persons, the taking of personal property

27

www.rkmfiles.net

belonging to another with intent to gain must be

accomplished
because
of
violence
or
intimidation. In this case, the taking of the radio
was complete and, hence, the crime of theft
was already consummated when the offended
party was intimidated. The threat to kill B made
by A is not a constitutive element of robbery
because the violence or intimidation must be
employed before the taking of personal property
belonging to another is complete.
4.

Answer: The crime is robbery with intimidation.

Although a house may be considered as real
property when attached to the ground, the
moment it is removed from the ground and
carried away it ceases to be a real property and
becomes personal property. One of the
elements of robbery is that the property taken is
personal property belonging to another.

A pointed his knife at B and demanded for his

money, and B pulled his wallet from his pocket
and handed it to A who took hold of it, but a
policemen suddenly appeared, collared A, and
placed him under arrest. What crime did A
commit? Explain your answer.

Answer:
The
crime
committed
by
A
consummated robbery with intimidation.
5.

carried said house to the lot of one of the

offenders? Explain your answer.

8.

is

Answer: A committed grave coercion, because he

compelled B to do something against his will by
means of intimidation. While it is true that A had
intent to gain and that ordinarily in coercion the
offender should not act with intent to gain, the
crime committed by A is not robbery with
intimidation, because one of the elements of
robbery is that the personal property must
belong to another. Since the property belonged
to him, A cannot be guilty of robbery, as no one
can be held liable for robbery of his own
property. This is not an impossible crime where
the act performed would have been an offense
against persons or property, because when the
act performed also constitutes a violation of
another provision of the RPC, impossible crime
cannot exist.
It is submitted that A is not liable for grave
threats, because the intimidation produced
immediate effect.

While a woman was walking along Session

Road, a man following her suddenly snatched
her handbag and ran away with it. What crime
was committed by that man? Explain your
answer.

Answer: The man committed the crime of theft, not

robbery with violence against persons, because
mere snatching of personal property from the
hand of the offended party, although violence is
used, it is not used on the person of the
offended party, but on the thing taken. It is a
rule that to constitute robbery with violence
against persons, the violence must be on the
person of the offended party, not upon the thing
taken.
6.

A help-up B at the point of a revolver and

succeeded in taking the watch from B. When he
reached home, A found that the watch he had
taken from B was his own property which he
had lost a week before. What crime was
committed by A?

While A was looking for his lost pig, he

happened to pass by the house of B and saw
under the latters house a pig. A told B that that
was his lost pig, but B said that that pig
belonged to him. A unsheathed his bolo and
threatened B with bodily harm, unless the latter
would give to him the pig. Afraid that he might
be injured, B gave the pig to A. A was
prosecuted for robbery with intimidation. During
the trial it was established by the prosecution
that the pig really belonged to B and that it was
not the lost pig of A. If you were the judge,
would you convict or acquit A? In case you
decide to convict him, of what crime will you
find him guilty?

9.

A passer-by noticed three persons inside the

house of another taking personal property. The
passer-by asked them why they were there. One
of them shot and killed him. What crime was
committed? Why?

Answer: The crime committed is robbery with

homicide, because the homicide was committed
by reason of the robbery, that is, to do away
with a witness.
10. Would it be robbery with homicide if a robber
killed his companion, another robber, on the
occasion or by reason of the robbery? Why?

Answer: Since A believed in good faith that the pig

was his, even if his claim later on appeared to
be untenable, there being no intent to gain on
his part, he should be found guilty of grave
coercion and not robbery with intimidation. One
of the elements of robbery is that the offender
took the personal property belonging to another
with intent to gain.

Answer: Yes, because in robbery with homicide, it is

only the result, without reference or distinction
as to the persons intervening in the commission
of the crime that must be taken into
consideration.
oo

7.

CRIMINAL LAW
(REVISED PENAL CODE- BOOK 2)

What crime is committed by several persons,

who, by means of intimidation used against the
owner of a small house, succeeded in removing
that small house from the lot of the owner and

28

www.rkmfiles.net

TREASON

strengthen the enemy in the conduct of war, there must

be an independents evidence of adherence, otherwise,
the accused is entitled to acquittal.
Basically, the mental condition cannot bring
about the offense not until the offender has started
committing an overt act.

Any person who, owing allegiance to (the

Philippine), not being a foreigner, levies war against
them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid or
comfort within the Philippine Islands or elsewhere, shall
be punished by reclusion temporal to death and shall pay
a fine not to exceed P20, 000.
No person shall be convicted of treason unless
on the testimony of 2 witnesses at least to the same
overt acts or on confession of the accused in open court.

EVIDENCE NEEDED FOR CONVICTION IN TREASON

1.

Likewise, an alien, residing in the Philippines

Islands, who commits acts of treason as defined in par. 1
of this article shall be punished by prision mayor to
death and shall pay a fine not to exceed P20, 000.

2.

WHAT IS THE SO-CALLED TWO-WITNESS RULE?

Elements:
1.
2.
3.

Under Art.114 of the RPC, no person shall be

convicted of treason except upon the testimony of at
least 2 witnesses by the same overt act or upon his
confession in open court. The 2-witness rule refers to
that portion of the provision which requires testimonies
of 2 witnesses at least on the same overt act.

The
offender
owes
allegiance
to
the
Government of the Philippines;
There is a war in which the Philippines is
involved;
The offender either:
a. Levies war against the Government; or
b. Adheres to the enemies, giving them
aid or comfort.

Example:
Supposing during the 2nd World War, A had
cooperated with Japanese solders and A was seen by it in
the company of such soldiers burning a certain barrio. A
is again seen by C in the company of the same Japanese
soldiers burning again another barrio. Under these set of
facts, if B and C would testify of what they have
respectively witnessed, may A be convicted of treason?

TREASON is a breach of allegiance, which is the

obligation of fidelity and obedience one owes to the
government or sovereign under which he lives, in return
for the protection he receives.
PERSONS LIABLE FOR TREASON
1.
2.

Filipino citizens owe permanent allegiance

to the government.
Resident aliens owe temporary allegiance
to government.

Answer:
No, it is not only the number of witnesses or the
substance but at least 2 witnesses should testify on the
same overt act, commission of the same treaso0nous act
at the same place and at almost the same time. It is not
enough that there be witnesses. It is necessary that the
2 witnesses have testified to the same overt act. OVERT
ACT we mean acts committed in different places at
times far remote from each other, you will need 2
witnesses to each of those places before a conviction
may be done.

TWO MODES OF COMMITTING TREASON

1.
2.

Testimony of at least 2 witnesses to the

same overt act;
Confession of guilt by the accused in open
court.

BY LEVYING WAR actual assemblage of

persons for the purpose of executing a
treasonable design.
BY ADHERING TO THE ENEMY, GIVING HIM
AID AND COMFORT

ADHERENCE TO THE ENEMY a citizen intellectuality

or emotionally favors the enemy and harbors
sympathies or convictions disloyal to his countrys
policy or interest.

So, even if there several witnesses testifying on

the treasonous acts, one witness to 2 treasonous act and
the other to another treasonous acts, if the acts testified
to are not committed in the same place and at the same
time, the 2-witnesses rule is not complied with. The
accused himself is entitled to freedom.

AID OR COMFORT an act which strengthens or

tends to strengthen the enemy of the government in
the conduct of war against the government or of the
country to resist or to attack the enemies of the
government or of the country.

EXCEPTION: When the accused himself pleads

guilty to the accusation of treason.
NOTE: The confession of guilt mentioned in this
rule is not a confession of guilt in the
ordinary sense of the word.

When the alleged treasonous acts consist only

of giving aid and comfort, the law requires that it must
be coupled with adherence. In other words, the mere
giving of aid and comfort WITHOUT ADHERENCE is not
treason.
On the other hand, if the manner of committing
treason by engaging the forces of the government in
combat, there is no need to show that the offenders are
doing so out of adherence to the enemy. If the aid or
support given to the enemy is one which does not

The confession referred to here is a plea of

guilty in open court.
So, if a person accused of treason has
previously
executed
a
confession
before
the
interrogating officer, but upon being arraigned in court,

29

www.rkmfiles.net

the pleaded not guilty, he cannot be convicted simply

because he had that confession.

2.

But the confession is admissible in evidence.

Only, it is not sufficient as a basis for conviction. Extra
judicial confessions are admissible but they are not
enough to sustain conviction.

NOTE: If actual acts of treason are committed after

the conspiracy or after the proposal is accepted, the
crime committed will be treason. The conspiracy or
proposal is considered as a means in the
commission thereof.

TREASON DISTINGUISHED FROM SEDITION:

TREASON:
Violation by a subject of his allegiance
to his sovereign or the supreme authority of the
state.
SEDITION:
The
raising
of
commotion
or
disturbances in the state.

IMPORTANT: The co-conspirators or those persons

involved in the proposal will be criminality liable to
that extent only as long as none among them has
committed treasonous acts.

TREASON DISTINGUISHED FROM REBELLION

1.
2.

If anyone of the conspirators or person participating

in the proposal have already done treasonous act
even though unknown to the others, the crime of all
of them will be treason and not merely conspiracy or
proposal.

An act of levying war to help the enemy is

treason otherwise it would be rebellion.
In treason, the purpose is to deliver the
government to the enemy or to pave the way for the
coming of the enemy while in rebellion, the purpose is to
substitute the government with their own.

NOTE: Bear in mind that in conspiracy, there

must be an agreement with concurrence of decision;
a mere agreement without decision is not
conspiracy. So also, a mere proposal without
acceptance, it is not criminal proposal.

IMPORTANT POINTS TO REMEMBER REGARDING

TREASON:
1.

2.
3.

4.

5.

Treason is committed only in time of war. It

cannot be committed in time of peace. Treasonable acts
may be actually during peace time, but there are no
traitors until war has started. [LAUREL VS. MISA, 77 PHIL
856]
No matter how many acts of treason are
committed by the offender, he will be liable for one crime
of treason only.
There is no complex crime of treason with
murder. Murder is an integral element of the crime of
treason which correspond to the giving of aid and
comfort to the enemy. The offender will be liable for
treason only.
In the imposition of the penalty the course
may disregard the attending mitigating and aggravating
circumstances. It may consider only the number, nature
and gravity of the treasonous acts proven. The
imposition of the penalty, although indivisible, may rest
largely on the exercise of judicial discretion.
Treachery, abuse of superior strength and
evident premeditation are inherent in treason if there are
killings.

There must always be the CONCURRENCE of

these 2 elements. One without the other is not
punishable, even if it refers to treason.
MISPRISION OF TREASON

3.
4.

Even though the offender has reported the

conspiracy to the government, if by the time the report
was made, the conspirators were already able to commit
overt acts of treason, then the party knowing the
conspiracy is nevertheless liable for misprision of treason
because the report was not made as soon as possible.

Elements of Conspiracy to Commit Treason:

1.

3.

There is a war in which the Philippines is

involved;
Two or more persons come to an agreement
to levy war against the government or to adhere to the
enemies and to give them aid or comfort.
They decide to commit it.

Misprision of treason is a felony by omission.

The offender has knowledge of conspiracy to commit
treason but he failed to report it to the authorities AS
SOON AS POSSIBLE.
NOTE: It is not enough that the report be made.
What is required is that it must be reported as
soon as possible, because if the report is
delayed, this might ripen to an act of treason.

Elements of Proposal to Commit Treason:

1.

Elements:
1. Offender must owe allegiance to the
Government of the Philippines;
2. Offender is not a foreigner;
He has knowledge of a conspiracy to
commit treason against the said government;
He conceals or fails to disclose the same to
the authorities of the province or city in which he resides.

For this crime to be committed, first of all, there

must be a conspiracy to commit treason. Misprision of
treason arises when a person who knew of such
conspiracy does not report the same as soon as possible.

CONSPIRACY AN PROPOSAL TO COMMIT TREASON

2.

The accused has decided to levy war

against the Government or to adhere to the enemies
giving them aid or comfort.
3. He proposes its execution to some other
person of persons.

There is war in which the Philippines is

involved;

The idea here is to make it obligatory on the

part of all citizens of the Philippines to report it to the

30

www.rkmfiles.net

government as soon as possible any conspiracy to

commit treason and that is known to them so that the
government may quell the treason before it can ripen.

Where the conspiracy has already ripened to an

act of treason, the obligation to report does not exist
anymore because that means that the government knew
that there is treason going on.

committed in more than 2 ways;

committed in 2 ways only;
generally committed by an alien.
may be committed by citizens

INCITING TO
REPRISALS

NOTE: The obligation to report does not cover

aliens even if they are permanent resident of the
Philippines.
This crime can only be committed by
citizens of the Philippines, unlike treason, which may be
committed by aliens as long as they are permanent
resident of the Philippines.

Elements:
1.
2.

ESPIONAGE

WAR

OR

GIVING

MOTIVES

o
FOR

Offender commits unlawful or unauthorized

acts;
Said acts provide or give occasion for war
involving or liable to involve the Philippines
or expose Filipino citizens to reprisals on
their persons or property.

This is committed by any public officer or

employee who, by unlawful or unauthorized acts provoke
or gives occasion for a war or liable to involve the
Philippines or exposes Filipino citizens to reprisals on
their persons or property. There is no need of war going
on. This may be committed in time of war or time of
peace.

There are 2 modes of committing espionage

under the RPC.
Elements of the first mode:
1. Offender, without any authority enters a
warship, naval or military establishment or
reservation, and
2. He obtains information, plans, photographs
or other data of a confidential nature
relative to the defense of the Philippines.

VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY
Elements:
1.

NOTE: The purpose of the offender in entering

must be to get hold of such materials.

2.

If that is not the purpose, the crime committed

is trespass to government property. Mere entering here
will bring about a consummated espionage as long as
the criminal intent of the offender is to get hold of those
materials which are vital to the defense of the
Philippines.

3.

There is war in which the Philippines is not

involved;
Competent
authorities
have
issued
regulations to enforce neutrality; and
The offender violates any of said
regulations.

There must be a war going on, but the

Philippines is not a partly to the war. It cannot be
committed as a crime if the government has not
promulgated rules and regulations for the observance of
neutrality. It is the violation of such rules that brings
about the crime of violation of neutrality.

Elements of the second mode:

1. Offender is a public officer;
2. He has in his possession articles, data or
information referred to in the first mode of
committing this crime; and
3. He
discloses
their
contents
to
a
representative of a foreign nation.

CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY

Elements:
1.

NOTE: Where the offender is not a custodian,

the crime committed is infidelity in the custody of public
records, and it has nothing to do with national defense of
the Philippines, the offender becomes liable only for
infidelity in the custody of public records.

2.

3.

ESPIONAGE DISTINGUISHED FROM TREASON

There is war in which the Philippines is

involved;
The offender shall have correspondence
with an enemy country or territory occupied
by enemy troops; and
Said correspondence is:
a)
b)

ESPIONAGE
TREASON
- there is no need of war going on;
- there must be war

c)

31

prohibited by the government;

the
offender
shall
have
correspondence with an enemy
country or territory occupied by
enemy troops;
notice or information to be given
thereby which might be useful to

www.rkmfiles.net

the enemy or intended by the

offender to aid the enemy.

3 KINDS OF PIRACY
1. Piracy in the high seas punished in the RPC;
2. Piracy in the Philippine waters punished in
PD 532; and
3. Air piracy punished in RA 6235.

This presupposes that, there is a war going on

and the Philippines is a party to that war. Under this
article, the mere sending or carrying on of
correspondence from one who is in the enemy country or
who is in the territory occupied by enemy troops is a
crime under the circumstances specified in the article.
The implication is that when a person writers to
another in any enemy country and he makes use of
ciphers and conventional signs he is hiding something
and that is maybe one which is vital to the defense of the
Philippines, so the mere sending of that under those
conditions makes it a crime.

PIRACY IN THE HIGH SEAS UNDER THE REVISED

PLENAL CODE
1. By attacking or seizing a vessel on the high
seas;
2. By seizing the whole or part of the cargo or
equipment of the vessel while on the high
seas or the personal belongings of its
complement or passengers, the offenders
not
being
of
the
complement
or
passengers.

FLIGHT TO ENEMY COUNTRY

Elements:
1.
2.
3.

OFFENDERS OF PIRACY IN THE HIGH SEAS (RPC)

- Strangers to the vessel
- They are not passengers or members of the
crew.
For the purposes of determining whether one is
a stranger to the vessel or not you only have to
determine whether one is lawfully admitted to the
vessel. If he is lawfully admitted to the vessel, other
than a complement thereof, then he is a passenger. But
if he boards the vessel without being lawfully admitted
thereto, then he is a strange and therefore liable for
piracy.
HIGH SEAS refer to the body of water outside
of the territorial waters of the Philippines, even if such is
within the territorial waters of a foreign country.
- Refers to that body of water beyond the threemile limit of our jurisdiction. At this point therefore, it
can be easily understood that piracy under the RPC
begins where piracy under PD 532 ends.

Existence of war in which the Philippines is

involved;
Offender owes allegiance to the Philippines;
and
He attempts to flee to the enemy country,
which is prohibited by the government.

This crime can be committed only in times of

war where the Philippines is a party. Mere attempt to
flee to the side of the enemy will already consummate
this crime.
The law presupposes that in time of war, a
person in the Philippines would try to go to the enemy
line, that person must have something for the enemy to
the prejudice of the Philippines and its forces.
ATTEMPT TO FLEE TO ENEMY COUNTRY --- This
is committed when a citizen of the Philippines or one
owing allegiance to the Philippine government shall
attempt to go to an enemy country.

ROBBERY ON THE HIGH SEAS

- Offender is a member of the complement or a
passenger of the vessel and there is violence against or
intimidation of persons or force upon things in taking the
property in the vessel.

PIRACY
Piracy is committed by any person who, on the
high seas shall attack or seize a vessel or, not being a
member of its complement nor a passenger, shall seize
the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, its
equipment, or personal belongings of its complement or
passengers.
Piracy is robbery or forcible depredation on the
high seas without lawful authority and done with animo
furandi and in the spirit and intention of universal
hostility.
Piracy is regarded not as a crime of any
particular country but a crime against the whole world so
that whenever the offenders may go to one country they
can be prosecuted there.
REASON: The law they violated is not the law of
a particular country but the law of the family of nations.

PIRACY the offender is an outsider.

NOTE: In both robbery on the high seas and
piracy, there is
1.
2.

Intent to gain; and

Manner of committing the crime is the
same.

MUTINY
MUTINY ON THE HIGH SEAS is the unlawful
resistance to a superior officer or the raising of
commosions and disturbances on board a ship
against the authority of its commander. It may be
committed by members of the crew and passengers
of the vessel.

32

www.rkmfiles.net

NOTE: Mutiny must be committed on the high

seas. When committed on board a vessel within the
waters of the Philippine, the killing is punished as
murder.

through Philippine waters. Includes all kinds and types of

vessels or boats used in fishing.
ANY PERSON WHO AIDS OR PROTECTS PIRATES OR
ABETS THE COMMISSION OF PIRACY SHALL BE
CONSIDERED AS AN ACCOMPLLICE.

PIRACY DISTINGUISHED FROM MUTINY:

PIRACY
the persons who attack or seize
they are members of the crew passengers;
the vessel on the high seas are
crew passengers; strangers to said vessel;
- there is an intent to gain

Example:
Giving pirates information about the movement of police
or other peace officers of the government;
Acquires or receives property taken by such pirates or in
any manner derives any benefit therefrom;
Directly of indirectly abets the commission of piracy.

MUTINY
- there is usually no intent to gain as the
offenders may only intend to ignore the strips
officers or to commit plunder.

Under the decree, when these acts are

committed the crime is ABETTING PIRACY. These persons
who participate by any of the acts mentioned above will
be charged not for the crime of piracy but for a crime of
abetting piracy under PD 532.

PIRACY IN THE PHILIPPINE WATERS (P.D. 532)

If any of the acts described in Art. 122 and 123
is committed in Philippine waters, the same shall be
considered as piracy under PD 532.

On the other hand, if the piracy falls under the

RPC because it was committed in the high seas, persons
who participated in the loot of the piracy or who harbor
or conceal or help the pirates escape will be accessories
to the crime of piracy. The crime committed by them is
not abetting piracy but piracy itself.

Any attack upon or seizure of any vessel, or the

taking away of the whole or part thereof or its cargo,
equipment, or the personal belongings of its complement
or passengers, irrespective of the value thereof, by
means of violence against or intimidation of persons or
force upon things, committed by any person, including a
passenger or member of the complement of said vessel
in Philippine waters, shall be considered as piracy.

So, under PD 532, the offender is a principal to

the crime of abetting piracy although the nature of the
act of participation is that of an accessory only and the
penalty imposed under the same decree is only that of
an accomplice.

In this kind of piracy, the offender may be any

person. He may be a stranger to the vessel, a passenger
or member of the crew of the vessel.

PRESUMPTION: any person who does any of the acts

provided in this section has performed them
KNOWINGLY, unless the contrary is proven.

2 WAYS OF COMMITTING PIRACY IN PHILIPPINE WATERS

DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN PIRACY UNDER PD 532 AND RPC

(1) By seizing or attacking a vessel while in the

Philippine waters with intent to gain by means of
violence or intimidation;
(2) By taking away the belongings of a member
of a crew or passenger.

Under the PRC, piracy can only be committed in the high

seas meaning to say beyond the three mile limit of our
territorial waters, whereas under the decree piracy can
only be committed within Philippine waters.
Under the RPC, piracy is committed by attacking or
seizing the vessel or of any of the cargo of personal
belongings of the passengers or complements of the
vessel.

Example:
If in the course of the voyage of an inter-island
vessel, a passenger at the point of a knife divested
another passenger of his valuables, the former will be
liable for piracy in Philippine waters, not for robbery.
Q:

NOTE: An attack or seizure of the vessel

presupposes the employment of force
but it may be such degree of force that
does not amount to robbery.

What will be the crime committed is on the

occasion of piracy in Philippine waters, only a
person was killed by the by the pirates?

Under the decree, piracy is committed not

only be an attack or seizure of the vessel or cargo or
personal belongings of the passengers or members of its
complement thru the use of violence and intimidation.

- Crime will be piracy in Philippine waters only.

PHILIPPINE WATERS refers to all bodies of
water around, between and connecting each of the
islands of the Philippine Archipelago, irrespective of its
breadth, depth, length, dimension, and all other waters
belonging to the Philippines by historic or legal title,
including territorial sea, sea-bed, insular shelves, and
other submarine areas over which the Philippines has
sovereignty or jurisdiction.

Piracy under RPC is committed by attacking or seizing a

vessel, or by seizing the whole or part of its cargo, its
equipment or personal belongings of its complement or
passengers, while such modes under PD 532 are
accomplished by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons or force upon things.
NOTE: Under the RPC, use of force upon things
does not bring about piracy unless it is
an attack or seizure of the vessel or of
the passenger and their belongings or
of the complement of the vessel.

VESSEL - any vessel or watercraft for transport

of passengers and cargo from one place to another

33

www.rkmfiles.net

NOTE: PROHIBITION IS ABSOLUTE

To make the difference between piracy under

the RPC and piracy under the decree easier to
understand, take note of the following:

IF OFFENDER IS A JURIDICAL PERSON the penalty shall

be imposed upon the manager, representative, director,
agent or employee who violated, or caused, directed,
cooperated or participated in the violation thereof;
IF VIOLATION IS COMMITTED IN THE INTEREST OF A
FOREIGN CORPORATION LEGALLY DOING BUSINESS IN
THE PHILIPPINES penalty shall be imposed upon its
resident agent, manager, representative or director
responsible for such violation and in addition thereto, the
license of said corporation to do business in the
Philippines shall be revoked.

NOTE: The essence of piracy under the decree

is not alone the seizure or attack of the
vessel but robbery committed on board
a vessel while this is in Philippine
waters.
The crime of robbery under title x is different
from the crime of theft although both crimes involve the
taking of property. So, if the taking of the cargo of
personal belongings of the passengers or complements
of the vessel amounts only to theft, PO 532 will not
apply. Without the use of violence or intimidation of
persons or without the use of force upon things as this is
understood under Art. 299 of the RPC, the decree will not
apply unless there is a seizure of the vessel or an attack
upon the vessel.

Section 4 --- The shipping, loading or carrying of any

substance or material in any cargo aircraft operating as a
public utility within the Philippines shall, be not in
accordance with the regulations issued by the Civil
Aeronautics Adm.
NOTE: PROHIBITION IS NOT ABSOLUTE

Therefore, the taking must be with violence and

intimidation or with the use of force upon things. If these
are absent on the taking, the crime is only theft.

For any death or injury to persons or damage to

property resulting from a violation of Sects. 3 and 4, the
person responsible therefore may be held liable in
accordance with the applicable provision of the RPC.
Injury / damage --- not absorbed in that
crime.
Offender may be prosecuted under the RPC
as well.

R.A. 6235
ACT TO PROHIBIT CERTAIN ACTS INIMICAL TO CIVIL
AVIATION
Although RA 6235 is commonly referred to as
the hijacking law, strictly the acts punished if this law are
not purely of hijacking.
When we say hijacking, we generally associate
the idea with that of compelling the plane to land in the
place other than its scheduled destination. This,
however, is not the only meaning of hijacking.
Hijacking generally refers to the taking of goods
in transit through force.

NOTE: Aircraft companies which operate as

public utilities or operators of aircraft which are or hire
are authorized to open and investigate suspicious
packages and cargoes in the presence of the owner or
shipper, or his authorized representatives, if present.

TWO KINDS OF AIRCRAFT MAY BE INVOLVED HERE:

1. Domestic
2. International

If the owner, shipper or his representative

refuses to have the same opened and inspected, the
airline or air-carrier is authorized to refuse the loading
thereof.

PURPOSE:

PROHIBITED ACTS:

QUALIFIED PIRACY

IF AIRCRAFT IS OF PHILIPPINE REGISTRY

(1.) To compel a change in the course or destination of an
aircraft of Philippine registry, while in flight; or
(2.) To seize or usurp the control thereof, while it is in-flight.
(3.) To compel an aircraft of foreign registry to land in
Philippine territory; or
(4.) To seize or usurp the control thereof while it is within
Philippine territory.

to help the authorities in the

enforcement of the provisions
of this Act.

Piracy is qualified if any of the following

circumstances is present, to wit:
1.
2.
3.

AIRCRAFT IS IN FLIGHT

Whenever the offenders have seized the vessel by

boarding or firing upon the same; or
Whenever the pirates have abandoned their victims
without means of saving themselves; or
Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder,
homicide, physical injuries, or rape.
KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION

An aircraft is IN FLIGHT from the moment

all its external doors are closed following embarkation
until any of such doors are opened for disembarkation.

Elements:
1. Offender is a private individual
2. He kidnaps or detains another, or in any other
manner deprives the latter of his liberty
3. The act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal
4. That in the commission of the offense, any of the
following circumstances are present (becomes
serious)

Under the law, air piracy regarding an

international plane is committed if the offender
compelled the plane to fly in Philippine territory, seized
or usurped it. If the seizure or usurpation of an
international plane, what is essential is that the plane
must be in Philippine territory.

34

www.rkmfiles.net

a. that the kidnapping/detention lasts for more

than 3 days
b. that it is committed simulating public authority
c. that any serious physical injuries are inflicted
upon the person kidnapped or detained or
threats to kill him are made, or
d. that the person kidnapped or detained is a
minor (except if parent is the offender),
female or a public officer

When the person is deprived of his liberty or is

seized and forcibly taken to another place, the inquiry
would, be what is the purpose of the offender in taking
him or her away?
1.

If the seizure is only to facilitate the killing of the

victim the crime committed would either be
homicide or murder and the crime of kidnapping is
absorbed.
2. If the seizure or deprivation of liberty is only to
compel the victim to perform an act, be it right or
wrong, the crime committed would only be grave
coercion. (People vs. Astorga, 283 SCRA 420).
3. If the deprivation of liberty is to take away the victim
to satisfy the lewd design of the offender, the crime
would only be forcible abduction.
4. If the seizure of the victim is solely to deprive him of
his liberty, the crime is illegal detention.

Note: When death penalty is imposed:

a. If kidnapping is committed for the purpose of
extorting ransom either from the victim or from
any other person even if none of the
aforementioned are present in the commission
of the offense (even if none of the
circumstances are present)
b. When the victim is killed or dies as a
consequence of the detention or is raped or is
subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts
Illustration:

In the penultimate paragraph of Article 267,

there is deprivation of liberty but not for any for the
purposes enumerated above. It is for the purpose of
extorting ransom from the victim or from any other
person. The law classifies the crime committed by the
offender as serious illegal detention even if none of the
circumstances to make it serious is present in the
commission of the crime. In this particular mode of
committing the crime of serious illegal detention,
demand for ransom is an indispensable element. (People
vs. Bustamante, G. R. No. 66427, Dec. 4, 1991)

If a private person commits the crime of

kidnapping or serious illegal detention, even though a
public officer conspires therein, the crime cannot be
arbitrary detention. As far as that public officer is
concerned, the crime is also illegal detention.
In the actual essence of the crime, when one
says kidnapping, this connotes the idea of transporting
the offended party from one place to another. When you
think illegal detention, it connotes the idea that one is
restrained of his liberty without necessarily transporting
him from one place to another.

If the victim was not kidnapped or taken away

but was restrained and deprived of his liberty, like in the
case of a hostage incident where the accused, who was
one of the occupants of the house, grabbed a child,
poked a knife on the latters neck, called for media
people and demanded a vehicle from the authorities
which he could use in escaping, as it turned out that
there was an unserved arrest warrant against him, the
proper charge is Serious Illegal Detention (without
kidnapping anymore) but likewise under Article 267 of
the Revised Penal Code.

The crime of kidnapping is committed if the

purpose of the offender is to extort ransom either from
the victim or from any other person. But if a person is
transported not for ransom, the crime can be illegal
detention. Usually, the offended party is brought to a
place other than his own, to detain him there.
When one thinks of kidnapping, it is not only
that of transporting one person from one place to
another. One also has to think of the criminal intent.

Where after taking the victim with her car, the

accused called the house of the victim asking for ransom
but upon going to their safehouse saw several police
cars chasing them, prompting them to kill their victim
inside the car, there were two crime committed
Kidnapping for Ransom and Murder, not a complex crime
of Kidnapping with Murder as she was not taken or
carried away to be killed, killing being an afterthought .
(People vs. Evanoria, 209 SCRA 577).

Forcible abduction -- If a woman is transported from one

place to another by virtue of restraining her of her
liberty, and that act is coupled with lewd designs.
Serious illegal detention If a woman is transported just
to restrain her of her liberty. There is no lewd design or
lewd intent.

SLIGHT ILLEGAL DETENTION

Grave coercion If a woman is carried away just to break

her will, to compel her to agree to the demand or request
by the offender. If a woman is carried against her will but
without lewd design on the part of the offender, the
crime is grave coercion.

Elements:
1. Offender is a private person
2. He kidnaps or detains another or in any other
manner deprives him of his liberty / furnished
place for the perpetuation of the crime
3. That the act of detention or kidnapping must be
illegal
4. That the crime is committed without the
attendant of any of the circumstances
enumerated in Art 267

Distinction between illegal detention and arbitrary

detention
Illegal detention is committed by a private
person who kidnaps, detains, or otherwise deprives
another of his liberty. Arbitrary detention is committed by
a public officer who detains a person without legal
grounds.

One should know the nature of the illegal

detention to know whether the voluntary release of the

35

www.rkmfiles.net

offended party will affect the criminal liability of the

offender.

purpose of delivering the offended party to the proper

authorities.

When the offender voluntarily releases the

offended party from detention within three days from the
time the restraint of liberty began, as long as the
offender has not accomplished his purposes, and the
release was made before the criminal prosecution was
commenced, this would serve to mitigate the criminal
liability of the offender, provided that the kidnapping or
illegal detention is not serious.

The offended party may also be detained but

the crime is not illegal detention because the purpose is
to prosecute the person arrested. The detention is only
incidental; the primary criminal intention of the offender
is to charge the offended party for a crime he did not
actually commit.
Generally, this crime is committed by
incriminating innocent persons by the offenders planting
evidence to justify the arrest a complex crime results,
that
is,
unlawful
arrest
through
incriminatory
machinations under Article 363.

If the illegal detention is serious, however, even

if the offender voluntarily released the offended party,
and such release was within three days from the time the
detention began, even if the offender has not
accomplished his purpose in detaining the offended
party, and even if there is no criminal prosecution yet,
such voluntary release will not mitigate the criminal
liability of the offender.

2.

If the arrest is made without a warrant and

under circumstances not allowing a warrantless arrest,
the crime would be unlawful arrest.

One who furnishes the place where the offended

party is being held generally acts as an accomplice. But
the criminal liability in connection with the kidnapping
and serious illegal detention, as well as the slight illegal
detention, is that of the principal and not of the
accomplice.

If the person arrested is not delivered to the

authorities, the private individual making the arrest
incurs criminal liability for illegal detention under Article
267 or 268.
If the offender is a public officer, the crime is
arbitrary detention under Article 124.

The prevailing rule now is Asistio v. Judge, which

provides that voluntary release will only mitigate criminal
liability if crime was slight illegal detention. If serious, it
has no effect.
In kidnapping for ransom, voluntary release will
not mitigate the crime.
This is because, with the
reimposition of the death penalty, this crime is penalized
with the extreme penalty of death.

If the detention or arrest is for a legal ground,

but the public officer delays delivery of the person
arrested to the proper judicial authorities, then Article
125 will apply.
Note: This felony may also be committed by public
officers.

What is Ransom?
It is the money, price or consideration paid or
demanded for redemption of a captured person or
persons, a payment that releases a person from
captivity.
UNLAWFUL ARREST
Elements:
1. That the offender arrests or detains another person
2. That the purpose of the offender is to deliver him to
the proper authorities
3. That the arrest or detention is not authorized by law
or there is no reasonable ground therefor

3.

In art 125, the detention is for some legal

ground while here, the detention is not
authorized by law

4.

In art 125, the crime pertains to failure to

deliver the person to the proper judicial
authority within the prescribed period while
here, the arrest is not authorized by law

KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A MINOR

Elements:
1. That the offender is entrusted with the custody
of a minor person (whether over or under 7 but
less than 18 yrs old)
2. That he deliberately fails to restore the said
minor to his parents

Notes:
1.

Refers to warrantless arrests

Offender is any person, so either a public officer

or private individual

If any of the foregoing elements is absent, the

kidnapping of the minor will then fall under Article 267.

The offender in this article can be a private

individual or public officer. In the latter case, the
offender, being a public officer, has the authority to
arrest and detain a person, but the arrest is made
without legal grounds. For him to be punished under this
article, the public officer must make the arrest and
detention without authority to do so; or without acting in
his official capacity.

If the accused is any of the parents, Article 267

does not apply; Articles 270 and 271 apply.
If the taking is with the consent of the parents,
the crime in Article 270 is committed.
In People v. Generosa, it was held that
deliberate failure to return a minor under ones custody
constitutes deprivation of liberty. Kidnapping and failure
to return a minor is necessarily included in kidnapping

This felony consists in making an arrest or

detention without legal or reasonable ground for the

36

www.rkmfiles.net

and serious illegal detention of a minor under Article

267(4).

guardian or person entrusted with the custody

of such minor.

In People v. Mendoza, where a minor child was

taken by the accused without the knowledge and
consent of his parents, it was held that the crime is
kidnapping and serious illegal detention under Article
267, not kidnapping and failure to return a minor under
Article 270.

If the minor agrees to serve the accused, no

crime is committed, even if the service is rendered to
pay an ascendants alleged debt.
SERVICES RENDERED
PAYMENT OF DEBT

INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS HOME

UNDER

COMPULSION

IN

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

Elements:
1. That the minor (whether over or under 7) is
living in the home of his parents or guardians or
the person entrusted with his custody
2. That the offender induces a minor to abandon
such home

Involuntary servitude or service - In this article, no

distinction is made whether the offended is a minor or an
adult.

Notes:
The inducement must be actually done with
malice and a determined will to cause damage. (People
vs. Paalam, C.A., O.G. 8267-8268). But where the victims
abandoned their respective homes out of an
irresponsible spirit of restlessness and adventure, the
crime is not committed.
1. Minor should not leave his home of his own free
will
2. Mitigating if by father or mother

ABANDONMENT OF PERSON IN DANGER

AND ABANDONMENT OF ONES OWN VICTIM
Acts punishable:
1. By failing to render assistance to any person whom
the offender finds in an inhabited place wounded or
in danger of dying, when he can render such
assistance without detriment to himself, unless such
omission shall constitute a more serious offense

The article also punishes the father or mother

who commits the act penalized under the law. This arises
when the custody of the minor is awarded by the court to
one of them after they have separated. The other parent
who induces the minor to abandon his home is covered
by this article.

Elements
a. That place is not inhabited.
b. The accused found there a person wounded or in
danger of dying.
c. The accused can render assistance without
detriment to himself.
d. The accused fails to render assistance.

SLAVERY

2.

Elements:
1. That the offender purchase, sells kidnaps or
detains a human being.
2. That the purpose of the offender is to enslave
such human being.

3.

By failing to help or render assistance to another

whom the offender has accidentally wounded or
injured
By failing to deliver a child, under 7 whom the
offender has found abandoned, to the authorities or
to his family, or by failing to take him to a safe place

ABANDONING A MINOR

Slavery is the treatment of a human being as a

mere property, stripped of dignity and human rights. The
person is reduced to the level of an ordinary animal, a
mere chattel with material value capable of pecuniary
estimation and for which reason, the offender purchases
and sells the same.
This is distinguished from illegal detention by
the purpose.
If the purpose of the kidnapping or
detention is to enslave the offended party, slavery is
committed.

Elements:
1. That the offender has the custody of a child.
2. That the child is under seven years of age.
3. That he abandons such child.
4. That he has no intent to kill the child when the latter
is abandoned.
In order to hold one criminally liable under this
article, the offender must have abandoned the child with
deliberate intent. The purpose of the offender must
solely be avoidance of the obligation of taking care of the
minor.

The crime is slavery if the offender is not

engaged in the business of prostitution. If he is, the
crime is white slave trade under Article 341.
EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR
Elements:
1. That the offender retains a minor in his service.
2. That it is against the will of the minor.
3. That it is under the pretext of reimbursing
himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant,

ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY PERSON ENTRUSTED

WITH HIS CUSTODY; INDIFFERENCE OF PARENTS
Acts punished:

37

www.rkmfiles.net

1.

2.

By delivering a minor to a public institution or other

persons w/o consent of the one who entrusted such
minor to the care of the offender or, in the absence
of that one, without the consent of the proper
authorities
Elements:
a. That the offender has charged of the
rearing or education of a minor.
b. That he delivers said minor to a public
institution or other persons.
c. That the one who entrusted such child to
the offender has not consented to such act,
or if the one who entrusted such child to
the offender is absent; the proper
authorities have not consented to it.
By neglecting his (offenders) children by not giving
them education which their station in life requires
and financial condition permits
Elements:
a. That the offender is a parent.
b. That he neglects his children by not giving
them education.
c. That his station in life requires such
education and his financial condition
permits it.

Age Must be below 16 years. At this age, the

minor is still growing.
If the employer is an ascendant, the crime is not
committed, unless the minor is less than 12 years old.
Because if the employer is an ascendant, the law regards
that he would look after the welfare and protection of the
child; hence, the age is lowered to 12 years. Below that
age, the crime is committed.
But remember Republic Act No. 7610 (Special
Protection of Children against Child Abuse, Exploitation
and Discrimination Act). It applies to minors below 18
years old, not 16 years old as in the Revised Penal Code.
As long as the employment is inimical even though
there is no physical risk and detrimental to the childs
interest against moral, intellectual, physical, and
mental development of the minor the establishment
will be closed.
Article 278 has no application if minor is 16
years old and above. But the exploitation will be dealt
with by Republic Act No. 7610.
If the minor so employed would suffer some
injuries as a result of a violation of Article 278, Article
279 provides that there would be additional criminal
liability for the resulting felony.

Indifference of parents while they are financially

capable of supporting the needs of their children, they
deliberately neglect to support the educational
requirements
of
these
children
through
plain
irresponsibility caused by wrong social values.

QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING

EXPLOITATION OF MINORS

Elements:
1. That the offender is a private person.
2. That he enters the dwelling of another.
3. That such entrance is against the latters will.

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

Notes:
Dwelling This is the place that a person
inhabits.
It includes the dependencies which have
interior communication with the house.
It is not
necessary that it be the permanent dwelling of the
person.
So, a persons room in a hotel may be
considered a dwelling. It also includes a room where one
resides as a boarder.
1.
2.

Qualifying circumstance: if the offense is

committed by means of violence or intimidation,
the penalty is higher
There must be an opposition to the entry of the
accused

If the entry is made by a way not intended for

entry, that is presumed to be against the will of the
occupant (example, entry through a window). It is not
necessary that there be a breaking.
Lack of permission to enter a dwelling does not
amount to prohibition. So, one who enters a building is
not presumed to be trespasser until the owner tells him
to leave the building. In such a case, if he refuses to
leave, then his entry shall now be considered to have
been made without the express consent of the owner.
(People vs. De Peralta, 42 Phil. 69)

The offender is engaged in a kind of business

that would place the life or limb of the minor in danger,
even though working for him is not against the will of the
minor.
Nature of the Business This involves circuses
which generally attract children so they themselves may
enjoy working there unaware of the danger to their own
lives and limbs.

Even if the door is not locked, for as long as it is

closed, the prohibition is presumed especially if the entry
was done at the late hour of the night or at an unholy
hour of the day. (U. S. vs. Mesina, 21 Phil. 615)

38

www.rkmfiles.net

3.

Implied prohibition is present considering the

situation late at night and everyones asleep or
entrance was made through the window

b.
c.

Against the will -- This means that the

entrance is, either expressly or impliedly, prohibited or
the prohibition is presumed. Fraudulent entrance may
constitute trespass. The prohibition to enter may be
made at any time and not necessarily at the time of the
entrance.

d.
2.
3.

To prove that an entry is against the will of the

occupant, it is not necessary that the entry should be
preceded by an express prohibition, provided that the
opposition of the occupant is clearly established by the
circumstances under which the entry is made, such as
the existence of enmity or strained relations between the
accused and the occupant.
4.

May be committed even by the owner (as against

the actual occupant)

b.
c.

Intimidation is an indispensable element in the

crime of threat. The very essence of threat is to sow fear,
anxiety and insecurity in the mind of the offended party.
It is done by threatening to commit the crime upon the
person, honor and property of the offended party. There
is a promise of some future harm or injury.
Threat is a declaration of an intention or
determination to injure another by the commission upon
his person, honor or property or upon that of his family of
some wrong which may or may not amount to a crime:
(1) Grave threats when the wrong threatened to
be inflicted amounts to a crime. The case falls
under Article 282.
(2) Light threats if it does not amount to a crime.
The case falls under Article 283.

Not applicable to:

a. entrance is for the purpose of preventing harm
to himself, the occupants or a third person
b. purpose is to render some service to humanity
or justice
c. place is a caf, tavern etc while open

But even if the harm intended is in the nature of

a crime, if made orally and in the heat of anger and after
the oral threat, the issuer of the threat did not pursue
the act; the crime is only other light threats under Article
285.
To constitute grave threats, the threats must
refer to a future wrong and is committed by acts or
through words of such efficiency to inspire terror or fear
upon another. It is, therefore, characterized by moral
pressure that produces disquietude or alarm.

OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS

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

The greater perversity of the offender is

manifested when the threats are made demanding
money or imposing any condition, whether lawful or not,
and the offender shall have attained his purpose. So the
law imposes upon him the penalty next lower in degree
than that prescribed for the crime threatened to be
committed. But if the purpose is not attained, the
penalty lower by two degrees is imposed. The maximum
period of the penalty is imposed if the threats are made
in writing or through a middleman as they manifest
evident premeditation.

GRAVE THREATS
Acts punishable:
1. By threatening another with the infliction upon his
person, honor or property that of his family of any
wrong amounting to a crime and demanding money
or imposing any other condition, even though not
unlawful and the offender (Note: threat is with
condition)
a.

Elements
That the offender threatens another person
with the infliction upon the latters person,
honor or property, or upon that of the
latters family, of any wrong.
That such wrong amounts to a crime.
That the threat is not subject to a condition

Notes:

Unlike qualified trespass to dwelling, violation of

domicile may be committed only by a public officer or
employee and the violation may consist of any of the
three acts mentioned in Article 128 (1) entering the
dwelling against the will of the owner without judicial
order; (2) searching papers or other effects found in such
dwelling without the previous consent of the owner
thereof; and (3) refusing to leave the dwelling when so
requested by the owner thereof, after having
surreptitiously entered such dwelling.

5.

By making such threat without the offender attaining

his purpose
By threatening another with the infliction upon his
person, honor or property or that of his family of any
wrong amounting to a crime, the threat not being
subject to a condition (Note: threat is without
condition)
a.

Distinction between qualified trespass to dwelling and

violation of domicile

That such wrong amounts to a crime.

That there is a demand for money or that
any other condition is imposed, even
though not unlawful.
That the offender attains his purpose.

Distinction between threat and coercion:

Elements
That the offender threatens another person
with the infliction upon the latters person,
honor or property, or upon that of the
latters family, of any wrong.

The essence of coercion is violence or

intimidation. There is no condition involved; hence,
there is no futurity in the harm or wrong done.

39

www.rkmfiles.net

In threat, the wrong or harm done is future and

conditional. In coercion, it is direct and personal.

3.

Distinction between threat and robbery:

In the crime of light threats, there is no demand

for money and the threat made is not planned or done
with deliberate intent. So threats which would otherwise
qualify as grave threats, when made in the heat of anger
or which is a product of a spur of the moment are
generally considered as light threats.

(1) As to intimidation In robbery, the intimidation

is actual and immediate; in threat, the
intimidation is future and conditional.
(2) As to nature of intimidation In robbery, the
intimidation is personal; in threats, it may be
through an intermediary.
(3) As to subject matter Robbery refers to
personal property; threat may refer to the
person, honor or property.
(4) As to intent to gain In robbery, there is intent
to gain; in threats, intent to gain is not an
essential element.
(5) In robbery, the robber makes the danger
involved in his threats directly imminent to the
victim and the obtainment of his gain
immediate, thereby also taking rights to his
person by the opposition or resistance which
the victim might offer; in threat, the danger to
the victim is not instantly imminent nor the gain
of the culprit immediate.

Person orally threatens another with harm not

constituting a felony.

Whether it is grave or light threats, the crime is

committed even in the absence of the person to whom
the threat is directed.
GRAVE COERCIONS
Elements:
1. That a person prevented another from doing
something OR not to do something against his will,
be it right or wrong;
2. That the prevention or compulsion be effected by
violence, of force as would produce intimidation and
control the will.
3. That the person that restrained the will and liberty
by another had not the authority of law or the right
to do so, or, in other words, that the restraint shall
not be made under authority of law or in the
exercise of any lawful right.

LIGHT THREATS
Elements:
1. That the offender makes a threat to commit a
wrong.
2. That the wrong does not constitute a crime.
3. That there is a demand for money or that other
condition is imposed, even though not unlawful
4. That the offender has attained his purpose or, that
he has not attained his purpose

Acts punished
1.
2.

In order to convict a person of the crime of light

threats, the harm threatened must not be in the nature
of crime and there is a demand for money or any other
condition is imposed, even though lawful.

Preventing another, by means of violence, threats or

intimidation, from doing something not prohibited by
law;
Compelling another, by means of violence, threats
or intimidation, to do something against his will,
whether it be right or wrong.

In grave coercion, the act of preventing by force

must be made at the time the offended party was doing
or was about to do the act to be prevented.

BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR

Grave coercion arises only if the act which the

offender prevented another to do is not prohibited by law
or ordinance. If the act prohibited was illegal, he is not
liable for grave coercion.

The law imposes the penalty of bond for good

behavior only in case of grave and light threats. If the
offender can not post the bond, he will be banished by
way of destierro to prevent him from carrying out his
threat.
Bond of good behavior means the posting of bond on the
part of the accused in order to guarantee that he will not
molest the offended party. It is in the nature of an
additional penalty.
Bond to keep peace under Article 35 is
applicable to all cases and is treated as a distinct
penalty. If the sentenced prisoner fails to give the bond,
he shall be detained for a period not exceeding six
months if the crime for which he was convicted is
classified as grave felony or for a period not exceeding
thirty days if convicted for a light felony.

If a person prohibits another to do an act

because the act is a crime, even though some sort of
violence or intimidation is employed, it would not give
rise to grave coercion. It may only give rise to threat or
physical injuries, if some injuries are inflicted. However,
in case of grave coercion where the offended party is
being compelled to do something against his will,
whether it be wrong or not, the crime of grave coercion
is committed if violence or intimidation is employed in
order to compel him to do the act. No person shall take
the law into his own hands.
LIGHT COERCIONS
Elements:
1. That the offender must be a creditor.
2. That he seizes anything belonging to his debtor.
3. That the seizure of the thing be accomplished by
means of violence or a display of material force
producing intimidation;
4. That the purpose of the offender is to apply the
same to the payment of the debt.

OTHER LIGHT THREATS

Elements:
1. Person shall threaten another with a weapon, or
draw weapon in a quarrel unless in self-defense.
2. In the heat of anger, person orally threatens another
with some harm constituting a crime, without
persisting in the idea involved in the threat.
Subsequent acts did not persist.

40

www.rkmfiles.net

UNJUST VEXATION

DISCOVERY AND REVELATION OF SECRETS

In unjust vexation, any act committed without

violence, but which unjustifiably annoys or vexes an
innocent person amounts to light coercion.
As a punishable act, unjust vexation should
include any human conduct which, although not
productive of some physical or material harm would,
however, unjustifiably annoy or vex an innocent person.
It is distinguished from grave coercion under the first
paragraph by the absence of violence.

DISCOVERING SECRETS
CORRESPONDENCE

ELEMENTS OF NO. 1 - Forcing or compelling, directly or

indirectly or knowingly permitting the forcing or
compelling of the laborer or employee of the offender to
purchase merchandise of commodities of any kind from
him;

2.
3.

2.
3.

OF

REVEALING SECRETS WITH ABUSE OF OFFICE

Elements
1. That the offender is a manager, employee or
servant.
2. That he learns the secrets of his principal or master
in such capacity.
3. That he reveals such secrets.

That the offender is any person, agent or officer

of any association or corporation.
That he or such firm or corporation has
employed laborers or employees.
That he forces or compels, directly or indirectly,
or knowingly permits to be forced or compelled,
any of his or its laborers or employees to
purchase merchandise or commodities of any
kind from his or from said firm or corporation.

REVELATION OF INDUSTRIAL SECRETS

Elements
1. That the offender is a person in charge,
employee or workman of a manufacturing or
industrial establishment.
2. That
the
manufacturing
or
industrial
establishment has a secret of the industry which
the offender has learned.
3. That the offender reveals such secrets.
4. That the prejudice is caused to the owner.

ELEMENTS OF NO. 2 - Paying the wages due his laborer

or employee by means of tokens or object other than the
legal tender currency of the Philippines, unless expressly
requested by such laborer or employee.
1.

SEIZURE

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

OTHER SIMILAR COERCIONS

1.

THROUGH

That the offender pays the wages due a laborer

or employee employed by him by means of
tokens or objects.
That those tokens or objects are other than the
legal tender currency to the Philippines.
That such employee or laborer does not
expressly request that he be paid by means of
tokens or objects.

A business secret must not be known to other

business entities or persons.
It is a matter to be
discovered, known and used by and must belong to one
person or entity exclusively. One who merely copies
their machines from those already existing and
functioning cannot claim to have a business secret, much
less, a discovery within the contemplation of Article 292.

Under the Republic Act No. 602, known as the

Minimum Wage Law, wages of laborers must be paid in
legal tender. Accordingly, it is unlawful to pay the wages
of the laborers in the form of promissory notes, vouchers,
coupons, tokens, or any other forms alleged to represent
legal tender.

ROBBERY IN GENERAL
Elements
1. That there be personal property belonging to
another.
2. That there is unlawful taking of that property.
3. That the taking must be with intent to gain, and
4. That there is violence against or intimidation of
any person, or force upon anything.

FORMATION, MAINTENANCE, AND PROHIBITION OF

COMBINATION OF CAPITAL OR LABOR THROUGH
VIOLENCE OR THREATS
Elements:
1. That the offender employs violence or threats, in
such a degree as to compel or force the laborers or
employers in the free and legal exercise of their
industry or work
2. That the purpose is to organize, maintain or prevent
coalitions of capital or labor, strike of laborers or
lockout of employees.

Robbery This is the taking or personal

property belonging to another, with intent to gain, by
means of violence against, or intimidation of any person,
or using force upon anything.
Two kinds of robbery: 1) robbery with violence or
intimidation and 2) robbery with force upon things.

Peaceful picketing is part of the freedom of

speech and is not covered by this article. Preventing
employees or laborers from joining any registered labor
organization is punished under Art. 248 of the Labor
Code.

1.

41

Belonging to another person from whom

property was taken need not be the owner,
legal possession is sufficient

www.rkmfiles.net

The property must be personal property and

cannot refer to real property.
2.

the taking is done simply without the knowledge and

consent of the owner.

Name of the real owner is not essential so long

as the personal property taken does not belong
to the accused except if crime is robbery with
homicide

3.

Taking of personal property must be unlawful;

if given in trust estafa

4.

As to robbery with violence or intimidation

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

5.

As to robbery with force upon things thing

must be taken out of the building

6.

Intent to gain presumed from unlawful taking Intent to gain may be presumed from the
unlawful taking of anothers property. However,
when one takes a property under the claim of
ownership or title, the taking is not considered
to be with intent to gain. (U. S. vs. Manluco, et
al., 28 Phil. 360)

ANTI CARNAPPING ACT ( RA # 6539 )

Carnapping is the taking, with intent to gain,
of a motor vehicle belonging to another without the
latters consent, or by means of violence against or
intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things.
Any vehicle which is motorized using the streets
which are public, not exclusively for private use is
covered within the concept of motor vehicle under the
Anti-Carnapping Law. A tricycle which is not included in
the enumeration of exempted vehicles under the
Carnapping Law is deemed to be motor vehicle as
defined in the law, the stealing of which comes within its
penal sanction.
If the vehicle uses the streets with or without
the required license, the same comes within the
protection of the law, for the severity of the offense is
not to be measured by what kind of street or highway
the same is used but by the nature of the vehicle itself
and the case to which it is devoted. (Izon, et al., vs.
People, 107 SCRA 118)
ROBBERY
WITH
VIOLENCE
INTIMIDATION OF PERSON

AGAINST

OR

7.

When theres no intent to gain but there is

violence in the taking grave coercion

Acts punished as robbery with violence against or

intimidation of persons

8.

Violence or intimidation must be against the

person of the offended party, not upon the thing

By reason or on occasion of the robbery, the

following are committed:

9.

General rule: violence or intimidation must be

present before the taking is complete,
Exception: when violence results in homicide,
rape, intentional mutilation or any of the serious
physical injuries in par 1 and 2 of art 263, the
taking of the property is robbery complexed
with any of these crimes under art 294, even if
taking is already complete when violence was
used by the offender

1.
2.
3.
4.

10. Use of force upon things entrance to the

building by means described in arts 299 and
302 (offender must enter)
The other kind of robbery is one that is
committed with the use of force upon anything in order
to take with intent to gain, the personal property of
another. The use of force here must refer to the force
employed upon things in order to gain entrance into a
building or a house. (People vs. Adorno, C. A. 40 O. G.
567)

5.

11.When both violence or intimidation and force

upon things concur it is robbery with violence

homicide
robbery accompanied with rape or intentional
mutilation, SPI insane, imbecile, impotent or
blind
SPI lost the use of speech, hear, smell, eye,
hand, foot, arm, leg, use of any such member,
incapacitated for work habitually engaged in
Violence/intimidation shall have been carried to
a degree clearly unnecessary for the crime or
when in the cause of its execution
SPI/deformity, or shall have lost any part of the
body or the use thereof or shall have been ill or
incapacitated for the performance of the work
for > 90 days; > 30 days
Any kind of robbery with less serious physical
injuries or slight physical injuries

Robbery
X didnt commit crime
but is intimidated to
deprive him of his
property

Robbery and Theft, compared.

1. Both robbery and theft involve unlawful taking as an
element;
2. Both involve personal property belonging to another;
3. In both crimes, the taking is done with intent to gain;
4. In robbery, the taking is done either with the use of
violence or intimidation of person or the
employment of force upon things; whereas in theft,

Deprived
of money
thru
force
or
intimidation
Neither

42

Ex.
defendant
demands payment of
P2.00 with threats of
arrest and prosecution,
therefore,
robbery
because (a) intent to
gain and (b) immediate
harm

Bribery
X has committed a
crime
and
gives
money as way to
avoid
arrest
or
prosecution
Giving of money is in
one sense voluntary
Transaction
is
voluntary and mutual

www.rkmfiles.net

Case:
A, B, C and D
robbed a bank. When they
were
about
to
flee,
policemen came, and they
traded shots with them. If

Robbery
with
violence
Intent to gain
Immediate
harm

Grave
threats

Grave
coercion

No intent to
gain
Intimidation;
promises
some future
harm
or
injury

one of the policemen was

killed, the offense is Robbery
with Homicide. If one of the robbers was the
one killed, the remaining robbers shall be
charged also with Robbery with Homicide. If
a bank employee was the one killed either
by the robbers or by the policemen in the
course of the latters action of arresting or
trying to arrest the robbers, the crime is still
Robbery with Homicide.

None
Intimidation
(effect)
is
immediate and
offended party
is compelled to
do
something
against his will
(w/n right or
wrong)

When two or more persons are killed

during the robbery, such should be
appreciated
as
an
aggravating
circumstance.
As long as there is only one
robbery, regardless of the persons
killed, you only have one crime of
robbery
with
homicide.
Note,
however, that one robbery does not
mean there is only one taking.

Illustration 2:
Robbers decided to commit robbery in a house,
which turned out to be a boarding house. Thus, there
were different boarders who were offended parties in the
robbery. There is only one count of robbery. If there
were killings done to different boarders during the
robbery being committed in a boarders quarter, do not
consider that as separate counts of robbery with
homicide because when robbers decide to commit
robbery in a certain house, they are only impelled by one
criminal intent to rob and there will only be one case of
robbery. If there were homicide or death committed, that
would only be part of a single robbery. That there were
several killings done would only aggravate the
commission of the crime of robbery with homicide.

As long as the criminal intent is to rob, that is,

robbery was the real motive, the offense would still be
classified as Robbery with Homicide even if the killing
preceded or was done ahead of the robbing. (People vs.
Tolentino, 165 SCRA 490). Thus, as a member of the
agaw-armas gang whose plan and design is to rob a
policeman of his service revolver, but because he fears
that said policeman may beat him to the draw, first
shoots the policeman fatally and only after when the
latter lies dead, does he get the gun the crime is still
considered Robbery with Homicide.

In robbery with homicide as a single indivisible

offense, it is immaterial who gets killed. Even though
the killing may have resulted from negligence, you will
still designate the crime as robbery with homicide.

This is a crime against property, and therefore,

you contend not with the killing but with the robbery.

Illustration 3:

The term homicide is used in the generic

sense, and the complex crime therein contemplated
comprehends not only robbery with homicide in its
restricted sense, but also with robbery with murder. So,
any kind of killing by reason of or on the occasion of a
robbery will bring about the crime of robbery with
homicide even if the person killed is less than three days
old, or even if the person killed is the mother or father of
the killer, or even if on such robbery the person killed
was done by treachery or any of the qualifying
circumstances. In short, there is no crime of robbery
with parricide, robbery with murder, robbery with
infanticide any and all forms of killing is referred to as
homicide.

On the occasion of a robbery, one of the

offenders placed his firearm on the table. While they
were ransacking the place, one of the robbers bumped
the table. As a result, the firearm fell on the floor and
discharged. One of the robbers was the one killed. Even
though the placing of the firearm on the table where
there is no safety precaution taken may be considered as
one of negligence or imprudence, you do not separate
the homicide as one of the product of criminal
negligence.
It will still be robbery with homicide,
whether the person killed is connected with the robbery
or not. He need not also be in the place of the robbery.
Note that the person killed need not be one who
is identified with the owner of the place where the
robbery is committed or one who is a stranger to the
robbers. It is enough that the homicide was committed
by reason of the robbery or on the occasion thereof.

Illustration 1:
The robbers enter the house.
In entering
through the window, one of the robbers stepped on a
child less than three days old. The crime is not robbery
with infanticide because there is no such crime. The
word homicide as used in defining robbery with homicide
is used in the generic sense. It refers to any kind of
death.

Illustration 4:
There are two robbers who broke into a house
and carried away some valuables. After they left such
house these two robbers decided to cut or divide the loot
already so that they can go of them. So while they are
dividing the loot the other robber noticed that the one
doing the division is trying to cheat him and so he
immediately boxed him. Now this robber who was boxed
then pulled out his gun and fired at the other one killing
the latter. Would that bring about the crime of robbery
with homicide? Yes. Even if the robbery was already
consummated, the killing was still by reason of the

Although it is a crime against property and treachery is

an aggravating circumstance that applies only to crimes
against persons, if the killing in a robbery is committed
with treachery, the treachery will be considered a
generic aggravating circumstance because of the
homicide.

43

www.rkmfiles.net

robbery because they quarreled in dividing the loot that

is the subject of the robbery.

If the woman, who was raped on the occasion of

the robbery, pardoned the rapist who is one of the
robbers, that would not erase the crime of rape. The
offender would still be prosecuted for the crime of
robbery with rape, as long as the rape is consummated.

Remember also that intent to rob must be

proved. But there must be an allegation as to the
robbery not only as to the intention to rob. If the motive
is to kill and the taking is committed thereafter, the
crimes committed are homicide and theft.
If the
primordial intent of the offender is to kill and not to rob
but after the killing of the victims a robbery was
committed, then there are will be two separate crimes.

If the rape is attempted, since it will be a

separate charge and the offended woman pardoned the
offender that would bring about a bar to the prosecution
of the attempted rape. If the offender married the
offended woman, that would extinguish the criminal
liability because the rape is the subject of a separate
prosecution.

Illustration 5:
If a person had an enemy and killed him and
after killing him, saw that he had a beautiful ring and
took this, the crime would be not robbery with homicide
because the primary criminal intent is to kill. So, there
will be two crimes: one for the killing and one for the
taking of the property after the victim was killed. Now
this would bring about the crime of theft and it could not
be robbery anymore because the person is already dead.

The intention must be to commit robbery and

even if the rape is committed before the robbery,
robbery with rape is committed. But if the accused tried
to rape the offended party and because of resistance, he
failed to consummate the act, and then he snatched the
vanity case from her hands when she ran away, two
crimes are committed: attempted rape and theft.
The Revised Penal Code does not differentiate
whether rape was committed before, during or after the
robbery. It is enough that the robbery accompanied the
rape.
Robbery must not be a mere accident or
afterthought.

For robbery with homicide to exist, homicide

must be committed by reason or on the occasion of the
robbery, that is, the homicide must be committed in the
course or because of the robbery.
Robbery and
homicide are separate offenses when the homicide is not
committed on the occasion or by reason of the
robbery.

If the two (2) crimes were separated both by

time and place, there is no complex crime of Robbery
with Rape. Thus, when complainant went out of her
room about 1:30 a.m. to urinate, one of the accused
grabbed her, poked an icepick on her neck , and dragged
her out of the house and was made to board a taxi; and
before boarding, she saw the two (2) companions of the
man carrying her typewriter and betamax and then
joining them in the taxi, and that after alighting from the
taxi, the two (2) companions left her, and the man who
had grabbed her brought her to a motel, where by
means of force and intimidation he was able to have sex
with her, the crimes committed are Robbery and Forcible
Abduction with Rape. The Rape committed cannot be
complexed with Robbery. (People vs. Angeles, 222 SCRA
451).

Robbery with homicide need not be committed

inside a building. What constitutes the crime as robbery
with homicide is the killing of a person on the occasion or
by reason of the taking of personal property belonging to
another with intent to gain.
The killing on the occasion of robbery may come
in different forms. 1) It may be done by the offender for
the purpose of suppressing evidence, like when the
victim is killed because he happens to know the person
of the offender; or 2) when the killing is done in order to
prevent or remove any opposition which the victim may
put up as regards the taking of his personal belongings.
3) The killing may also result from the offenders defense
of his possession of the stolen goods. 4) Or it may be
resorted to by the offender to facilitate his escape after
the commission of the robbery.

If rape was the primary objective of the accused

and the taking of her jewelries was not done with intent
to gain but as a token of her supposed consent to the
sexual intercourse, the accused is guilty of two distinct
crimes: rape and unjust vexation. (People vs. Villarino, C.
A. G. R. No. 6342-R, Nov. 26, 1951)

Robbery with Rape

a.
b.
c.

d.

Intent to commit robbery must precede

rape.
Prosecution of the crime need not be by
offended party fiscal can sign the information.
When rape and homicide co-exist, rape
should be considered as aggravating only and
the crime is still robbery with homicide

robbery with intimidation acts done by

the accused which by their own nature or by
reason of the circumstances inspire fear in the
person against whom they are directed

In the taking of personal property, it is

necessary that violence must be employed by the
offender in order that the taking may be considered as
robbery. So, where the taking is without violence or
intimidation and the same is complete, but the victim
pursued the offender in order to recover the personal
property taken and by the reason thereof, he suffers less
serious or slight physical injuries in the hands of the
offender, the violence employed on the victim which
resulted to his injuries will not convert the taking of his
personal property to robbery. In such a case, the offender
is liable for two crimes, namely, theft and less serious or
slight physical injuries.

The rape committed on the occasion of the

robbery is not considered a private crime because the
crime is robbery, which is a crime against property. So,
even though the robber may have married the woman
raped, the crime remains robbery with rape. The rape is
not erased. This is because the crime is against property
which is a single indivisible offense.

44

www.rkmfiles.net

The intimidation must be present at the time of

the taking before it is completed. If the taking is
completed without intimidation and it is employed by the
offender only to prevent the owner from recovering his
stolen property, two crimes are committed by the
offender: theft and grave threat.

Moreover, it should be noted that arson has

been made a component only of robbery with violence
against or intimidation of persons in said Article 294, but
not of robbery by the use of force upon things in Articles
299 and 302.
So, if the robbery was by the use of force upon
things and therewith arson was committed, two distinct
crimes are committed.

If violence is employed against the offended

party in order to deprive him of his personal property
and the violence resulted to the infliction of less serious
or slight physical injuries, the crime committed would
only be robbery. Hence, there is no crime of robbery with
less serious or slight injuries. (U. S. vs. Barroga, 21 Phil
161)

QUALIFIED
ROBBERY
INTIMIDATION

WITH

VIOLENCE

OR

Qualifying circumstances in robbery with

violence or intimidation of persons, if any of the offenses
defined in subdivisions 3, 4 and 5 of Art 294 is
committed:
a.
in an uninhabited place or
b.
by a band or
c.
by attacking a moving train, street car,
motor vehicle or airship, or
d.
by entering the passengers compartments
in a train, or in any manner taking the
passengers thereof by surprise in the respective
conveyances, or
e.
on a street, road, highway or alley and the
intimidation is made with the use of firearms,
the offender shall be punished by the max
period of the proper penalties prescribed in art
294

On Robbery with Physical Injuries

To be considered as such, the physical injuries
must always be serious. If the physical injuries are only
less serious or slight, they are absorbed in the robbery.
The crime becomes merely robbery. But if the less
serious physical injuries were committed after the
robbery was already consummated, there would be a
separate charge for the less serious physical injuries. It
will only be absorbed in the robbery if it was inflicted in
the course of the execution of the robbery. The same is
true in the case of slight physical injuries.
Illustration 1:
After the robbery had been committed and the
robbers were already fleeing from the house where the
robbery was committed, the owner of the house chased
them and the robbers fought back. If only less serious
physical injuries were inflicted, there will be separate
crimes: one for robbery and one for less serious physical
injuries.

Notes:
1.
2.
3.

But if after the robbery was committed and the

robbers were already fleeing from the house where the
robbery was committed, the owner or members of the
family of the owner chased them, and they fought back
and somebody was killed, the crime would still be
robbery with homicide. But if serious physical injuries
were inflicted and the serious physical injuries rendered
the victim impotent or insane or the victim lost the use
of any of his senses or lost a part of his body, the crime
would still be robbery with serious physical injuries. The
physical injuries (serious) should not be separated
regardless of whether they retorted in the course of the
commission of the robbery or even after the robbery was
consummated.

Must be alleged in the information

Cant be offset by generic mitigating
Art 295 will not apply to: robbery w/ homicide,
rape or SPI under par 1 of art 263

ROBBERY BY A BAND
Band is defined as consisting of at least four
armed malefactors organized with the intention of
carrying out any unlawful design. Their participation in
the commission of the crime must be actual. The
offender must be principal by direct participation, so
that, a principal by inducement cannot be convicted of
this crime where the aggravating circumstance of band
shall be appreciated against him, since the law requires
as a condition to its commission the actual participation
of the offender in the execution of the crime. In such a
case, the conviction of a principal by inducement will
only be limited to his criminal liability as a coconspirator.

On Robbery with Arson

1.

Another innovation of Republic Act No. 7659 is

the composite crime of robbery with arson if arson is
committed by reason of or on occasion of the robbery.
The composite crime would only be committed if the
primordial intent of the offender is to commit robbery
and there is no killing, rape, or intentional mutilation
committed by the offender during the robbery.
Otherwise, the crime would be robbery with homicide, or
robbery with rape, or robbery with intentional mutilation,
in that order and the arson would only be an aggravating
circumstance. It is essential that robbery precedes the
arson, as in the case of rape and intentional mutilation,
because the amendment included arson among the rape
and intentional mutilation which have accompanied the
robbery.

Liability for the acts of the other members of the

band
a.
b.
c.
d.

45

he was a member of the band

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

2.

Conspiracy to commit robbery with homicide even

if less than 4 armed men

3.

Conspiracy to commit robbery only but homicide

was committed also on the occasion thereof all
members of the band are liable for robbery with
homicide

www.rkmfiles.net

created in the mind of the offended party is not

immediate but remote. In this type of robbery, the fear is
immediate and not remote. In coercion, there is no intent
to gain whereas in this form of robbery, intent to gain is
an indispensable element.

Even if the agreement refers only to the

robbery, nonetheless, where the robbery is committed by
a band and a person is killed, any member who was
present at the commission of the robbery and who did
not do anything to prevent the killing of the victim on the
occasion of the robbery shall be held liable for the crime
of robbery with homicide. (People vs. Cinco, 194 SCRA
535)

ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE OR PUBLIC

BUILDING OR EDIFICE DEVOTED TO WORSHIP
Elements

4.

Conspiracy is presumed when 4 or more armed

persons committed robbery

1.

5.

Unless the others attempted to prevent the assault

guilty of robbery by band only

2.

Band is a generic aggravating circumstance in

the crime of robbery with homicide or rape. But in the
other circumstances provided under Article 294
particularly paragraphs 3, 4 and 5, band is a special
aggravating circumstance which must be alleged in the
information.

That the offender entered (a) an inhabited house, or

(b) public buildings, or (c) edifice devoted to
religious worship.
That the entrance was effected by any of the
following means:
a. Through an opening not intended for
entrance or egress.
b. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or
breaking any door or window.
c. By using false keys, picklocks or similar
tools or.
d. By using any fictitious name or pretending
the exercise of public authority.
That once inside the building, the offender took
personal property belonging to another with intent
to gain.

Band is a special aggravating circumstance if

the robbery results in the infliction of serious physical
injuries.

3.

The arms contemplated under this article refers

to any deadly weapon and is not limited to firearms,
whether long or short.

Nota Bene: In this kind of Robbery, no violence or

intimidation against persons is ever used.
1.

ATTEMPTED
HOMICIDE
1.

OR

FRUSTRATED

ROBBERY

WITH

Whether robbery is attempted or frustrated, penalty

is the same

Where the homicide is only attempted or frustrated,

Article 297 does not apply. In the same manner, where
the attempted or frustrated robbery results in the
commission of serious physical injuries, Article 297 has
no application. In such a case, the crime shall be treated
under the provisions of Article 48 on ordinary complex
crimes. Consequently, the penalty prescribed by Article
48 shall be observed.

(stairways,

hallways,

2.

Inhabited house any shelter, ship or vessel

constituting the dwelling of one or more person
even
though
temporarily
absent

dependencies, courts, corals, barns, etc.

3.

NOT INCLUDED
CULTIVATION.

4.

Important for robbery by use of force upon

things, it is necessary that offender enters the
building or where object may be found. NO
ENTRY, NO ROBBERY

ORCHARD,

LANDS

FOR

In the absence of evidence to show how bandits

effected an entrance into the convent which they
robbed, there can be no conviction under this article.
The act would be treated as Theft. ( U.S. vs. Callotes, 2
PHIL 16 )

EXECUTION OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF VIOLENCE OR

INTIMIDATION
Elements

3.

dependencies

A small store located on the ground floor of a house is a

dependency of the house, there being no partition
between the store and the house and in going to the
main stairway, one has to enter the store which has a
door. (U.S. vs. Ventura, 39 Phil. 523).

When the robbery is attempted or frustrated, Art.

294 have no application because the robbery and the
homicide must be both consummated.

1.
2.

Includes
etc.)

"Force upon things" has a technical meaning in

law. Not any kind of force upon things will characterize
the taking as one of robbery. The force upon things
contemplated requires some element of trespass into the
establishment where the robbery was committed. In
other words, the offender must have entered the
premises where the robbery was committed. If no entry
was effected, even though force may have been
employed actually in the taking of the property from
within the premises, the crime will only be theft.

That the offender has intent to defraud another.

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

The element of intent to gain or fraudulent

intent is what distinguishes this felony from grave
coercion. Although both crimes share a common element
which is the compelling of any person to do something
against his will, nonetheless, in coercion, the fear

46

www.rkmfiles.net

The term force upon things has a legal meaning.

It means the employment of force to effect entrance into
the house or building by destroying the door, window,
roof, wall or floor of the aforesaid house or building. In
other words, the force upon things has no reference to
personal property but to a house or building which is
ordinarily classified as real property.
5.

Those means must be employed in entering. If

the offender had already entered when these means
were employed, anything taken inside, without breaking
of any sealed or closed receptacle, will not give rise to
robbery.
Illustration 3:

Entrance is necessary mere insertion of hand

is not enough (whole body); not to get out but
to enter therefore, evidence to such effect is
necessary

A found B inside his (As) house. He asked B what

the latter was doping there. B claimed he is an inspector
from the local city government to look after the electrical
installations. At the time B was chanced upon by A, he
has already entered. So anything he took inside without
breaking of any sealed or closed receptacle will not give
rise to robbery because the simulation of public authority
was made not in order to enter but when he has already
entered.

Two predicates that will give rise to the crime as robbery:

a.
b.

By mere entering alone, a robbery will be

committed if any personal property is taken
from within;
The entering will not give rise to robbery
even if something is taken inside. It is the
breaking of the receptacle or closet or
cabinet where the personal property is kept
that will give rise to robbery, or the taking
of a sealed, locked receptacle to be broken
outside the premises.

If by the mere entering, that would already

qualify the taking of any personal property inside as
robbery, it is immaterial whether the offender stays
inside the premises. The breaking of things inside the
premises will only be important to consider if the
entering by itself will not characterize the crime as
robbery with force upon things.

6.

P v. Lamahang intent to rob being present is

necessary

7.

Place: house or building; not car

8.

Public building every building owned, rented

or used by the government (though owned by
private persons) though temporarily vacant

9.

Not robbery passing through open door but

getting out of a window

If accused entered the house through a door, and it was

while escaping that he broke any wall, floor or window
after taking personal property inside the house there is
no Robbery committed, only Theft.

Modes of entering that would give rise to the

crime of robbery with force upon things if something is
taken inside the premises: entering into an opening not
intended for entrance or egress, under Article 299 (a).

10. Outside door must be broken, smashed. Theft

if lock is merely removed or door was merely
pushed

Illustration 1:

Breaking of the door under Article299 (b) Originally, the

interpretation was that in order that there be a breaking
of the door in contemplation of law, there must be some
damage to the door.

The entry was made through a fire escape. The

fire escape was intended for egress. The entry will not
characterize the taking as one of robbery because it is an
opening intended for egress, although it may not be
intended for entrance. If the entering were done through
the window, even if the window was not broken, that
would characterize the taking of personal property inside
as robbery because the window is not an opening
intended for entrance.

Before, if the door was not damaged but only the lock
attached to the door was broken, the taking from within
is only theft. But the ruling is now abandoned because
the door is considered useless without the lock. Even if it
is not the door that was broken but only the lock, the
breaking of the lock renders the door useless and it is
therefore tantamount to the breaking of the door.
Hence, the taking inside is considered robbery with force
upon things.

Illustration 2:
On a sari-sari store, a vehicle bumped the wall.
The wall collapsed. There was a small opening there. At
night, a man entered through that opening without
breaking the same. The crime will already be robbery if
he takes property from within because that is not an
opening intended for the purpose.
Even of there is a breaking of wall, roof, floor or window,
but the offender did not enter, it would not give rise to
robbery with force upon things.

11. False keys genuine keys stolen from the owner

or any keys other than those intended by the
owner for use in the lock
12. Picklocks specially
commission of robbery

made,

adopted

for

13. Key stolen not by force, otherwise, its robbery

by violence and intimidation against persons

Note that in the crime of robbery with force

upon things, what should be considered is the means of
entrance and means of taking the personal property from
within. If those means do not come within the definition
under the Revised Penal Code, the taking will only give
rise to theft.

14. False key used in opening house and not

furniture inside, otherwise, theft (for latter to be
robbery., must be broken and not just opened)

47

www.rkmfiles.net

Use of picklocks or false keys refers to

the entering into the premises If the
picklock or false key was used not to
enter the premises because the
offender had already entered but was
used to unlock an interior door or even
a receptacle where the valuable or
personal belonging was taken, the use
of false key or picklock will not give
rise to the robbery with force upon
things because these are considered
by law as only a means to gain
entrance, and not to extract personal
belongings from the place where it is
being kept.

Notes:
1.

If the entering does not characterize the taking

inside as one of robbery with force upon things, it is the
conduct inside that would give rise to the robbery if there
would be a breaking of sealed, locked or closed
receptacles or cabinet in order to get the personal
belongings from within such receptacles, cabinet or
place where it is kept.
2.

If in the course of committing the robbery within

the premises some interior doors are broken, the taking
from inside the room where the door leads to will only
give rise to theft. The breaking of doors contemplated in
the law refers to the main door of the house and not the
interior door.

3.
4.
5.

When the robbery with force upon things is

committed in an uninhabited place and by a band, the
robbery becomes qualified. In the same manner, where
robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons
is committed by a band or in an uninhabited place, the
crime becomes qualified.

16. E.g. pretending to be police to be able to enter

(not pretending after entrance)

The place considered uninhabited when it is not

used as a dwelling. It may refer to a building or a house
which is not used as a dwelling.

When the robbery is committed in a house

which is inhabited, or in a public building or in a place
devoted to religious worship, the use of fictitious name
or pretension to possess authority in order to gain
entrance will characterize the taking inside as robbery
with force upon things.

If a house is inhabited and its owners or

occupants temporarily left the place to take a short
vacation in another place, their casual absence will not
make the place or house uninhabited. (U. S. vs. Ventura,
39 Phil. 523)

If A and B told the occupant of the house that

they were the nephews of the spouse of the owner of the
house, and because of that, the closed door was opened,
or that they were NBI agents executing a warrant of
arrest, and so the occupant opened the door, any taking
personal property thereat with intent to gain, would be
Robbery.

1.

2.

WHAT IS AN INHABITED HOUSE, PUBLIC BUILDING

OR BUILDING DEDICATED TO RELIGIOUS WORSHIP
AND THEIR DEPENDENCIES
Nota Bene
Inhabited house Any shelter, ship, or vessel
constituting the dwelling of one or more persons, even
though the inhabitants thereof shall temporarily be
absent therefrom when the robbery is committed.

UPON

That the offender is inside a dwelling house, public

building, or edifice devoted to religious worship,
regardless of the circumstances under which he
entered it
That the offender takes personal property belonging
to another with intent to gain, under any of the
following circumstances.
a.
b.

When sealed box is taken out for the purpose of

breaking it, no need to open already
consummated robbery
Estafa if box is in the custody of accused
Theft if box found outside and forced open

ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE AND BY A

BAND

But if it is the door of a cabinet that is broken

and the valuable inside the cabinet was taken, the
breaking of the cabinet door would characterize the
taking as robbery. Although that particular door is not
included as part of the house, the cabinet keeps the
contents thereof safe.

FORCE

Offender may be servants or guests

A friend who has invited in a house and who

enters a room where he finds a closed cabinet where
money is kept, is guilty of robbery if he forcibly opens the
said cabinet and takes the money contained therein.

15. Gen. Rule: outside door. Exception: inside door

in a separate dwelling

ELEMENTS OF ROBBERY WITH

SUBDIVISION (B) OR ART. 299

Entrance ( no matter how done)

Public building Includes every building owned by the

government or belonging to a private person but used or
rented by the government, although temporarily
unoccupied by the same.
1.

by the breaking of doors, wardrobes,

chests, or any other kind of locked or
sealed furniture or receptacle, or
by taking such furniture or objects away to
be broken or forced open outside the place
of the robbery.

Dependencies are all interior courts, corrals,

warehouses, granaries or enclosed places:
a. contiguous to the building
b. having an interior entrance connected therewith
c. which form part of the whole

2. Garage must have 3 requirements. Exception:

orchards/lands

48

www.rkmfiles.net

The word cereals however must be understood

to mean seedlings or semilla. It does not include
hulled rice. It may include palay or unhulled palay.
While the law uses the term uninhabited place,
it however refers to uninhabited building and its
dependencies. If the cereals, fruits or firewood were
taken outside a building and its dependencies, the crime
committed would only be theft even though the taking
was done in an uninhabited place.

ROBBERY IN AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR IN A

PRIVATE BUILDING
Elements:
1. That the offender entered an uninhabited place or a
building which was not a dwelling house, not a
public building, or not an edifice devoted to religious
worship.
2. that any of the following circumstances was present:
a. That entrance was effected through an opening
not intended for entrance or egress.
b. A wall, roof, floor, or outside door or window
was broken.
c. The entrance was effected through the use of
false keys, picklocks or other similar tools.
d. A door, wardrobe, chest, or any sealed or closed
furniture or receptacle was broken or
e. A closed or sealed receptacle was removed,
even if the same be broken open elsewhere.
3. That with intent to gain the offender took therefrom
personal property belonging to another.

ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF PICKLOCKS OR SIMILAR

TOOLS
Elements:
1. That the offender has in his possession picklocks or
similar tools.
2. That such picklocks or similar tools are specially
adopted to the commission of robbery.
3. That the offender does not have lawful cause for
such possession.
Nota Bene: Actual use of the same is not necessary

Nota Bene:
1.

The law also prohibits the manufacture or

fabrication of such tools. If the manufacturer or maker or
locksmith himself is the offender, a higher penalty is
prescribed by law.

Second kind of robbery with force upon things

It must be taken note of, that the entrance by

using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of
public authority is not among those mentioned in Article
302 because the place is Uninhabited and therefore
without person present.
Likewise, in this class of
Robbery, the penalty depends on the amount taken
disregarding the circumstances of whether the robbers
are armed or not as in the case in Robbery in Inhabited
Place.

2.
3.

Supposing that in the crime of robbery, the

offender used a picklock to enter a building. Can he be
charged of illegal possession of picklocks or similar tools?
The answer is NO since the same possession of these
tools is already absorbed in the graver crime of robbery.
FALSE KEYS
What constitutes false keys?
1. Picklocks, etc.
2. Genuine key stolen from owner.
3. Any key other than those intended by owner for use
in the lock forcibly opened by the offender

Uninhabited place is an uninhabited building

(habitable, not any of the 3 places mentioned)
Ex. warehouse, freight car, store. Exception:
pigsty

Nota Bene:

A store may or may not be an inhabited place

depending upon the circumstances of whether or not it is
usually occupied by any person lodging therein at night.
Although it may be used as a dwelling to sustain a
conviction under Article 299, the information must allege
that the same was used and occupied as a dwelling
(People vs. Tubog, 49 Phil. 620), otherwise Art. 302 is
applicable.
4.

5.
6.

1.
2.

Possession of false keys here not punishable

If key was entrusted and used to steal, not
robbery (not stolen)

BRIGANDAGE
Brigandage This is a crime committed by more than
three armed persons who form a band of robbers for the
purpose of committing robbery in the highway or
kidnapping persons for the purpose of extortion or to
obtain ransom, or for any other purpose to be attained
by means of force and violence.

Same manner as 299 except that was entered

into was an uninhabited place or a building
other than the 3 mentioned in 299. Exception:
does not include use of fictitious name or
pretending the exercise of public authority
Breaking of padlock (but not door) is only theft
False keys genuine keys stolen from the owner
or any other keys other than those intended by
the owner for use in the lock forcibly opened

WHO ARE BRIGANDS?

Brigands more than three armed persons forming a
band
Elements of brigandage:
1. There are least four armed persons;
2. They formed a band of robbers;
3. The purpose is any of the following:
a. To commit robbery in the highway;
b. To kidnap persons for the purpose of
extortion or to obtain ransom; or

ROBBERY OF CEREALS, FRUITS OR FIRE WOOD IN

AN UNINHABITED PLACE OR PRIVATE BUILDING
Under Article 303, if the robbery under Article
299 and 302 consists in the taking of cereals, fruits, or
firewood, the penalty imposable is lower.

49

www.rkmfiles.net

c.

To attain by means of force and violence

any other purpose.

Distinction between brigandage under the Revised Penal

Code
and
highway
robbery/brigandage
under
Presidential Decree No. 532:

Presumption of Brigandage:
a. if members of lawless band and possession
of unlicensed firearms (any of them)
b. possession of any kind of arms (not just
firearm)
BRIGANDAG
ROBBERY IN BAND
E
Purposes are Only to commit robbery, not
given
necessarily in hi-way
Mere
If the purpose is to commit a
formation of a part robbery
band for the
above
purpose
Necessary to prove that band
actually committed robbery
There is no need for the band robbers to
execute the object of their association in order to hold
them criminally liable for the crime of brigandage.

(1) Brigandage as a crime under the Revised Penal Code

refers to the formation of a band of robbers by more
than three armed persons for the purpose of
committing robbery in the highway, kidnapping for
purposes of extortion or ransom, or for any other
purpose to be attained by force and violence. The
mere forming of a band, which requires at least four
armed persons, if for any of the criminal purposes
stated in Article 306, gives rise to brigandage.
(2) Highway robbery/brigandage under Presidential
Decree No. 532 is the seizure of any person for
ransom, extortion or for any other lawful purposes,
or the taking away of the property of another by
means of violence against or intimidation of persons
or force upon things or other unlawful means
committed by any person on any Philippine highway.
THEFT
Elements:
1. That there be taking of personal property.
2. That said property belongs to another.
3. That the taking be done with intent to gain.
4. That the taking be done without the consent of the
owner.
5. That the taking be accomplished without the use of
violence against or intimidation of persons or force
upon things.

The primary object on the law on brigandage is

to prevent the formation of bands of robbers. Hence, if
the formed band commits robbery with the use of force
upon persons or force upon things, their criminal liability
shall be limited to the commission of such crimes.
Likewise, if the offenders are charged with robbery but
the same is not established by the evidence and what
appear clear are the elements of brigandage where the
allegation in the information necessarily includes such
offense, the offender can be convicted of the crime of
brigandage.

PERSONS LIABLE:
1. Those who
a) with intent to gain
b) But without violence against or intimidation of
persons nor force upon things
c) take personal property of another
d) without the latters consent

It does not mean however that to constitute

violation of P.D. 532, there must be a band. One or two
persons can be held liable under this law if they
perpetrated their acts of depredation in Philippine
Highways against persons who are not pre-determined
victims.

The taking from an enclosed corral of a carabao

belonging to another, after force is employed to destroy
a part of the corral to enter the same, is considered
merely as theft because corral is not a building nor a
dependency of a building. (U. S. vs. Rosales, et al., 1 Phil.
300)
2. Those who
a) having found lost property
b) fail to deliver the same to local authorities or its
owner

If the agreement among more than three armed

men is to commit a particular robbery, brigandage is not
committed because the latter must be an agreement to
commit robbery in general or indiscriminately.
AIDING AND ABETTING A BAND OF BRIGANDS
Elements:
1. That there is a band of brigands.
2. That the offender knows the band to be of brigands.
3. That the offender does any of the following acts:
a. he in any manner aids, abets or protects such
band of brigands, or
b. he gives them information of the movements of
the police or other peace officers of the
government or
c. He acquires or receives the property taken by
such brigands.

Nota Bene:
1.

Retention of money/property found is theft.

Retention is failure to return (intent to gain)

The word lost is used in the generic sense. It

embraces loss by stealing or any act of a person other
than the owner, as well as the act of the owner, or
through some casual occurrence. (People vs. Rodrigo, 16
SCRA 475)

PD 532 Brigandage
1.
Seizure of any person for: (a) ransom; (b)
extortion or other unlawful purpose; (c) taking
away of property by violence or intimidation or
force upon things or other unlawful means
2. Committed by any person
3. On any Phil hi-way

The felony is not limited to the actual finder.

Theft of a lost property may be committed even by a
person who is not the actual finder. (People vs. Avila, 44
Phil. 720)
2.

50

Knowledge of owner is not required, knowledge

of loss is enough

www.rkmfiles.net

It is not necessary that the owner of the lost

property be known to the accused. What is important is
that he knows or has reason to know that the property
was lost and for this fact alone, it is his duty to turn it
over to the authorities. If he does otherwise, like, if he
sells the thing to another, then the crime of theft is
committed.
3.

the right of the lawful owner. (People vs. Naval, 46 O. G.

2641)

Under Article 438 and 439 of the Civil Code, the

finder of hidden treasure on the property of another and
by chance is entitled to one-half of the treasure that he
found. His duty is to tell the owner about the treasure. If
he appropriates the other half pertaining to the owner of
the property, he is liable for theft as to that share.
(People vs. Longdew, C. A. G. R. No. 9380-R, June 4,
1953)

Servant using car without permission deemed

qualified theft though use was temporary

4.

Reyes says: there must be some character of

permanency in depriving owner of the use of
the object and making himself the owner,
therefore must exclude joyride

5.

Theft: if after custody (only material possession)

of object was given to the accused, it is actually
taken by him (no intent to return) e.g. felonious
conversion. But it is estafa if juridical possession
is transferred e.g., by contract of bailment

6.

Includes electricity and gas

a. inspector misreads meter to earn
b. one using a jumper
Personal Property

Personal property in the crime of theft includes

electric current or properties that may have no material
or concrete appearance. The test is not whether the
subject is corporeal or incorporeal but whether it is
incapable of appropriation by another from the owner.
Hence, checks, promissory notes, and any other
commercial documents may be the object of theft
because while they may not be of value to the accused,
they are without doubt of value to the offended party. (U.
S. vs. Raboy, 25 Phil. 1) In such a case, the penalty shall
be based on the amount of money represented by the
checks or promissory note since, while it may not of
value to the thief, it is undoubtedly of value to the
offended party. (People vs. Koc Song, 63 Phil. 369).

Those who
a) enter an enclosed estate or a field where
b) trespass is forbidden or which belongs to
another and, without the consent of its owner
c) hunts or fish upon the same or gather fruits,
cereals or other forest or farm products
Nota Bene:
1.

3.

Juridical possession of a thing is transferred to

another when he receives the thing in trust or on
commission or for administration, or under a quasicontract or a contract of bailment. When possession by
the offender is under any of these circumstances and he
misappropriates the thing received, he cannot be held
guilty of theft but of estafa because here, he has both
the physical and juridical possession of the property.

Those who
a) after having maliciously damaged the property
of another
b) remove or make use of the fruits or object of the
damage caused by them

Theft of damaged property occurs only after the

accused has committed the crime of malicious mischief.
In malicious mischief, the offender destroys the property
of another because of hatred, resentment or other evil
motive against the owner. So, a neighbor who shoots and
kills a goat which has destroyed his flower plants and
thereafter slaughters and eats the meat of the
wandering goat is guilty of theft.
4.

P v. Dino applies only in theft of bulky goods

(meaning there has to be capacity to dispose of
the things). Otherwise, P v. Espiritu full
possession is enough

Finder in law is liable

Hidden Treasure

3.

2.

Theft is consummated when offender is able to

place the thing taken under his control and in
such a situation as he could dispose of it at
once (though no opportunity to dispose) i.e, the
control test

In the crime of theft, the law makes only of the

term taking and not taking away. The non-inclusion
of the word away is significant because it means that
as soon as the culprit takes possession of the things
taken by him, the crime of theft is already consummated
since the law does not require that the thief be able to
carry away the thing taken from the owner. (People vs.
Jaranilla, 55 SCRA 563)

7.

Selling share of co-partner is not theft

The personal property must belong to another.

The consummation of the crime of theft takes

place upon the voluntary and malicious taking of the
property belonging to another which is realized by the
material occupation of the thing. The property need not
be actually taken away by the thief. It is enough that he
has obtained, at some particular moment, complete
control and possession of the thing desired, adverse to

51

A joint owner or partner who sells the palay

to other persons or a co-owner or co-heir
who appropriates the whole property
cannot be guilty of theft since the property
cannot be said to belong to another. (U. S.
Reyes, 6 Phil. 441)

One who takes away the property pledged

by him to another without the latters
consent, does not commit theft for the

www.rkmfiles.net

simple reason that he is the owner of the

thing taken by him. (L. B. Reyes)
8.

Salary must be delivered first to employee; prior

to this, taking of Php is theft

9.

If offender claims property as his own (in good

faith) not theft (though later found to be
untrue. If in bad faith theft)

Nota Bene: Fish not in fishpond, otherwise, qualified

Fencing under Presidential Decree No. 1612 is a
distinct crime from theft and robbery. If the participant
who profited is being prosecuted with person who
robbed, the person is prosecuted as an accessory. If he
is being prosecuted separately, the person who partook
of the proceeds is liable for fencing.

10. Gain is not just Php satisfaction, use, pleasure

desired, any benefit (e.g. joyride)

Burden of proof is upon fence to overcome

presumption; if explanation insufficient or unsatisfactory,
court will convict. This is a malum prohibitum so intent
is not material. But if prosecution is under the Revised
Penal Code, as an accessory, the criminal intent is
controlling.

Gain means the acquisition of a thing useful for

the purpose of life. It includes the benefit which in any
other sense may be derived or expected from the act
performed.

When there is notice to person buying, there

may be fencing such as when the price is way below
ordinary prices; this may serve as notice. He may be
liable for fencing even if he paid the price because of the
presumption.

11. Actual gain is not necessary (intent to gain

necessary)
12. Allege lack of consent in info is important
Consent as an element of the crime of theft
must be in the concept of consent that is freely given
and not one which is inferred from mere lack of
opposition on the part of the owner.

Cattle Rustling and Qualified Theft of Large

Cattle The crime of cattle-rustling is defined and
punished under Presidential Decree No. 533, the AntiCattle Rustling law of 1974, as the taking by any means,
method or scheme, of any large cattle, with or without
intent to gain and whether committed with or without
violence against or intimidation of person or force upon
things, so long as the taking is without the consent of the
owner/breed thereof. The crime includes the killing or
taking the meat or hide of large cattle without the
consent of the owner.

Where the charge of theft under the first

sentence of Article 308, the information must allege lack
of consent. The allegation of lack of consent is
indispensable under the first paragraph of Article 308
since the language or epigraph of the law expressly
requires that the (unlawful) taking should be done
without the consent of the owner. In view of the clear
text of the law, an information which does not aver lack
of consent of the owner would render the allegation
insufficient and the information may be quashed for
failure to allege an essential element of the crime. (Pua
Yi Kun vs. People, G. R. No. 26256, June 26, 1968)
Robbery and Theft distinguished.

Since the intent to gain is not essential, the

killing or destruction of large cattle, even without taking
any part thereof, is not a crime of malicious mischief but
cattle-rustling.
The Presidential Decree, however, does not
supersede the crime of qualified theft of large cattle
under Article 310 of the Revised Penal Code, but merely
modified the penalties provided for theft of large cattle
and, to that extent, amended Articles 309 and 310. Note
that the overt act that gives rise to the crime of cattlerustling is the taking or killing of large cattle. Where the
large cattle was not taken, but received by the offender
from the owner/overseer thereof, the crime is not cattlerustling; it is qualified theft of large cattle.

For robbery to exist, it is necessary that

personal property be taken against the will of the owner;
whereas in theft, it is sufficient that consent on the part
of the owner is lacking.
Presumption:
A person found in possession of a thing taken in
the recent doing of a wrongful act is the taker of the
thing and the doer of the whole act.

Where the large cattle was received by the

offender who thereafter misappropriated it, the crime is
qualified theft under Article 310 if only physical or
material possession thereof was yielded to him. If both
material and juridical possession thereof was yielded to
him who misappropriated the large cattle, the crime
would be estafa under Article 315 (1b).

Possession is not limited to actual personal

custody. One who deposits stolen property in a place
where it cannot be found may be deemed to have such
property in his possession.
ELEMENTS OF HUNTING, FISHING OR GATHERING
FRUITS, ETC. IN ENCLOSED ESTATE

PENALTIES FOR QUALIFIED THEFT

(PAR. NO.3, ART. 308)

The basis of the penalty is the value of the things stolen.

1.

If the property has some value but is not proven with

reasonable certainty, the minimum penalty shall be
imposed under par. 6 of Art. 309 (People vs. Reyes,
58 Phil. 964).

2.
3.
4.

That there is an enclosed estate or a field where

trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another;
That the offender enters the same.
That the offender hunts or fishes upon the same or
gathers fruits, cereals or other forest or farm
products, and
That the hunting or fishing or gathering of products
is without the consent of the owner.

When there is no evidence as to the value of the

property stolen, the court is allowed to take judicial

52

www.rkmfiles.net

knowledge of the value of such property. (People vs.

dela Cruz, 43 O. G. 3206)

juridical possession of the thing transfers ownership of

the property to the possessor, any misappropriation
made by the possessor will not result in the commission
of any crime, either for theft of estafa.

When the resulting penalty for the accessory to the

crime of theft has no medium period, the court can
impose the penalty which is found favorable to the
accused. (Cristobal vs. People, 84 Phil. 473).

4.

QUALIFIED THEFT

5.
6.
7.

THEFT IS QUALIFIED WHEN:

1. Committed by domestic servant, or
2. With grave abuse of confidence, or
3. Property stolen is:
a. motor vehicle
b. mail matter
c. large cattle
d. coconut from plantation
e. fish from fishpond or fishery, or
4. On occasion of calamities and civil disturbance.

8.

On Carnapping and Theft of Motor Vehicle

When the subject is motor vehicle, the Theft
becomes qualified. Under R.A. 6539, Anti-Carnapping
Act of 1972, the term motor vehicle includes, within its
protection, any vehicle which uses the streets, with or
without the required license, or any vehicle which is
motorized using the streets, such as a motorized tricycle.
(Izon vs. People, 107 SCRA 123)

Nota Bene:
When the theft is committed by a domestic
servant, the offended party may either be the employer
where the offender is working as a household help, or a
third person as a guest in the house. The roomboy is a
hotel is embraced within the term domestic servant.
1.

The taking with intent to gain of a motor vehicle

belonging to another, without the latters consent, or by
means of violence or intimidation of persons, or by using
force upon things is penalized as carnapping under
Republic Act No. 6539 (An Act Preventing and Penalizing
Carnapping), as amended. The overt act which is being
punished under this law as carnapping is also the taking
of a motor vehicle under circumstances of theft or
robbery. If the motor vehicle was not taken by the
offender but was delivered by the owner or the
possessor
to
the
offender,
who
thereafter
misappropriated the same, the crime is either qualified
theft under Article 310 of the Revised Penal Code or
estafa under Article 315 (b) of the Revised Penal Code.
Qualified theft of a motor vehicle is the crime if only the
material or physical possession was yielded to the
offender; otherwise, if juridical possession was also
yielded, the crime is estafa.

grave abuse high degree of confidence e.g.

guests

In the case of abuse of confidence, the latter

must be grave in order to comply with the requirement
of the law because abuse of confidence is not enough.
There must be an allegation in the information that there
is a relation between the accused and the offended party
wherein the latter confided his security as to his person,
life and property to the accused with such degree of
confidence and that the accused abused the same.
Abuse of confidence is determined from the
trust reposed by the offended party to the offender. It
may also refer to the nature of the work of the offender
which must necessarily involve trust and confidence.
Abuse of confidence is also an element of estafa. To
avoid confusion between theft with abuse of confidence
(qualified theft) and estafa with abuse of confidence,
where the offender misappropriates a thing after he
receives it from the victim, the student must remember
that in qualified theft, only the physical or material
possession of the thing is transferred. If the offender
acquires the juridical as well as the physical possession
of the thing and he misappropriates it, the crime
committed is estafa. Juridical possession of the thing is
acquired when one holds the thing in trust, or on
commission, or for administration or under any other
obligation involving the duty to deliver or to return the
thing received. If the possession of the offender is not
under any of these concepts, the crime is qualified theft.
2.
3.

Qualified: if done by one who has access to

place where stolen property is kept e.g., guards,
tellers
novation theory applies only if theres a relation
industrial partner is not liable for QT (estafa)
when accused considered the deed of sale as
sham (modus) and he had intent to gain, his
absconding is QT
motor vehicle in kabit system sold to anothertheft. Motor vehicle not used as PU in kabit
system but under K of lease-estafa

9.

mail matter private mail to be QT, Not

postmaster Art. 226

10. theft of large cattle

OCCUPATION OF REAL PROPERTY OR USURPATION
OF REAL RIGHTS IN PROPERTY
Acts punished:
1. Taking possession of any real property belonging to
another by means of violence against or intimidation
of persons;
2. Usurping any real rights in property belonging to
another by means of violence against or intimidation
of persons.

no confidence, not qualified theft

theft material possession estafa juridical
possession

ELEMENTS:
1.

Where only the material possession is

transferred, conversion of the property gives rise to the
crime of theft. Where both the material and juridical
possession is transferred, misappropriation of the
property would constitute estafa. When the material and

2.
3.

53

That the offender takes possession of any real

property or usurps any real rights in property.
That the real property or real rights belong to
another.
That violence against or intimidation of persons is
used by the offender in occupying real property or
usurpation real rights in property.

www.rkmfiles.net

4.

That there is intent to gain.

Violence employed results to the death of the

offended party. When such eventuality does occur, then
the crime may rightfully be denominated as usurpation
of real rights resulting to homicide, murder, parricide, or
infanticide as the case may be.

Since this is a crime against property, there

must be intent to gain. In the absence of the intent to
gain, the act may constitute Coercion.
Use the degree of intimidation to determine the
degree of the penalty to be applied for the usurpation.

ALTERING BOUNDARIES OR LANDMARKS

Elements:
1. That there be boundary marks or monuments of
towns, provinces, or estates, or any other marks
intended to designate the boundaries of the same.
2. That the offender alters said boundary marks.

Usurpation under Article 312 is committed in the

same way as robbery with violence or intimidation of
persons. The main difference is that in robbery,
personal property is involved; while in usurpation of
real rights, it is real property. (People v. Judge
Alfeche, July 23, 1992)

FRAUDULENT INSOLVENCY (culpable insolvency)

The possession of the land or real rights must

be done by means of violence or intimidation. So, if the
evidence of the prosecution shows that the accused
entered the premises by means of strategy, stealth or
methods other than the employment of violence, no
crime was committed by the offender. (People vs.
Alfeche, Jr., 211 SCRA 770)

Elements:
1. That the offender is a debtor; that is, he was
obligations due and payable.
2. That he absconds with his property.
3. That there be prejudice to his creditors.
To be liable for fraudulent insolvency, the
disposal of the merchandise must be done with malice.
The mere circumstance that a person has disposed of his
merchandise by removing them from the place where
they were kept would necessarily imply fraud. What is
required is actual prejudice to the creditor. The intention
of the accused alone is not enough. (People vs. Guzman,
C. A. 40 O. G. 2655)

Usurpation of real rights and property should

not be complexed using Article 48 when violence or
intimidation is committed. There is only a single crime,
but a two-tiered penalty is prescribed to be determined
on whether the acts of violence used is akin to that in
robbery in Article 294, grave threats or grave coercion
and an incremental penalty of fine based on the value of
the gain obtained by the offender.

The law does not require the offender to be a

merchant. The law says any person, and this refers to
anyone who becomes a debtor and performs the acts
made punishable by the law.

There is no crime of threat and usurpation of

real property since threat is an indispensable element of
usurpation of real rights. Hence, where threats are
uttered to the owner of real property by one illegally
occupying it, the crime committed is not the complex
crime of usurpation of real property with grave threats
because making a threat is an inherent element of
usurpation of real property. (Castrodes vs. Cubelo, 83
SCRA 670)

SWINDLING AND OTHER DECEITS

Estafa is embezzlement under common law. It
is a well-known crime to lawyers and businessmen. It is a
continuing crime unlike theft. Being a public crime, it can
be prosecuted de officio.

The complainant must be the person upon

whom violence was employed. If a tenant was occupying
the property and he was threatened by the offender, but
it was the owner who was not in possession of the
property who was named as the offended party, the
same may be quashed as it does not charge an offense.
The owner would, at most, be entitled to civil recourse
only.

ESTAFA
ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA IN GENERAL
1.
2.

On Squatting
According to the Urban Development
Housing Act, the following are squatters:

That the accused defrauded another (a.) by abuse of

confidence, or (b) or means of deceit and
That damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary
estimation is caused to the offended party or third
person

The concept of damage under this article does

not mean actual or real damage. It may consist in mere
disturbance of the property rights of the offended party.
However, the damage must be capable of pecuniary
estimation. This requirement is important because in
estafa, the penalty is dependent on the value of the
property.

and

1. Those who have the capacity or means to pay rent or

for legitimate housing but are squatting anyway;
2. Also the persons who were awarded lots but sold or
lease them out;
3.
Intruders of lands reserved for socialized housing,
pre-empting possession by occupying the same.

Since estafa is a material crime, it can be

divided into consummated, attempted or frustrated
stages. In the latter case, the damage can be in the form
of temporary prejudice or suffering, or inconvenience
capable of pecuniary estimation.

Note that violation of Article 312 is punishable

only with fine. So, if physical injuries are inflicted on the
victim due to the violence employed by the offender in
the usurpation of real rights, the latter shall be punished
separately for the crime of physical injuries.

ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA WITH UNFAITHFULNESS

54

www.rkmfiles.net

1.
2.
3.

That the offender has an onerous obligation to

deliver something of value.
That he alters its substance, quantity, or quality.
That damage or prejudice is caused to another.

a. by altering the substance

b. existing obligation to deliver even if it is not a
subject of lawful commerce
c. thing delivered has not been fully or partially paid
for not estafa
d. no agreement as to quality No estafa if delivery
is unsatisfactory

The accused does not receive the goods but

delivers a thing under an onerous obligation which is not
in accordance with the substance, quantity or quality
agreed upon. It is the altering of the substance, quality
or quantity of the thing delivered which makes the
offender liable for the crime of estafa.

2.

By misappropriating and converting

a.

The word onerous means that the offended

party has fully complied with his obligations to pay. So, if
the thing delivered whose substance was altered, is not
yet fully or partially paid, then the crime of estafa is not
committed.

b.
c.

ELEMENTS
OF
ESTAFA
WITH
ABUSE
OF
CONFIDENCE UNDER SUBDIVISION NO.1 PAR. (B)

d.

1.

e.

2.
3.
4.

That money, goods, or other personal property be

received by the offender in trust, or on commission,
or for administration, or under any other obligation
involving the duty to make delivery of or to return,
the same.
That there be misappropriation or conversion of such
money or property by the offender, or dental on his
part of such receipt.
that such misappropriation or conversion or dental is
to the prejudice of another and
That there is a demand made by the offended party
to the offender.

f.
g.

h.

(The fourth element is not necessary when there is

evidence of misappropriation of the goods by the
defendant. [Tubb v. People, et al., 101 Phil. 114] ).

There is no estafa through negligence. There is

likewise no estafa where the accused did not
personally
profit
or
gain
from
the
misappropriation.

It is necessary in this kind of estafa, for the

money, goods or personal property to have been
received by the offender in trust, or on commission or for
administration. He must acquire both material or
physical as well as juridical possession of the thing
received. In these instances, the offender, who is the
transferee, acquires a right over a thing which he may
set up even against the owner.

i.

Partners No estafa of money or property

received for the partnership when the business
is commercial and profits accrued.
BUT if
property is received for specific purpose and is
misappropriated estafa!
j.
Failure to account after the DEMAND is
circumstantial evidence of misappropriation
k. DEMAND is not a condition precedent to
existence of estafa when misappropriation may
be established by other proof
l.
In theft, upon delivery of the thing to the
offender, the owner expects an immediate
return of the thing to him otherwise, Estafa
m. Servant,
domestic
or
employee
who
misappropriates a thing he received from his
master is NOT guilty of estafa but of qualified
theft

A money market transaction however partakes

of the nature of a loan, and non-payment thereof would
not give rise to criminal liability for Estafa through
misappropriation or conversion.
In money market
placements, the unpaid investor should institute against
the middleman or dealer, before the ordinary courts, a
simple action for recovery of the amount he had
invested, and if there is allegation of fraud, the proper
forum would be the Securities and Exchange
Commission. (Sesbreno vs. Court of Appeals, et al., 240
SCRA 606).

3.

2ND ELEMENT OF ESTAFA WITH ABUSE OF

CONFIDENCE
UNDER
PARAGRAPH
(B),
SUBDIVISION N0.1, ART. 315 = 3 WAYS OF
COMMITTING
1.
2.
3.

thing is received by offender under transactions

transferring juridical possession, not ownership
under PD 115 (Trust Receipts Law) failure to
turn over to the bank the proceeds of the sale of
the goods covered by TR Estafa
same thing received must be returned
otherwise estafa; sale on credit by agency when
it was to be sold for cash estafa
Estafa not affected by Novation of Contract
because it is a public offense
Novation must take place before criminal
liability was incurred or perhaps prior to the
filing of the criminal information in court by
state prosecutors
Misappropriating to take something for ones
own benefit
Converting act of using or disposing of
anothers property as if it was ones own; thing
has been devoted for a purpose or use different
from that agreed upon
There must be prejudice to another not
necessary that offender should obtain gain

When in the prosecution for malversation the public

officer is acquitted, the private individual allegedly
in conspiracy with him may be held liable for estafa

By misappropriating the thing received.

By converting the thing received.
By denying that the thing was received.

Nota Bene:
1.

Unfaithfulness or Abuse of Confidence

55

www.rkmfiles.net

ESTAFA WITH
MALVERSATION
ABUSE OF
CONFIDENCE
Offenders
are offenders are entrusted
entrusted
with with funds or property
funds or property and
are
continuing
and
are offenses
continuing
offenses
Funds:
always Funds: public funds or
private
property
Offender: private Offender: public officer
individual,
or accountable for public
public officer not funds
accountable
Committed
by Committed
by
misappropriating, appropriating, taking,
converting,
misappropriating
denying having
received money
ELEMENTS
OF
ESTAFA
BY
TAKING
ADVANTAGE OF
THE SIGNATURE IN BLANK
1.
2.
3.
4.

ELEMENTS OF
PRETENSES

1.
2.
3.

3.

4.

MEANS

OF

FALSE

Using fictitious name;

Falsely pretending to possess power, influence,
qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or
imaginary transactions; or
By means of other similar deceits.

ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY POSTDATING A CHECK OR

ISSUING A CHECK IN PAYMENT OF AN OBLIGATION
1.
2.

UNDUE

(1) The obligation is not pre-existing;

(2) The check is drawn to enter into an
obligation;
(Remember that it is the check that is supposed to be
the sole consideration for the other party to have
entered into the obligation. For example, Rose wants to
purchase a bracelet and draws a check without
insufficient funds. The jeweler sells her the bracelet
solely because of the consideration in the check.)
(3) It does not cover checks where the purpose
of drawing the check is to guarantee a loan as
this is not an obligation contemplated in this
paragraph

That the paper with the signature of the offended

party be in blank.
That the offended party should have delivered it to
offender.
That above the signature of the offended party a
document is written by the offender without
authority to do so.
That the document so written creates a liability of,
or causes damage to, the offended party or any third
person.

The check must be genuine. If the check is

falsified and is cashed with the bank or exchanged for
cash, the crime is estafa thru falsification of a
commercial document.

that there must be a false pretense, fraudulent

means must be made or executed prior to or
That such false pretense, fraudulent act or
fraudulent means must be made or executed prior
to or simultaneously with the commission of the
fraud.
That the offended party must have relied on the
false pretense, fraudulent act, or fraudulent means,
that is, he was induced to part with his money or
property because of the false pretense, fraudulent
act, or fraudulent means.
That as a result thereof, the offended party suffered
damage.

The general rule is that the accused must be

able to obtain something from the offended party by
means of the check he issued and delivered. Exception:
when the check is issued not in payment of an
obligation.
If the checks were issued by the defendant and
he received money for them, then stopped payment and
did not return the money, and he had an intention to
stop payment when he issued the check, there is estafa.
Deceit is presumed if the drawer fails to deposit
the amount necessary to cover the check within three
days from receipt of notice of dishonor or insufficiency of
funds in the bank.

Nota Bene:
1.

False pretenses or fraudulent acts executed prior

to or simultaneously with delivery of the thing by the
complainant

2.

There must be evidence that the pretense of the

accused that he possesses power/influence is false

That the offender postdated a check, or issued a

check in payment of an obligation.
That such postdatig or issuing a check was done
when the offender had no funds in the bank or his
funds deposited therein were not sufficient to cover
the amount of the check.

Note that this only applies if:

ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY MEANS OF DECEIT

2.

BY

Acts punished under paragraph (a)

Note: If the paper with signature in blank was stolen

Falsification if by making it appear that he participated in
a transaction when in fact he did not so participate

1.

ESTAFA

1.

If check was issued in payment of pre-existing

debt no estafa

It is therefore essential that the check be issued

in payment of a simultaneous obligation. The check in
question must be utilized by the offender in order to
defraud the offended party. So, if the check was issued in
payment of a promissory note which had matured and
the check was dishonored, there is not estafa since the
accused did not obtain anything by means of said check.
(People vs. Canlas, O. G. 1092)

The representation that accused possessed influence, to

deceive and inveigle the complainant into parting with
his money must however be false to constitute deceit
under No. 2 of Article 315, RPC. (Dela Cruz vs. Court of
Appeals, et al., 265 SCRA 299).

56

www.rkmfiles.net

If a bouncing check is issued to pay a preexisting obligation, the drawer is liable under B. P. Blg. 22
which does not make any distinction as to whether a bad
check is issued in payment of an obligation or to
guarantee an obligation. (Que vs. People, 73217-18,
Sept. 21, 1987)
2.

is the issuance of the check.

double jeopardy.

(3) In the estafa under Article 315 (2) (d), deceit and
damage are material, while in Batas Pambansa Blg.
22, they are immaterial.

Offender must be able to obtain something from

the offended party by means of the check he
issues and delivers

(4) In estafa under Article 315 (2) (d), knowledge by the

drawer of insufficient funds is not required, while in
Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, knowledge by the drawer
of insufficient funds is reqired.

The check must be issued in payment of an obligation. If

the check was issued without any obligation or if there is
lack of consideration and the check is subsequently
dishonored, the crime of estafa is not committed.
3.

If postdating a check issued as

guarantee/promissory note no estafa

On issuance of a bouncing check

The issuance of check with insufficient funds
may be held liable for estafa and Batas Pambansa Blg.
22. Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 expressly provides that
prosecution under said law is without prejudice to any
liability for violation of any provision in the Revised Penal
Code. Double Jeopardy may not be invoked because a
violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 is a malum
prohibitum and is being punished as a crime
against the public interest for undermining the
banking system of the country, while under the
Revised Penal Code, the crime is malum in se
which requires criminal intent and damage to the
payee and is a crime against property.

mere

ELEMENTS OF OFFENSE DEFINED IN THE FIRST

PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 1: BP 22
1.
2.
3.

4.

That a person makes or draws and issues any check.

That the check is made or drawn and issued to apply
on account or for value.
That the person who makes or draws and issues the
check knows at the time of issue that he does not
have sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee
bank for the payment of such check in full upon its
presentment.
That the check is subsequently dishonored by the
drawee bank for insufficiency of funds or credit, or
would have been dishonored for the same reason
had not the drawee, without any valid reason,
ordered the bank to stop payment.

In estafa, the check must have been issued as a

reciprocal consideration for parting of goods (kaliwaan).
There must be concomitance. The deceit must be prior
to or simultaneous with damage done, that is, seller
relied on check to part with goods. If it is issued after
parting with goods as in credit accommodation only,
there is no estafa. If the check is issued for a preexisting obligation, there is no estafa as damage had
already been done. The drawer is liable under Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22.

Note: Failure to make good within 5 banking days prima

facie evidence of knowledge of lack and insufficiency
ELEMENTS OF THE OFFENSE DEFINED IN THE
SECOND PARAGRAPH OF SECTION 1: BP 22
1.
2.

3.

Hence, there is no

For criminal liability to attach under Batas

Pambansa Blg. 22, it is enough that the check was issued
to "apply on account or for value" and upon its
presentment it was dishonored by the drawee bank for
insufficiency of funds, provided that the drawer had been
notified of the dishonor and inspite of such notice fails to
pay the holder of the check the full amount due thereon
within five days from notice.

That a person has sufficient funds in or credit with

the drawee bank when he makes or draws and
issues a check.
That he fails to keep sufficient funds or to maintain a
credit to cover the full amount of the check if
presented within a period of 90 days from the date
appearing thereon.
That the check is dishonored by the drawee bank.

Under Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, a drawer must

be given notice of dishonor and given five banking days
from notice within which to deposit or pay the amount
stated in the check to negate the presumtion that drawer
knew of the insufficiency.
After this period, it is
conclusive that drawer knew of the insufficiency, thus
there is no more defense to the prosecution under Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22.

Nota Bene: Failure to make good within 5

banking days prima facie evididence of knowledge of
lack and insufficiency
Distinction between Estafa under Article 315 (2)
(d) of the Revised Penal Code and violation of
Batas Pambansa Blg. 22:

The mere issuance of any kind of check

regardless of the intent of the parties, whether the check
is intended to serve merely as a guarantee or as a
deposit, makes the drawer liable under Batas Pambansa
Blg. 22 if the check bounces. As a matter of public
policy, the issuance of a worthless check is a public
nuisance and must be abated.

(1) Under both Article 315 (2) (d) and Batas Pambansa
Blg. 22, there is criminal liability if the check is
drawn for non-pre-existing obligation.
If the check is drawn for a pre-existing obligation, there
is criminal liability only under Batas Pambansa Blg.
22.

ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY INDUCING ANOTHER TO

SIGN ANY DOCUMENTS

(2) Estafa under Article 315 (2) (d) is a crime against

property while Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 is a crime
against public interest.
The gravamen for the
former is the deceit employed, while in the latter, it

1.

57

That the offender induced the offended party to sign

a document.

www.rkmfiles.net

2.
3.
4.

That deceit be employed to make him sign the

document.
That the offended party personally signed the
document.
That prejudice be caused.

3.
4.

ESTAFA

Note: If offended party willingly signed the document

and there was deceit as to the character or contents of
the document falsification; but where the accused
made representation to mislead the complainants as to
the character of the documents - estafa

2.
3.

That there be court records, office files, documents

or any other papers.
That the offender removed, concealed or destroyed
any of them.
That the offender had intent to defraud another.

1.
2.
3.

In order to commit a crime, the offender must

have the intention to defraud. In other words, the
removal, concealment or destruction of the court record
should be done with the intent to defraud the victim. This
is distinguished from the crime of removal; concealment
or destruction of documents under Article 226 wherein
fraud is not an element of the crime, and which is
committed only by public officers. What is punished
under this Article is the damage to public interest.

4.

1.
2.
3.
4.

Syndicated Estafa
A syndicate of five or more persons formed with
intent to carry out an unlawful or illegal act, transaction
or scheme and defraudation which results in
misappropriation of money contributed by stockholders
or members of rural banks, cooperatives, samahang
nayon or formers association; or funds contributed by
corporations or associations for the general welfare.

1.
2.
3.
4.

THE ELEMENTS OF DAMAGE OR PREJUDICE MAY CONSIST

OF THE FF:
The offender party being deprived of his money or
property, as a result of the defraudation.
Disturbance in property right or
Temporary prejudice.

2.

That the offender is the owner of personal property.

That said personal property is in the lawful
possession of another.
That the offender wrongfully takes it from its lawful
possessor.
That prejudice is thereby caused to the possessor or
third person.

That the offender is a surety in a bond given in a

criminal or civil action.
That he guaranteed the fulfillment of such obligation
with his real property or properties.
That he sells, mortgages, or, in any other manner
encumbers said real property.
That such sale, mortage or encumbrance is (a)
without express authority from the court, or (b)
made before the cancellation of his bond, or (c)
before being relieved from the obligation contracted
by him.

ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING A MINOR

1.

ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR.1) BY CONVEYING,

SELLING, ENCUMBERING, OR MORTGAGING ANY
REAL PROPERTY, PRETENDING TO BE THE OWNER
OF THE SAME
1.

BY
HIS

ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR. 6) BY SELLING,

MORTGAGING OR ENCUMBERING REAL PROPERTY
OR PROPERTIES WITH WHICH THE OFFENDER
GUARANTEED
THE
FULFILLMENT
OF
HIS
OBLIGATION AS SURETY

DAMAGE OR PREJUDICE CAPABLE OF PECUNIARY

ESTIMATION: (315) (second element of any form of
estafa)

2.
3.

that the thing disposed of be real property.

That the offender knew that the real property was
encumbered, whether the encumbrance is recorded
or not.
That there must be express representation by the
offender that the real property is free from
encumbrance.
That the act of disposing of the real property be
made to the damage of another.

ELEMENTS
OF
SWINDLING
(PAR.3)
WRONGFULLY TAKING BY THE OWNER
PERSONAL FROM ITS LAWFUL POSSESSOR

If the act of removing, concealing or destroying

results from hatred, revenge, or other evil motive, the
crime committed is malicious mischief under Article 327.

1.

INFIDELITY IN THE
CUSTODY OF DOCUMENTS
Public officer entrusted

Private
individual was
entrusted
Intent to defraud
No intent to defraud
ELEMENTS OF SWINDLING (PAR. 2) BY DISPOSING
OF
REAL
PROPERTY
AS
FREE
FROM
ENCUMBRANCE, ALTHOUGH SUCH ENCUMBRANCE
BE NOT RECORDED

ELEMENTS OF ESTAFA BY REMOVING, CONCEALING

OR DESTROYING DOCUMENTS
1.

That the offender should have executed an act of

ownership
(selling, leasing,
encumbering
or
mortgaging the real property).
That the act be made to the prejudice of the owner
or a third person.

2.
3.

That the thing be immovable, such as a parcel of

land or a building.
That the offender who is not the owner of said
property represented that he is the owner thereof.

4.

That the offender takes advantage of the

inexperience or emotions or feelings of a minor.
That he induces such minor (a) to assume an
obligation, or (b) to give release, or (c) to execute a
transfer of any property right.
That the consideration is (a) some loan of money (b)
credit or (c) other personal property.
That the transaction is to the detriment of such
minor.

The property referred to in this article is not real

property. It is limited to personal property since a minor

58

www.rkmfiles.net

cannot convey real property without judicial intervention.

So, if what is involved is real property, the crime of
swindling a minor under this article is not committed
even if the offender succeeds in inducing the minor to
deal with such real property since no damage or
detriment is caused against the minor.

3.

B.

1.
2.

ELEMENTS OF CRIME INVOLVING DESTRUCTION

1.

ELEMENTS OF OTHER DECEITS

2.

not mentioned above;

interpretation of dreams, forecast, future-telling for
profit or gain.

The meaning of other deceits under this article has

reference to a situation wherein fraud or damage is done
to another by any other form of deception which is not
covered by the preceding articles.
Another form of deceit would be in the nature of
interpreting dreams, or making forecasts, telling fortunes
or simply by taking advantage of the credulity of the
public by any other similar manner, done for profit or
gain.

C.

CHATTEL MORTGAGE

2.

A.
SELLING OR PLEDGING PERSONAL PROPERTY
ALREADY PLEDGED

3.
D.

2.

CRIMES

The crime committed is still arson. Death is

absorbed in the crime of arson but the penalty to be
imposed ranges from reclusion perpetua to death. (Sec.
5, P.D. No. 1613)
How arson is established?
Arson is established by proving the corpus
delicti, usually in the form of circumstantial evidence
such as the criminal agency, meaning the substance
used, like gasoline, kerosene or other form of
combustible materials which caused the fire. It can also
be in the form of electrical wires, mechanical, chemical
or electronic contrivance designed to start a fire; ashes
or traces of such objects which are found in the ruins of
the burned premises.

INVOLVING

Nota Bene:

Note: PD 1613 expressly repealed or amended Arts

320-326, but PD 1744 revived Art 320
A.

If the crime of arson was employed by the

offender as a means to kill the offended party, the crime
committed is murder. The burning of the property as the
means to kill the victim is what is contemplated by the
word fire under Article 248 which qualifies the crime to
murder. (People vs. Villarosa, 54 O. G. 3482)

ELEMENTS OF ARSONS OF PROPERTY OF SMALL

VALUES
1.
2.

That the property burned is the exclusive

property of the offender
That (a) the purpose of the offender is burning it
is to defraud or cause damage to another or (b)
prejudice is actually caused, or (c) the thing
burned is a building in an inhabited place

Legal effect if death results from arson

ELEMENTS:
1. that personal property is mortgaged under the
chattel mortage law.
2. That the offender knows that such property is so
mortaged.
3. That he removes such mortgaged personal to any
province or city other than the one in which it was
located at the time of the execution of the
mortgage.
4. that the removal is permanent.
5. That there is no written consent of the mortgagee or
his executors, administration or assigns to such
removal.
OTHER

That the offender set fire to or destroyed his

own property
That the purpose of the offender in doing so was
to commit arson or to cause a great destruction
That the property belonging to another was
burned or destroyed

ELEMENTS OF ARSON
1.

KNOWINGLY REMOVING MORTGAGED PERSONAL

PROPERTY

ARSON
AND
DESTRUCTIONS

That the offender causes destruction of the

property
That the destruction was done by means of:
a. explosion
b. discharge of electric current
c. inundation
d. sinking or stranding of a vessel
e. damaging the engine of the vessel
f.
taking up rails from the railway track
g. destroying telegraph wires and posts or
those of any other system
h. other similar effective means of destruction

ELEMENTS OF BURNING ONES PROPERTY AS A

MEANS TO COMMIT ARSON
1.

ELEMENTS:
1. That personal property is already pledged under the
terms of the chattel mortgage law.
2. That the offender, who is the mortgagee of such
property, sells or pledges the same or any part
thereof.
3. That there is no consent of the mortgagee written on
the back of the mortgage and noted on the record
thereof in the office of the register of deeds.

That the burning was done at a time or under

circumstances which clearly exclude all danger
of the fire spreading

That an uninhabited hut, storehouse, barn, shed

or any other property is burned
That the value of the property burned does not
exceed 25 pesos

When the burning of the property was done by

the offender only to cause damage but the arson
resulted to death of a person, the crime committed is still
arson because the death of the victim is a mere

59

www.rkmfiles.net

consequence and not the intention of the offender.

(People vs. Paterno, 47 O. G. 4600)

Note: Qualified malicious mischief no uprising or

sedition (#1)

There is no special complex crime of arson with

homicide. What matters in resolving cases involving
intentional arson is the criminal intent of the offender.

OTHER MISCHIEF

There is such a crime as reckless imprudence

resulting in the commission of arson. When the arson
results from reckless imprudence and it leads to death,
serious physical injuries and damage to the property of
another, the penalty to be imposed shall not be for the
crime of arson under P. D. No. 1613 but rather, the
penalty shall be based on Article 365 of the Revised
Penal Code as a felony committed by means of culpa.

1.

ELEMENTS:
Not included in Art. 328
a. scattering human excrement
b. killing of cow as an act of revenge

The offender is punished according to the value of the

damage caused to the offended party. If the damages
cannot be estimated, the minimum penalty is arresto
menor or a fine of not more than 200 pesos shall be
imposed on the offender.

MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
ELEMENTS
1.
2.
3.

That the offender deliberately caused damage to the

property of another.
That such act does not constitute arson or other
crimes involving destruction.
That the act damaging anothers property be
committed merely for the sake of damaging it.

DAMAGE AND OBSTRUCTION

COMMUNICATION

If the damage was intended to cause derailment only

without any intention to kill, it will be a crime involving
destruction under Article 324. If the derailment is
intentionally done to cause the death of a person, the
crime committed will be murder under Article 248.

It means not only loss but a diminution of the value of

ones property. It includes defacing, deforming or
rendering it useless for the purpose for which it was
made.

4.

But after damaging the thing, he used it = theft

There is destruction of the property of another but there

is no misappropriation. Otherwise, it would be theft if he
gathers the effects of destruction.

circumstance qualifying the offense if the damage

shall result in any derailment of cars, collision or
other accident a higher penalty shall be imposed

DESTROYING OR DAMAGING
MONUMENTS OR PAINTINGS

Damage is not incident of a crime (breaking

windows in robbery)

EXEMPTION FROM
AGAINST PROPERTY

SPECIAL CASES OF MALICIOUS MISCHIEF

1.
2.
3.
4.

OF

Notes:
1. removing rails from tracks is destruction (art 324)
2. not applicable when telegraph/phone lines dont
pertain to railways (example: for transmission of
electric power/light)
3. people killed as a result:
a. murder if derailment is means of intent to kill
b. none art 48

Meaning of damage in malicious mischief.

6.

MEANS

done by damaging railways, telegraph, telephone lines,

electric wires, traction cables, signal system of railways

Nota Bene:
1. Malicious mischief willful damaging of
anothers property for the sake of causing
damage due to hate, revenge or other evil
motive
2. No negligence
3. Example. Killing the cow as revenge
4. If no malice only civil liability

5.

TO

CRIMINAL

STATUES,

LIABILITY

IN

PUBLIC
CRIMES

Persons exempt from criminal liability

1. Spouse, ascendants and descendants or
relatives by affinity in the same line
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the
property w/c belonged to the deceased spouse
before the same passed into the possession of
another
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law and
sisters-in-law, if living together

Obstruct performance of public functions.

Using poisonous or corrosive substances.
Spreading infection or contagious among cattle.
Damage to property of national museum or library,
archive, registry, waterworks, road, promenade, or
any other thing used in common by the public.

The cases of malicious mischief enumerated in

this article are so-called qualified malicious mischief. The
crime becomes qualified either because of the nature of
the damage caused to obstruct a public; or because of
the kind of substance used to cause the damage. The
crime is still malicious mischief because the offender has
no intent to gain but derives satisfaction from the act
because of hate, revenge or other evil motive.

Offenses involved in the exemption

1. Theft ( not robbery )
2. Swindling
3. Malicious mischief
Notes:
1. Exemption is based on family relations

60

www.rkmfiles.net

For the exemption to apply insofar as brothers and

sisters, and brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law are
concerned, they must be living together at the time
of the commission of the crime of theft, estafa or
malicious mischief.

defense and it is up to him to ventilate that in formal

investigations or a formal trial.
If after preliminary investigation, the public
prosecutor is convinced that the man did not know that
the woman is married, then he could simply file the case
against the woman.

2. Parties to the crime not related to the offended party

still remains criminally liable
3.

Persons
a.
b.
c.
d.

The acquittal of the woman does not necessarily

result in the acquittal of her co-accused.

exempt include:
stepfather/mother (ascendants by affinity)
adopted children (descendants)
concubine/paramour (spouse)
common law spouse (property is part of
their earnings)

In order to constitute adultery, there must be a

joint physical act. Joint criminal intent is not necessary.
Although the criminal intent may exist in the mind of one
of the parties to the physical act, there may be no such
intent in the mind of the other party. One may be guilty
of the criminal intent, the other innocent, and yet the
joint physical act necessary to constitute the adultery
may be complete. So, if the man had no knowledge that
the woman was married, he would be innocent insofar as
the crime of adultery is concerned but the woman would
still be guilty; the former would have to be acquitted and
the latter found guilty, although they were tried together.

Only the relatives enumerated incur no liability

if the crime relates to theft (not robbery), swindling, and
malicious mischief. Third parties who participate are not
exempt. The relationship between the spouses is not
limited to legally married couples; the provision applies
to live-in partners.

A husband committing concubinage may be

required to support his wife committing adultery under
the rule in pari delicto.

ON CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY

The crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction,
abduction and acts of lasciviousness are the so-called
private crimes. They cannot be prosecuted except upon
the complaint initiated by the offended party. The law
regards the privacy of the offended party here as more
important than the disturbance to the order of society.
For the law gives the offended party the preference
whether to sue or not to sue. But the moment the
offended party has initiated the criminal complaint, the
public prosecutor will take over and continue with
prosecution of the offender. That is why under Article
344, if the offended party pardons the offender, that
pardon will only be valid if it comes before the
prosecution starts. The moment the prosecution starts,
the crime has already become public and it is beyond the
offended party to pardon the offender.

For adultery to exist, there must be a marriage

although it be subsequently annulled.
There is no
adultery, if the marriage is void from the beginning.
Adultery is an instantaneous crime which is
consummated and completed at the moment of the
carnal union. Each sexual intercourse constitutes a
crime of adultery. Adultery is not a continuing crime
unlike concubinage.
Illustration 1:
Madamme X is a married woman residing in
Pasay City. He met a man, Y, at Roxas Boulevard. She
agreed to go with to Baguio City, supposedly to come
back the next day. When they were in Bulacan, they
stayed in a motel, having sexual intercourse there. After
that, they proceeded again and stopped at Dagupan
City, where they went to a motel and had sexual
intercourse.

ADULTERY
ELEMENTS
1. That the woman is married (even if marriage
subsequently declared void)
2. That she has sexual intercourse with a man not her
husband.
3. That as regards the man with whom she has sexual
intercourses, he must know her to be married.

There are two counts of adultery committed in

this instance: one adultery in Bulacan, and another
adultery in Dagupan City. Even if it involves the same
man, each intercourse is a separate crime of adultery.
1.

Nota Bene:
There are two reasons why adultery is made
punishable by law. Primarily, it is a violation of the
marital vow and secondarily, it paves the way to the
introduction of a spurious child into the family.

mitigated if wife was abandoned without

justification by the offended spouse (man is
entitled to this mitigating circumstance)

Abandonment without justification is not

exempting but only a mitigating circumstance. One who
invokes abandonment in the crime of adultery
hypothetically admits criminal liability for the crime
charged. (U. S. vs. Serrano, et al., 28 Phil. 230)

Adultery is a crime not only of the married

woman but also of the man who had intercourse with a
married woman knowing her to be married. Even if the
man proves later on that he does not know the woman to
be married, at the beginning, he must still be included in
the complaint or information. This is so because whether
he knows the woman to be married or not is a matter of

While abandonment is peculiar only to the

accused who is related to the offended party and must
be considered only as to her or him as provided under
Article 62, paragraph 3, nonetheless, judicially speaking,
in the crime of adultery, there is only one act committed
and consequently both accused are entitled to this

61

www.rkmfiles.net

mitigating circumstance. (People vs. Avelino, 40 O.G.

Supp. 11, 194)
2.

If the husband commits concubinage, this probability

does not arise because the mother of the child will
always carry the child with her. So even if the husband
brings with him the child, it is clearly known that the
child is a stranger. Not in the case of a married woman
who may bring a child to the family under the guise of a
legitimate child. This is the reason why in the former
crime the penalty is higher than the latter.

attempted: caught disrobing a lover

There is no frustrated adultery because of the

nature of the offense.
In the case of People vs. Pontio Guinucud, et al.,
(58 Phil. 621), a private agreement was entered into
between the husband and wife for them to separate from
bed and board and for each of them to go for his and her
own separate way. Thereafter, the wife Rosario Tagayum
lived with her co-accused Pontio Guinucud in a nearby
barangay. Their love affair ultimately embroiled the
spouses conservative and reputable families in a human
drama exposed in legal battles and whispers of
unwanted gossips. In dismissing the complaint, the Court
ruled that while a private agreement between the
husband and wife was null and void, the same was
admissible proof of the express consent given by the
condescending husband to the prodigal wife, a license
for her to commit adultery. Such agreement bars the
husband from instituting a criminal complaint for
adultery.

Unlike adultery, concubinage is a continuing

crime.
If the charges consist in keeping a mistress in
the conjugal dwelling, there is no need for proof of sexual
intercourse. The conjugal dwelling is the house of the
spouse even if the wife happens to be temporarily
absent therefrom. The woman however must be brought
into the conjugal house by the accused husband as a
concubine to fall under this article. Thus, if the coaccused was voluntarily taken and sheltered by the
spouses in their house and treated as an adopted child
being a relative of the complaining wife, her illicit
relations with the accused husband does not make her a
mistress. (People vs. Hilao, et al., (C.A.) 52 O.G. 904).
It is only when a married man has sexual
intercourse with a woman elsewhere that scandalous
circumstances becomes an element of crime.

After filing the complaint for adultery and while

the case is pending trial and resolution by the trial court,
the offended spouse must not have sexual intercourse
with the adulterous wife since an act of intercourse
subsequent to the adulterous conduct is considered as
implied pardon. (People vs. Muguerza, et al., 13 C.A. Rep.
1079)

For the existence of the crime of concubinage by

having sexual intercourse under scandalous
circumstances, the latter must be imprudent and
wanton as to offend modesty and sense of
morality and decency.

It is seldom the case that adultery is established

by direct evidence. The legal tenet has been and still is
circumstancial and corroborative evidence as will lead
the guarded discretion of a reasonable and just man to
the conclusion that the criminal act of adultery has been
committed will bring about conviction for the crime. (U.
S. vs. Feliciano, 36 Phil. 753)

When spies are employed to chronicle the

activities of the accused and the evidence presented to
prove scandalous circumstances are those taken by the
detectives, it is obvious that the sexual intercourse done
by
the
offenders
was
not
under
scandalous
circumstances. (U.S. vs. Campos-Rueda, 35 Phil. 51)

CONCUBINAGE

Causal sexual intercourse with a woman in a

hotel is not concubinage. Likewise, keeping of a mistress
in a townhouse procured and furnished by a married man
who does not live or sleep with her in said townhouse
does not constitute concubinage since there is no
cohabitation.

ELEMENTS:
1. That the man must be married.
2. That he committed any of the following acts:
a. Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling.
b. Having
sexual
intercourse
under
scandalous circumstances with a woman
who is not his wife.
c. Cohabiting with her in any other place.
3. That as regards the woman she must know him to
be married.

The rule is that, if a married mans conduct with

a woman who is not his wife was not confined to
occasional or transient interview for carnal intercourse
but is carried n in the manner of husband and wife and
for some period of time, then such association is
sufficient to constitute cohabitation. (People vs. Zuniga,
CA 57 O.G. 2497)

Note: Scandal consists in any reprehensible

word/deed that offends public conscience, redounds to
the detriment of the feelings of honest persons and gives
occasions to the neighbors spiritual damage and ruin

If the evidence of the prosecution consists of a

marriage contract between the offender and the
offended party, and the additional fact of the birth
certificate of a child showing the accused to be the
father of the child with the alleged cocubine, the same
will not be sufficient to convict the accused of
concubinage since the law clearly states that the act
must be one of those provided by law.

With respect to concubinage the same principle

applies: only the offended spouse can bring the
prosecution. This is a crime committed by the married
man, the husband. Similarly, it includes the woman who
had a relationship with the married man.
It has been asked why the penalty for adultery
is higher than concubinage when both crimes are
infidelities to the marital vows. The reason given for this
is that when the wife commits adultery, there is a
probability that she will bring a stranger into the family.

RAPE

62

www.rkmfiles.net

This has been repealed by Republic Act No.

8353 or the Anti-Rape Law of 1997. Rape is classified as
a Crime against Person. (See notes on Special Laws)

case. The demarcation line is not always easy to

determine but in order to sustain a conviction for acts of
lasciviousness, it is essential that the acts complained of
be prompted by lust or lewd designs and the victim did
not consent to nor encouraged the act.

ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender commits any act of lasciviousness
or lewdness.
2. That it is done under any of the following
circumstances:
a. by using force or intimidation, or
b. when the offended party is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious, or
c. when the offended party is under 12 years
of age.
3. That the offended party is another person of either
sex.

To be guilty of this crime however, the acts of

lasciviousness must be committed under any of the
circumstances that had there been sexual intercourse,
the crime would have been Rape. Where circumstances
however are such, indicating a clear intention to lie with
the offended party, the crime committed as Attempted
Rape.

Note: There are two kinds of acts of lasciviousness

under the Revised Penal Code: (1) under Article 336,
and (2) under Article 339.

This crime (Art. 336) can be committed by

either sex unlike in Acts of Lasciviousness with Consent
under Article 339. Thus, a lesbian who toyed with the
private part of an eleven-year-old girl who enjoyed it
since she was given $50 dollars before the act, is guilty
of Act of Lasciviousness under this Article as the victim is
below twelve year old; and had sexual intercourse been
possible and done, the act would have been Rape.

1.

SEDUCTION

Article 336. Acts of Lasciviousness

Under this article, the offended party may be a man or a

woman.
The crime committed, when the act
performed with lewd design was perpetrated under
circumstances which would have brought about the
crime of rape if sexual intercourse was effected, is
acts of lasciviousness under this article. This means
that the offended party is either

QUALIFIED SEDUCTION OF A VIRGIN

Two classes of qualified seduction:
1. Seduction of a virgin over 12 and under 18 years of
age by certain persons, such as a person in
authority, priest, teachers etc and
2. Seduction of a sister by her brother or descendant
by her ascendant, regardless of her age or
reputation (incestuous seduction)

(1) under 12 years of age; or

(2) being over 12 years of age, the lascivious acts were
committed on him or her through violence or
intimidation,
or while the offender party was
deprived of reason, or otherwise unconscious.
2.

Elements:
1. That the offended party is a virgin, (presumed if she
unmarried and of good reputation.)
2. That she must be over 12 and under 18 years of
age.
3. That the offender has sexual intercourse with her.
4. That there is abuse of authority, confidence or
relationship on the part of the offender ( person
entrusted with education or custody of victim;
person in public authority, priest; servant)

Article 339. Acts of Lasciviousness with the Consent

of the Offended Party:

Under this article, the victim is limited only to a

woman. The circumstances under which the lascivious
acts were committed must be that of qualified seduction
or simple seduction, that is, the offender took advantage
of his position of ascendancy over the offender woman
either because he is a person in authority, a domestic, a
househelp, a priest, a teacher or a guardian, or there was
a deceitful promise of marriage which never would really
be fulfilled.

1.

Always remember that there can be no

frustration of acts of lasciviousness, rape or adultery
because no matter how far the offender may have gone
towards the realization of his purpose, if his participation
amounts to performing all the acts of execution, the
felony is necessarily produced as a consequence thereof.
Intent to rape is not a necessary element of the
crime of acts of lasciviousness. Otherwise, there would
be no crime of attempted rape.
In the crime of acts of lasciviousness, the
intention of the wrongdoer is not very material. The
motive that impelled the accused to commit the offense
is of no importance because the essence of lewdness is
in the act itself.

Persons liable:
Those who abuse their authority:
a. persons in public authority
b. guardian
c. teacher
d. person who, in any capacity, is entrusted
with the education or custody of the woman
seduced

2.

Those who abused the confidence reposed in them:

a. priest
b. house servant
c. domestic

3.

Those who abused their relationship:

a. brother who seduced his sister
b. ascendant who seduced his descendant
This crime also involves sexual intercourse. The
offended woman must be over 12 but below 18 years.
The distinction between qualified seduction and
simple seduction lies in the fact, among others, that the
woman is a virgin in qualified seduction, while in simple

What constitutes lewd or lascivious conduct

must be determined from the circumstances of each

63

www.rkmfiles.net

seduction, it is not necessary that the woman be a virgin.

It is enough that she is of good repute.

One who is charged with qualified seduction can

be convicted of rape. But one who is charged with rape
cannot be convicted of qualified seduction under the
same information. (People vs. Ramirez, 69 SCRA 144)

For purposes of qualified seduction, virginity

does not mean physical virginity. It means that the
offended party has not had any experience before.

Even if the woman has already lost her virginity

because of rape, in the eyes of the law, she remains a
virtuous woman even if physically she is no longer a
virgin.

The virginity referred to here, is not to be

understood in so material a sense as to exclude the idea
of abduction of a virtuous woman of a good reputation.
Thus, when the accused claims he had prior intercourse
with the complainant, the latter is still to be considered a
virgin (U.S. vs. Casten, 34 Phil. 808). But if it was
established that the girl had a carnal relations with other
men, there can be no crime of Seduction as she is not a
virgin.

SIMPLE SEDUCTION

Although in qualified seduction, the age of the

offended woman is considered, if the offended party is a
descendant or a sister of the offender no matter how
old she is or whether she is a prostitute the crime of
qualified seduction is committed.

ELEMENTS

Illustration

3.
4.

1.
2.

If a person goes to a sauna parlor and finds

there a descendant and despite that, had sexual
intercourse with her, regardless of her reputation or age,
the crime of qualified seduction is committed.

That the offended party is over 12 and under 18

years of age.
That she must be of good reputation, single or
widow.
That the offender has sexual intercourse with her.
That it is committed by means of deceit.

Deceit generally takes the form of unfulfilled

promise to marry. The promise of marriage must serve as
the inducement. The woman must yield on account of
the promise of marriage or other forms of inducement.
(People vs. Hernandez, 29 Phil. 109)

In the case of a teacher, it is not necessary that

the offended woman be his student. It is enough that
she is enrolled in the same school.

Where the accused failed to have sex with this

sweetheart over twelve (12) but below eighteen (18)
years old because the latter refused as they were not yet
married, and the accused procured the performance of a
fictitious marriage ceremony because of which the
girlfriend yielded, he is guilty of Simple Seduction. (U.S.
vs. Hernandez, 29 Phil. 109). Here, there was deceit
employed. This act may now be considered Rape under
R.A. 8353, Sec. 2 par. 6.

Deceit is not necessary in qualified seduction.

Qualified seduction is committed even though no deceit
intervened or even when such carnal knowledge was
voluntary on the part of the virgin. This is because in
such a case, the law takes for granted the existence of
the deceit as an integral element of the crime and
punishes it with greater severity than it does the simple
seduction, taking into account the abuse of confidence
on the part of the agent. Abuse of confidence here
implies fraud.

A promise of material things in exchange for the

womans surrender of her virtue does not constitute
deceit.
If a woman under 18 years of age but over 12
agrees to a sexual intercourse with a man who promised
her precious jewelries but the man reneges on his
promise, there is no seduction that the woman is of loose
morals. (Luis B. Reyes)

The fact that the offended party gave her

consent to the sexual intercourse is not a defense. Lack
of consent on the part of the complainant is not an
element of the crime.
The term domestic refers to a person usually
living under the same roof with the offended party. It
includes all those persons residing with the family and
who are members of the same household, regardless of
the fact that their residence may only be temporary or
that they may be paying for their board and lodging.

Promise
intercourse.

of

marriage

must

precede

sexual

A promise of marriage made by the accused

after sexual intercourse had taken place, or after the
woman had yielded her body to the man by mutual
consent will not render the man liable for simple
seduction.
The offended woman must be under 18 but not
less than 12 years old; otherwise, the crime is statutory
rape.
Unlike in qualified seduction, virginity is not
essential in this crime.
What is required is that the
woman be unmarried and of good reputation. Simple
seduction is not synonymous with loss of virginity. If the
woman is married, the crime will be adultery.

A domestic should not be confused with a house

servant. A domestic is not necessarily a house servant.
Where the offended party is below 12 years of
age, regardless of whether the victim is a sister or a
descendant of the offender, the crime committed is rape.
If the offended party is married and over 12
years of age, the crime committed will be adultery.
An essential element of a qualified seduction is
virginity (doncella). It is a condition existing in a woman
who has had no sexual intercourse with any man. It does
not refer to the condition of the hymen as being intact.

64

www.rkmfiles.net

ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS WITH THE CONSENT OF

THE OFFENDED PARTY

age cannot be the victim in the crime of corruption of

minors.

ELEMENTS:

WHITE SLAVE TRADE

1.

Acts penalized:
1. Engaging in the business of prostitution
2. Profiting by prostitution
3. Enlisting the service of women for the purpose of
prostitution

2.

3.

that the offender commits acts of lasciviousness or

lewdness.
That the acts are committed upon a woman who is
virgin or single or widow of good reputation, under
18 years of age but over 12 years, or a sister or
descendant regardless of her reputation or age.
that the offender accomplishes the acts by abuse of
authority, confidence, relationship, or deceit.

The person liable under Article 341 is the one

who maintains or engages in the trade of prostitution. A
white slave is a woman held unwillingly for purposes of
commercial prostitution. A white slaver on the other
hand is one engaged in white slave traffic, procurer of
white slaves or prostitutes.

When the acts of lasciviousness is committed

with the use of force or intimidation or when the
offended party is under 12 years of age, the object of the
crime can either be a woman or a man.

The most common way of committing this crime

would be through the maintenance of a bar or saloon
where women engage in prostitution. For each
intercourse, the women pay the maintainer or owner of a
certain amount in this case, the maintainer of owner of
the bar or saloon is liable for white slave trade. (People
vs. Go Lo, 56 O.G. 4056)

Where the acts of the offender were limited to

acts of lewdness or lasciviousness, and no carnal
knowledge was had; but had there been sexual
intercourse, the offense would have been Seduction, he
is guilty of Acts of Lasciviousness under this article.
The crime of acts of lasciviousness under Article
339 is one that is done with the consent of the offended
party who is always a woman. The lewd acts committed
against her is with her consent only because the offender
took advantage of his authority, or there was abuse of
confidence, or the employment of deceit, or the offender
is related to the victim.

ABDUCTION
FORCIBLE ABDUCTION
ELEMENTS:
1.

In the commission of the acts of lasciviousness

either by force or intimidation, or with the consent of the
offended party, there must be no sexual intercourse, or
the acts performed are short of sexual intercourse. In the
first situation, the crime would either be qualified
seduction or simple seduction if the offender succeeds in
having sexual intercourse with the victim. In these two
cases, there is consent but the same is procured by the
offender through the employment of deceit, abuse of
confidence, abuse of authority or because of the
existence of blood relationship.

2.
3.

That the person abducted is any woman, regardless

of her age, civil status, or reputation.
That the abduction is against her will.
That the abduction is with lewd designs.

Note: Sexual intercourse is NOT necessary

Crimes against chastity where age and reputation of
victim are immaterial: rape, acts of lasciviousness,
qualified seduction of sister/descendant, forcible
abduction
Forcible abduction defined

CORRUPTION OF MINORS

It is the taking away of any woman against her

will, from her house or the place where she may be, for
the purpose of carrying her to another place with intent
to marry or corrupt her. A woman is carried against her
will or brought from one place to another against her will
with lewd design.

Act punishable: by promoting or facilitating the

prostitution or corruption of persons underage to satisfy
the lust of another.
It is not required that the offender be the
guardian or custodian of the minor. It is not necessary
that the minor be prostituted or corrupted as the law
merely punishes the act of promoting or facilitating the
prostitution or corruption of said minor and that he acted
in order to satisfy the lust of another.

Unlike in Rape and Seduction, in the crime of

Abduction, whether Forcible or Consented, there is no
sexual intercourse. The acts are limited to taking away
from a place the victim, but the same must be with lewd
designs, that is, with unchaste design manifested by
kissing and touching the victims private parts.

A single act of promoting or facilitating the

corruption or prostitution of a minor is sufficient to
constitute violation of this article.
What the law punishes is the act of pimp
(bugaw) who facilitates the corruption of a minor. It is not
the unchaste act of the minor which is being punished.
So, a mere proposal to promote or facilitate the
prostitution or corruption of a minor is sufficient to
consummate the crime.

If the element of lewd design is present, the

carrying of the woman would qualify as abduction;
otherwise, it would amount to kidnapping. If the woman
was only brought to a certain place in order to break her
will and make her agree to marry the offender, the crime
is only grave coercion because the criminal intent of the
offender is to force his will upon the woman and not
really to restrain the woman of her liberty.

Young minor should enjoy a good reputation.

Apparently, a prostitute above 12 and under 18 years of

Where lewd design was not proved or shown,

and the victim was deprived of her liberty, the crime is

65

www.rkmfiles.net

kidnapping with Serious Illegal Detention under this

Article 267, RPC.

True intention of the offender should be

ascertained. If the detention is only incidental, the same
should be considered as absorbed. Otherwise, it should
be treated as a separate offense. When such a situation
arises, we should consider the application of Article 48
on complex crimes.

The element of lewd designs, which is essential

to the crime of abduction through violence, refers to the
intention to abuse the abducted woman. If such intention
is lacking or does not exist, the crime may be illegal
detention. It is necessary to establish the unchaste
design or purpose of the offender. But it is sufficient that
the intent to seduce the girl is present. The evil purpose
of the offender may be established or inferred from the
overt acts of the accused.

The taking away of the woman may be

accomplished by means of deceit at the beginning and
then by means of violence and intimidation later.
The virginity of the complaining witness is not a
determining factor in forcible abduction.

If the offended woman is under 12 years old,

even if she consented to the abduction, the crime is
forcible abduction and not consented abduction.

In order to demonstrate the presence of the

lewd design, illicit criminal relations with the person
abducted need not be shown. The intent to seduce a girl
is sufficient.

Where the offended woman is below the age of

consent, even though she had gone with the offender
through some deceitful promises revealed upon her to go
with him and they live together as husband and wife
without the benefit of marriage, the ruling is that forcible
abduction is committed by the mere carrying of the
woman as long as that intent is already shown. In other
words, where the man cannot possibly give the woman
the benefit of an honorable life, all that man promised
are just machinations of a lewd design and, therefore,
the carrying of the woman is characterized with lewd
design and would bring about the crime of abduction and
not kidnapping.
This is also true if the woman is
deprived of reason and if the woman is mentally
retarded.
Forcible abduction is committed and not
consented abduction.

If there is a separation in fact, the taking by the

husband of his wife against her will constitutes grave
coercion.
Distinction between Forcible Abduction and Illegal
Detention
When a woman is kidnapped with lewd or
unchaste designs, the crime committed is forcible
abduction.
When the kidnapping is without lewd designs, the crime
committed is illegal detention.
But where the offended party was forcibly taken
to the house of the defendant to coerce her to marry
him, it was held that only grave coercion was committed
and not illegal detention.

Lewd designs may be demonstrated by the

lascivious acts performed by the offender on her. Since
this crime does not involve sexual intercourse, if the
victim is subjected to this, then a crime of rape is further
committed and a complex crime of forcible abduction
with rape is committed.

Forcible abduction must be distinguished from

the crime of kidnapping. When the violent taking of a
woman is motivated by lewd design, the crime
committed is forcible abduction. But if the motive of the
offender is to deprive the woman of her liberty, the crime
committed is kidnapping. Abduction is a crime against
chastity while kidnapping is a crime against personal
liberty.

Lewd
design
does
not
include
sexual
intercourse. So, if sexual intercourse is committed
against the offended party after her forcible abduction,
the offender commits another crime separate and
distinct from forcible abduction. In this case, the accused
should be charged with forcible abduction with rape.
(People vs. Jose, et al., 37 SCRA 450)

CONSENTED ABDUCTION

If the accused carried or took away the victim

by means of force and with lewd design and thereafter
raped her, the crime is Forcible Abduction with Rape, the
former being a necessary means to commit the latter.
The subsequent two (2) other sexual intercourse
committed against the will of the complainant would be
treated as independent separate crimes of Rape.
(People vs. Bacalso, 210 SCRA 206).

ELEMENTS:
1. That the offended party must be a virgin.
2. That she must be over 12 and under 18 years of
age.
3. That the taking away of the offended party must be
with her consent, after solicitation or cajolery from
the offender.
4. That the taking away of the offended party must be
with lewd designs.

If the main object of the offender is to rape the

victim, and the forcible abduction was resorted to by the
accused in order to facilitate the commission of the rape,
then the crime committed is only rape. (People vs.
Toledo, 83 Phil. 777)

Virginity may be presumed from the fact that

the offended party is unmarried and has been leading
moral life. Virginity or maidenhood should not be
understood in such a matter of fact as to completely
exclude a woman who has had previous sexual
intercourse. If the previous sexual intercourse was the
result of the crime of rape, the intercourse committed
with her against he will and over her violent objection
should not render her unchaste and a woman of bad
reputation.

Where the victim was taken from one place to

another, solely for the purpose of killing him and not
detaining him for any legal length of time, the crime
committed is murder. (People vs. Ong, 62 SCRA 174)

66

www.rkmfiles.net

If the virgin is under 12 years old, the crime

committed is forcible abduction because of the theory
that a child below 12 years of age has no will of her own.

must be in good faith. This rule does not apply in case of

multiple rape
In the crimes involving rape, abduction,
seduction, and acts of lasciviousness, the marriage by
the offender with the offended woman generally
extinguishes criminal liability, not only of the principal
but also of the accomplice and accessory. However, the
mere fact of marriage is not enough because it is already
decided that if the offender marries the offended woman
without any intention to perform the duties of a husband
as shown by the fact that after the marriage, he already
left her, the marriage would appear as having been
contracted only to avoid the punishment. Even with that
marriage, the offended woman could still prosecute the
offender and that marriage will not have the effect of
extinguishing the criminal liability.

The purpose of the law on consented abduction

is to punish the offender for causing disgrace and
scandal to the family of the offended party. The law does
not punish the offender for the wrong done to the woman
since in the eyes of the law, she consented to her
seduction.
The deceit which is termed by the law as
solicitation or cajolery maybe in the form of honeyed
promises of marriage.
In consented Abduction, it is not necessary that
the young victim, (a virgin over twelve and under
eighteen) be personally taken from her parents home by
the accused; it is sufficient that he was instrumental in
her leaving the house. He must however use solicitation,
cajolery or deceit, or honeyed promises of marriage to
induce the girl to escape from her home.

Pardon by the offended woman of the offender

is not a manner of extinguishing criminal liability but only
a bar to the prosecution of the offender. Therefore, that
pardon must come before the prosecution is
commenced.
When the prosecution is already
commenced or initiated, pardon by the offended woman
will no longer be effective because pardon may preclude
prosecution but not prevent the same.

In consented abduction, the taking away of the

virgin must be with lewd design. Actual sexual
intercourse with the woman is not necessary. However, if
the same is established, then it will be considered as
strong evidence to prove lewd design.

Pardon in crimes against chastity, is a bar to

prosecution. But it must come before the institution of
the criminal action. (See the cases of People vs.
Villorente, 210 SCRA 647; People vs. Avila, 192 SCRA
635) To be effective, it must include both accused.

PROSECUTION OF ADULTERY, CONCUBINAGE,

SEDUCTION, ABDUCTION RAPE AND ACTS OF
LASCIVIOUSNESS
1.
2.

How about pardon declared by the offended

party during the trial of the case? Such a declaration is
not a ground for the dismissal of the case. Pardon is a
matter of defense which the accused must plead and
prove during the trial. (People vs. Riotes, C.A., 49
O.G.3403).

Adultery and concubinage must be prosecuted upon

complaint signed by the offended spouse
Seduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness
must be prosecuted upon complaint signed by:
a. offended party
b. by her parents
c. grandparents
d. guardians in the order in which they are named
above

CIVIL LIABILITY OF PERSONS

SEDUCTION OR ABDUCTION
1.
2.

The crimes of adultery and concubinage must

be prosecuted upon a complaint signed by the offended
spouse. In the complaint, the offended party must
include both guilty parties if they are both alive.

3.

GUILTY

OF

RAPE,

To idemnify the offended women

To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law should
prevent him from doing so
In every case to support the offspring

The civil liability of the adulterer and the

concubine is limited to indemnity for damages caused to
the offended spouse. The law does not mention the
adulteress in the crime of adultery such that only the
adulterer shall be held civilly liable.

The word guardian as mentioned in the law

refers to the guardian appointed by the court. (People vs.
Formento, et al., 60 Phil. 434)
What is the meaning of shall have consented
which bars the institution of criminal action for
adultery or concubinage?

There is likewise no mention of the offender in

the crime of acts of lasciviousness, as being held liable
for civil damages under Article 345, the law only
mentioned the crimes of rape, seduction and abduction.

The term consent has reference to the tie

prior to the commission of the crime. In other words, the
offended party gives his or her consent to the future
infidelity of the offending spouse. And so, while consent
refers to the offense prior to its commission, pardon
refers to the offense after its commission. (People vs.
Schnekenburger, et al., 73 Phil. 413)

Under Article 2219 of the Civil Code, moral

damages may be recovered in seduction, abduction,
rape or other lascivious acts. The crimes of adultery and
concubinage are also included.
In the crimes of rape, abduction and seduction,
if the offended woman had given birth to the child,
among the liabilities of the offender is to support the
child. This obligation to support the child may be true
even if there are several offenders. As to whether all of
them will acknowledge the child that is a different
question because the obligation to support here is not

Nota Bene:
Marriage of the offender with the offended party
extinguishes the criminal action or remit the penalty
already imposed upon him. This applies as well to the
accomplices, accessories-after-the-fact. But marriages

67

www.rkmfiles.net

founded on civil law but is the result of a criminal act or a

form of punishment.

status, the offender must have the intent to enjoy the

rights arising from the civil status of another.

It has been held that where the woman was the

victim of the said crime could not possibly conceive
anymore; the trial court should not provide in its
sentence that the accused, in case a child is born, should
support the child. This should only be proper when there
is a probability that the offended woman could give birth
to an offspring.

3.

Circumstances qualifying the offense: penalty is

heavier when the purpose of the impersonation is to
defraud the offended party or his heirs
BIGAMY
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender has been legally married.
2. That the marriage has not been legally dissolved or,
in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent
spouse could not yet be presumed dead according
to the civil code.
3. That he contracts a second or subsequent marriage.
4. That the second or subsequent marriage has all the
essential requisites for validity.

ON CRIMES AGAINST CIVIL STATUS OF PERSON

SIMULATION OF BIRTHS, SUBSTITUTION OF ONE
CHILD FOR ANOTHER, AND CONCEALMENT OR
ABANDONMENT OF A LEGITIMATE CHILD
Acts Punished:
1. Simulation of births
2. Substitution of one child for another
3. Concealing or abandoning any legitimate child with
the intent to cause such child to lose its civil status

Nota Bene:
1. The crime does not fall within the category of
private crimes that can be prosecuted only at the
instance of the offended party PUBLIC CRIME

Requisites:
1. The child must be legitimate
2. The offender conceals or abandons such child
3. The offender has the intent to cause the child to lose
its civil status

For the crime of bigamy to prosper the first

marriage must be valid. If the first marriage is
void from the beginning, such nullity of the
marriage is not a defense in a charge of bigamy.
Consequently, when raised as a defense, the
accused should be convicted since until and
unless annulled, the bond of matrimony remains
or is maintained.

Need for judicial declaration of nullity

The second marriage must have all the

essential requisites for validity were it not for
the existence of the first marriage.

Elements of Simulation of Birth

1. Child is baptized or registered in the Registry of birth
as hers
2. Child loses its real status and acquiires a new one
3. Actors purpose was to cause the loss of any trace
as to the childs true filiation
Simulation of birth takes place when a woman
pretends to be pregnant when in fact she is not and on
the day of the supposed delivery, she takes the child of
another and declares the child to be her own. This is
done by entering in the birth certificate of the child that
the offender is the alleged mother of the child when in
fact the child belongs to another.

2. A simulated marriage is not marriage at all and can

be used as a defense for bigamy
Good faith is a defense in bigamy. One who,
although not yet married before, knowingly consents to
be married to one who is already married is guilty of
bigamy knowing that the latters marriage is still valid
and subsisting.

USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS

Committed by a person who represents himself as
another and assumes the filiation or rights pertaining to
such person

1.

3. There must be a summary proceeding to declare the

absent spouse presumptively dead for purposes of
remarriage
4. Failure to exercise due diligence to ascertain the
whereabouts of the 1st wife is bigamy through
reckless imprudence
5. A judicial declaration of the nullity of a marriage
void ab initio is now required
6. One convicted for bigamy may be prosecuted for
concubinage as both are distinct offenses
7. One who vouches that there is no legal impediment
knowing that one of the parties is already married
is an accomplice

Notes:
There must be criminal intent to enjoy the civil
rights of another by the offender knowing he is not
entitled thereto
The term "civil status" includes one's public
station, or the rights, duties, capacities and incapacities
which determine a person to a given class. It seems that
the term "civil status" includes one's profession.

2.

Committed by asuming the filiation, or the parental

or conjugal rights of another

Distinction between bigamy and illegal marriage

Usurpation is committed by assuming the

filiation or parental (when maternal, paternal or conjugal)
claim of another. To be liable for usurpation of civil

Bigamy is a form of illegal marriage.

The
offender must have a valid and subsisting marriage.
Despite the fact that the marriage is still subsisting, he
contracts a subsequent marriage.

68

www.rkmfiles.net

LIBEL

Illegal marriage includes also such other

marriages which are performed without complying with
the requirements of law, or such premature marriages, or
such marriage which was solemnized by one who is not
authorized to solemnize the same.

ELEMENTS:
1.

MARRIAGE CONTRACTED AGAINST PROVISIONS OF

LAWS

2.
3.
4.

ELEMENTS:
1.
2.

5.

That the offender contracted marriage.

That he knew at the time that
a. the requirement of the law were not
complied with, or
b. The marriage was in disregard of a legal
impediment.

Libel is a public and malicious imputation of a

crime, or a vice or defect, real or imaginary or any act,
commission, condition, status or circumstances tending
to cause the dishonor, discredit or contempt of a natural
or juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who
is dead

Note: Circumstance qualifying the offense: if either of the

contracting parties obtains the consent of the other by
means of violence, intimidation or fraud

Character of
defamatory

The requirements of the law for a valid marriage are:

1. The legal capacity of the contracting parties;
2. Their consent freely given;
3. Authority of the person performing the marriage; and
4.
Marriage license, except in marriage under
exceptional circumstances.

words

used

to

make

it

Malice has been defined as a term used to

indicate the fact that the defamer is prompted by
personal ill or spite and speaks not in response to duty
but merely to injure the reputation of the person
defamed.

Marriages contracted against the provisions of laws

1. The marriage does not constitute bigamy.
2.
The marriage is contracted knowing that the
requirements of the law have not been complied
with or in disregard of legal impediments.
3. One where the consent of the other was obtained by
means of violence, intimidation or fraud.
4. If the second marriage is void because the accused
knowingly contracted it without complying with legal
requirements as the marriage license, although he
was previously married.
5. Marriage solemnized by a minister or priest who does
not have the required authority to
solemnize
marriages.

Kinds of Malice
Malice in law This is assumed and is inferred
from the defamatory character of an imputation. The
presumption of malice attaches to the defamatory
statement especially if it appears to be insulting per se.
The law presumes that the defamer made the imputation
without good intention or justifiable motive.
Malice in fact This refers to malice as a fact.
The presence and existence of personal ill-will or spite
may still appear even if the statement is not defamatory.
So, where the defamatory acts may be presumed from
the publication of the defamatory acts imputed refer to
the private life of the individual, malice may be
presumed from the publication of the defamatory
statement because no one has a right to invade
anothers privacy.

PREMATURE MARRIAGE
Acts punished:

2.

the

Words calculated to induce suspicion are more

effective in destroying reputation than false charges
directly made. Ironical and metaphorical language is a
favored vehicle for slander. A charge is sufficient if the
words are calculated to induce the hearer to suppose
and understand that the person against whom they are
uttered is guilty of certain offenses, or are sufficient to
impeach his honesty, virtue or reputation, or to hold him
up to public ridicule. (U.S. vs. OConnell, 37 Phil. 767)

The law further provides that for accused to be liable

under this article, he should not be guilty of bigamy
because otherwise, the crime punished under Article 350
is deemed absorbed in the bigamy.

1.

That there must be an imputation of a crime, or of a

vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act,
omission, condition, status, or circumstances.
That the imputation must be made publicly.
That it must be malicious.
That the imputation must be directed at a natural or
juridical person, or one who is dead.
That the imputation must tend to cause the
dishonor, discredit or contempt of the person
defamed.

A widow who within 301 days from death of

husband, got married or before her delivery, if she
was pregnant at the time of his death
A woman whose marriage having been dissolved or
annulled, married before her delivery or within 301
days after the legal separation

Distinction

PERFORMANCE OF ILLEGAL MARRIAGE CEREMONY

Malice in fact is the malice which the law

presumes from every statement whose tenor is
defamatory. It does not need proof. The mere fact that
the utterance or statement is defamatory negates a legal
presumption of malice.

Act punished: Performance of any illegal marriage

ceremony by a priest or minister of any religious
denomination or sect or by civil authorities
ON CRIMES AGAINST HONOR

69

www.rkmfiles.net

Libel
In the crime of
-false accusation need not
libel, which includes oral
be made under oath
defamation, there is no
need for the prosecution to
present evidence of malice. It is enough that the alleged
defamatory or libelous statement be presented to the
court verbatim. It is the court which will prove whether it
is defamatory or not. If the tenor of the utterance or
statement is defamatory, the
legal presumption of
malice arises even without proof.

Perjury
-false accusation
made under oath

A libel may be committed by means of Writing;

Printing; Lithography; Engraving; Radio; Photograph;
Painting;
Theatrical
exhibition;
Cinematographic
exhibition; or Any similar means.
THREATENING TO PUBLISH LIBEL AND OFFER TO
PREVENT
SUCH
PUBLICATION
FOR
A
COMPENSATION

Malice in law can be negated by evidence that,

in fact, the alleged libelous or defamatory utterance was
made with good motives and justifiable ends or by the
fact that the utterance was privileged in character.

Acts punished
1. Threatening another to publish a libel concerning
him, or his parents, spouse, child, or other members
of his family;

In law, however, the privileged character of a

defamatory statement may be absolute or qualified.
When the privileged character is said to be absolute, the
statement will not be actionable whether criminal or civil
because that means the law does not allow prosecution
on an action based thereon. In libel cases, the question is
not what the offender means but what the words used by
him mean. ( Sazon vs. CA, 255 SCRA 692)

2.

Where the comments are worded in praise of

the plaintiff, like describing him with qualities which
plaintiff does not deserve because of his social, political
and economic status in the community which is too well
known to all concerned, are which intended are intended
to ridicule rather than praise him, the publication is
deemed libelous (Jimenez vs. Reyes, 27 SCRA 52)

Blackmail In its metaphorical sense,

blackmail may be defined as any unlawful extortion of
money by threats of accusation or exposure. Two words
are expressive of the crime hush money. (US v. Eguia,
et al., 38 Phil. 857) Blackmail is possible in (1) light
threats under Article 283; and (2) threatening to publish,
or offering to prevent the publication of, a libel for
compensation, under Article 356.

Even if what was imputed is true, the crime of

libel is committed unless one acted with good motives or
justifiable end. Poof of truth of a defamatory imputation
is not even admissible in evidence, unless what was
imputed pertains to an act which constitutes a crime and
when the person to whom the imputation was made is a
public officer and the imputation pertains to the
performance of official duty. Other than these, the
imputation is not admissible.

PROHIBITED PUBLICATION OF ACTS REFERRED TO

IN THE COURSE OF OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender is a reporter, editor or manager of
a newspaper, daily or magazine.
2. That he publishes facts connected with the private
life of another.
3. Those facts are offensive to the honor, virtue and
reputation of said person.

When proof of truth is admissible

When the act or omission imputed constitutes a
crime regardless of whether the offended party is a
private individual or a public officer;
When the offended party is a government employee,
even if the act or omission imputed does not
constitute a crime, provided if its related to the
discharged of his official duties.

Note:
Even though made in connection with or under
the pretext that it is necessary in the narration of any
judicial or administrative proceedings wherein such facts
have been mentioned.

Requisites of defense in defamation

1.
2.
3.

Offering to prevent the publication of such libel for

compensation or money consideration.

It involves the unlawful extortion of money by

appealing to the fear of the victim, through threats of
accusation or exposure. It contemplates of two offenses:
a threat to establish a libel and an offer to prevent such
publication. The gravamen of the crime is the intent to
extort money or other things of value.

Praises undeserved are slander in disguise

2.

If a crime is a private crime, it

cannot be prosecuted de officio. A
complaint from the offended party
is necessary.

LIBEL BY MEANS OF WRITING OR SIMILAR MEANS

Malice in fact becomes necessary only if the

malice in law has been rebutted. Otherwise, there is no
need to adduce evidence of malice in fact. So, while
malice in law does not require evidence, malice in fact
requires evidence.

1.

is

With its provisions, Article 357 has come to be

known as the Gag Law. It prohibits reporters, editors
or managers of newspapers from publishing articles
containing facts connected with the private life of an
individual; facts which are offensive to the honor, virtue
and reputation of persons. But these must refer to facts
which are intimately related to the offended partys
family and home. Occasionally, it involves conjugal

If it appears that the matter charged as libelous is

true;
It was published with good motives;
It was for justifiable ends.

70

www.rkmfiles.net

troubles and quarrels because of infidelity, adultery or

crimes involving chastity.

the acts committed against the offended party caused

her physical injury which did not require medical
attendance, then the crime would be maltreatment
which is classified as slight physical injuries.

ORAL DEFAMATION / SLANDER

Two Kinds of Oral Defamation:
1. action of a serious and insulting nature (Grave
slander)
2. light insult or defamation not serious in nature
(simple slander)

Distinctions
a.
b.

Factors that determine gravity of the offense:

a) expressions used
b) personal relations of the accused and the offended
party
c) circumstances surrounding the case

c.

Notes:
The gravity of oral defamation depends not only
on the expressions but also on the personal relation of
the
accused
with
the
offended
party.
Other
circumstances like the presence of important people
when the crime was committed, the social standing and
position of the offended party are factors which may
influence the gravity and defamatory imputation
(Victorio vs. Court of Appeals, 173 SCRA 645).
Note that slander can be committed even if the
defamatory remark was done in the absence of the
offended party. (People vs. Clarin, C.A., 37 O.G. 1106)
If the utterances were made publicly and were
heard by many people and the accused at the same time
levelled his finger at the complainant, oral defamation is
committed (P v Salleque)
The word puta does not impute that the
complainant is prostitute. (People vs. Atienza, G.R. No. L19857, Oct. 26, 1968 ) It is a common expression of
anger or displeasure. It is seldom taken in its literal
sense by the hearer. It is viewed more as a threat on the
part of the accused to manifest and emphasize a point.
(Reyes vs. People, 27 SCRA 686)

PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR LIBEL

Who are liable?
a.
b.
c.
d.

person who publishes, exhibits or causes

the
publication
or
exhibition
of
any
defamation in writing or similar means(par.1)
author or editor of a book or pamphlet
editor or business manager of a daily
newspaper magazine or serial publication(par.2)
owner of the printing plant which
publishes a libelous article with his consent and
all other persons who in any way participate in
or have connection with its publication (US v
Ortiz)

LIBELOUS REMARKS
Libelous remarks or comments on privileged
matters (under Art. 354) if made with malice in fact will
not exempt the author and editor.

SLANDER BY DEED
ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender performs any act not included in
any other crime against honor.
2. That such act is performed in the presence of other
person or persons.
3. That such act casts dishonor, discredit or contempt
upon the offended party.

(This article is a limitation to the defense of

privileged communication)
INCRIMINATORY MACHINATIONS
INCRIMINATING INNOCENT PERSON

Notes:

ELEMENTS:
1. That the offender performs an act.
2. That by such act he directly incriminates or imputes
to an innocent person the commission of a crime.
3. That such act does not constitute perjury.

Slander by deed is a defamation committed by

the offender against the complainant through the
performance of any act which casts dishonor, discredit or
contempt upon another person. Slander by deed refers
to performance of an act, not use of words.

Two Kinds

Two kinds of slander by deed

1.
2.

Unjust
Vexation-irritation
or
annoyance/anything that annoys or irritates
without justification.
Slander by Deed-irritation or
annoyance + attendant publicity and dishonor
or contempt.
Acts of lasciviousness-irritation or
annoyance + any of 3 circumstance provided in
Art335 of RPC on rape
use of force or intimidation
deprivation of reason or rendering the
offended unconscious
offended party under 12 yrs of age plus
lewd designs

a.

Simple slander by deed; and

Grave slander by deed, that is, which is of a serious
nature.

b.

Whether a certain slanderous act constitutes

slander by deed of a serious nature or not, depends on
the social standing of the offended party, the
circumstances under which the act was committed, the
occasion, etc. The acts of slapping and boxing the
woman, a teacher, in the presence of many people has
put her to dishonor, contempt and ridicule. (P v Costa). If

making a statement which is

defamatory or perjurious (if made under oath and is
false)
planting evidence

Note: article is limited to planting evidence and the like

This crime cannot be committed through verbal
incriminatory statements. It is defined as an act and,
therefore, to commit this crime, more than a mere
utterance is required. If the incriminating machination is

71

www.rkmfiles.net

made orally, the crime may be slander or oral

defamation. If the incriminatory machination was made
in writing and under oath, the crime may be perjury if
there is a willful falsity of the statements made. If the
statement in writing is not under oath, the crime may be
falsification if the crime is a material matter made in a
written statement which is required by law to have been
rendered. As far as this crime is concerned, this has been
interpreted to be possible only in the so-called planting
of evidence.

he directly incriminates or imputes to an innocent person

the commission of a crime.
R.A. 4200 The Anti - Wire Tapping Act
Acts punished:
1) any person, not authorized by all the parties to any
private communication or spoken word
a) taps any wire of cable OR
b) uses any other device or arrangement, to
secretly overhear, intercept, or record such
communication or spoken word by using a
device commonly known as a dictaphone or
dictagraph or walkie talkie or tape recorder

There is such a crime as incriminating an

innocent person through unlawful arrest. (People vs.
Alagao, et al., G.R. No. L-20721, April 30, 1966)
INTRIGUING AGAINST HONOR

2) any person, whether or not a participant in the abovementioned acts:

a) knowingly possesses any tape record, wire
record, disc record, or any other such record or
copies thereof of any communication or spoken
word
b) replays the same for any other person
c) communicates the contents thereof, whether
complete or partial, to any other person

How committed?
By any person who shall make any intrigue
which has for its principal purpose to blemish the honor
or reputation of another person
Notes:
The crime is committed by resorting to any form
of scheme or plot designed to blemish the reputation of a
person. The offender does not employ written or spoken
words, pictures or caricatures to ridicule the victim.
Rather, he uses some ingenious, crafty and secret ploy
which produces the same effect.

Notes: Peace officer is exempt if acts done under lawful

order of the court. You can only use the recording for the
case for which it was validly requested. Information
obtained in violation of the Act is inadmissible in
evidence in any hearing or investigation.

Intriguing against honor is referred to as

gossiping. The offender, without ascertaining the truth
of a defamatory utterance, repeats the same and passes
it on to another, to the damage of the offended party.
Who started the defamatory news is unknown.

CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
ELEMENTS OF RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE:
1.
2.

Where the source of polluted information can be

traced and pinpointed, and the accused adopted as his
own the information he obtained, and passed it to
another in order to cause dishonor to the complainants
reputation, the act is Slander and not intriguing against
Honor. But where the source or the author of the
derogatory information can not be determined and the
accused borrows the same, and without subscribing to
the truth thereof, passes it to others, the act is one of
Intriguing against Honor.

3.
4.
5.

Distinction between Intriguing Against Honor and

Slander

That the offender does or fails to do an act.

That the doing of or the failure to do that act is
voluntary.
That it be without malice.
That material damage results.
That there is inexcusable lack of precaution on the
part of the offender, taking into consideration
a. his employment or occupation
b. degree of intelligence, physical condition,
and
c. other circumstances regarding persons,
time and place.

ELEMENTS OF SIMPLE IMPRUDENCE:

When the source of the defamatory utterance is

unknown and the offender simply repeats or passes the
same, the crime is intriguing against honor. If the
offender made the utterance, where the source of the
defamatory nature of the utterance is known, and
offender makes a republication thereof, even though he
repeats the libelous statement as coming from another,
as long as the source is identified, the crime committed
by that offender is slander.

1.

Distinction between Intriguing Against Honor and

Incriminating an Innocent Person

2.

In intriguing against honor, the offender resorts

to an intrigue for the purpose of blemishing the honor or
reputation of another person. In incriminating an
innocent person, the offender performs an act by which

3.

2.

That there is lack of precaution on the part of the

offender.
That the damage impending to be caused in not
immediate or the danger is not clearly manifest.

Quasi-offenses punished
1.

72

Committing through reckless imprudence any act

which, had it been intentional, would constitute a
grave or less grave felony or light felony;
Committing
through
simple
imprudence
or
negligence an act which would otherwise constitute
a grave or a less serious felony;
Causing damage to the property of another through
reckless imprudence or simple imprudence or
negligence;

www.rkmfiles.net

4.

Causing through simple imprudence or negligence

some wrong which, if done maliciously, would have
constituted a light felony.

Distinction between
Negligence

Reckless

Imprudence

d.

The
above-mentioned
doctrine
should
be
reconciled with the doctrine of concurrent proximate
cause of two negligent drivers.
In the case of People vs. Desalis, et al., C.A., 57
O.G. 8689, the two accused were drivers of two speeding
vehicles which overtook vehicles ahead of them and
even encroached on the others lane without taking due
precaution as required by the circumstances. The court
found the concurrent or successive negligent act or
omission of the two drivers as the direct and proximate
cause of the injury caused to the offended party. The
court could not determine in what proportion each driver
contributed to the injury. Both were declared guilty for
the injury suffered by the third person.

There is no more issue on whether culpa is a

crime in itself or only a mode of incurring criminal
liability. It is practically settled that criminal negligence
is only a modality in incurring criminal liability. This is so
because under Article 3, a felony may result from dolo or
culpa.
Nota Bene: Test for determining whether or not a
person is negligent of doing of an act which results in
injury or damages to another person or his property.
Would a prudent man in the position of the
person, to whom negligence is attributed, foresee harm
to the person injured? If so, the law imposes on the doer,
the duty to refrain from the course of action, or to take
precaution against such result. Failure to do so
constitutes negligence. Reasonable foresight of harm,
followed by ignoring the admonition borne of this
provision, is the constitutive fact of negligence. (Picart
vs. Smith, 37 Phil. 809, 813)

When negligence does not result in any injury to

persons or damage to property, then no crime is
committed. Negligence becomes punishable when it
results in the commission of a crime. (Lantok, Jr. vs. Hon.
Gorgonio, L-37396, April 30, 1979, 75 O.G. 7763)
Last clear chance doctrine
The contributory negligence of the injured party
will not defeat the action if it be shown that the accused
might, by the exercise of reasonable care and prudence,
have avoided the consequences of the negligence of the
injured party

Test of Negligence
Did the defendant, in doing the alleged
negligent act, use the reasonable care and caution which
an ordinary prudent person would have used in the same
situation? If not, then he is guilty of negligence.

6.

7.

365

has

Emergency rule
An automobile driver, who, by the negligence of
another, is suddenly placed in an emergency and
compelled to act instantly to avoid a collision or injury is
not guilty of negligence if he makes a choice which a
person of ordinary prudence placed in such a position
might make even though he did not make the wisest
choice.

no

When the penalty provided for the

offense ifs equal or lower than that provided in
pars.1 and 2 of Article 365. In this case, the
penalty shall be that which is next lower in
degree than that which should be imposed, in
the period which the court may deem proper to
apply.

Doctrine of Pre-emption
It is a rule in collision cases which the driver of a
motor vehicle to make a full stop when crossing a thrustreet. Any accident therefore which takes place in said
corner gives to rise to the presumption of negligence on
the part driver of the motor vehicle running thru-street
has already reached the middle part of the intersection.
In such a case, the other driver who has the right of way
has the duty to stop his motor vehicle in order to avoid a
collision. (People vs. Taradji, 3 C.A. Rep. [25] 460)

When by imprudence or negligence

and with violation of the Automobile Law, the
death of a person is caused, the penalty is
prision correccional
in its medium and
maximum periods.
a.
b.
c.

The defense of contributory negligence does not

apply in criminal cases committed through reckless
imprudence. It is against public policy to invoke the
negligence of another to escape criminal liability. (People
vs. Quiones, C.A., 44 O.G. 1520)

and

The two are distinguished only as to whether

the danger that would be impending is easily perceivable
or not. If the danger that may result from the criminal
negligence is clearly perceivable, the imprudence is
reckless. If it could hardly be perceived, the criminal
negligence would only be simple.

The penalties under Article

application in the following cases:

Contributory
negligencenot
defense, only mitigating

Art.64 on mitigating and aggravating

circumstances not applicable.
Failure to lend on the spot assistance to
victim of his negligence: penalty next
higher in degree.
Abandoning usually punishable under
Art 275, if charged under Art 365 is
only qualifying and if not alleged
cannot even be an aggravating
circumstance.

If the criminal negligence resulted, for example,

in homicide, serious physical injuries and slight physical
injuries do not join only the homicide and serious
physical injuries in one information for the slight physical
injuries. You are not complexing slight when you join it in
the same information. It is just that you are not splitting
the criminal negligence because the real basis of the
criminal liability is the negligence.

73

www.rkmfiles.net

If you split the criminal negligence, that is

where double jeopardy would arise.

of the Philippines and against all persons who appear to

be responsible for the offense involved.
Complaint defined A complaint is a sworn written
statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed
by the offended party, any peace officer, or other public
officer charge with the enforcement of the law violated.

Accused is not criminally liable for the death or

injuries caused by his negligence to trespassers whose
presence in the premises he was not aware of. In the
case of People vs. Cuadra, C.A., 53 O.G. 7265, accused
was a truck driver. Unknown to him, several persons
boarded his truck and while driving along a slippery road
which has a declinations of 25 degrees, the left front
wheel of the truck fell into a ditch. In his effort to return
the truck to the center of the road, the truck turned
turtle, throwing off two of the passengers who boarded
the truck without his knowledge. As a consequence, one
of them died. Cuadra was acquitted of the crime of
reckless imprudence resulting in homicide and physical
injuries.

Information defined Information is an accusation in

writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by
the prosecutor and filed with the court.
Who must prosecute Criminal Actions? Plaintiff
proponent dependant perpetrator culprit
All criminal actions commenced by a complaint
or information shall be prosecuted under the direction
and control of the prosecutor. However, in Municipal Trial
Courts or Municipal Circuit Trial Courts when the
prosecutor assigned thereto or to the case is not
available, the offended party, any peace officer, or public
officer charged with the enforcement of t
he law violated may prosecute the case. This
authority shall cease upon actual intervention of the
prosecutor or upon elevation of the case to the Regional
Trial Court.
The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall
not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the
offended spouse. The offended party cannot institute
criminal prosecution without including the guilty parties,
if both are alive, nor, in any case, if the offended party
has consented to the offense or pardoned the offenders.
The offenses of seduction, abduction and acts of
lasciviousness shall not prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents or guardian, nor, in any case, if the
offender has been expressly pardoned by any of them. If
the offended party dies or becomes incapacitated before
she can file the complaint, and she has no known
parents, grandparents or guardian, the State shall
initiate the criminal action in her behalf.
The offended party, even if a minor, has the
right to initiate the prosecution of the offense of
seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness
independently of her parents, grandparents, or guardian,
unless she is incompetent or incapable of doing so.
Where the offended party, who is a minor, fails to file the
complaint, her parents, grandparents, or guardian may
file the same. The right to file the action granted to
parents, grandparents or guardian shall be exclusive of
all other persons and shall be exercised successively in
the order herein provided, except as stated in the
preceding paragraph.
No criminal action for defamation which consists
in the imputation of any of the offenses mentioned
above shall be brought except at the instance of and
upon complaint filed by the offended party.
The prosecution for violation of special laws shall be
governed by the provisions thereof.

Overtaking of another vehicle is a normal

occurrence in driving. But when the overtaking is done
from right, it shows recklessness and disregard of traffic
laws and regulations. It is likewise so when the
overtaking is done while another vehicle is approaching
from the opposite direction. This is a violation of Section
59(b) of the Motor Vehicle Law (People vs. Songalla, C.A.,
67 O.G. 8330)
Driving within the speed limit is not a guaranty
of due care. Speed limits impose the maximum speed
which should not be exceeded. The degree of care
required of a motorist is not governed by speed limits
but by the circumstances and conditions obtaining in the
place at the particular time. So, if the maximum speed
limit is 80 kilometers per hour and the vehicle driven at
30 kilometers per hour, but because of the very slow
pace of the vehicle, an accident occurs, the observation
of the speed limit will not be acceptable evidence of due
care. (people vs. Caluza, C.A., 58 O.G. 8060)
oo
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

RULE 110 - PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES

Institution of Criminal actions- Criminal actions shall
be instituted as follows:
(a) For
offenses
where
a
preliminary
investigation is required pursuant to section
I of Rule 112, by filing the complaint with the proper
officer for the purpose of conducting the requisite
preliminary investigation.
(b) For all other offenses, by filing the
complaint or information directly with the
Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts,
or the complaint with the office of the prosecutor. In
Manila and other chartered cities, the complaint shall be
filed with the office of the prosecutor unless otherwise
provided in their charters.

Sufficiency of complaint or information

The institution of the criminal action shall

interrupt the running of the period of prescription of the
offense charged unless otherwise provided in special
laws.

A complaint or information is sufficient if it

states the name of the accused; the designation of the
offense given by the stature; the acts or omissions
complained of as constituting the offense; the name of
the offended party; the approximate date of the

Complaint or Information The complaint or

information shall be in writing, in the name of the People

74

www.rkmfiles.net

commission of the offense; and the place where the

offense was committed.

(a) In offenses against property, if the name of the

offended party is unknown, the property must be
described with such particularity as to properly
identify the offense charged.
(b) If the name of the person against whom or
against whose property the offense was committed
is thereafter disclosed or ascertained, the court must
cause such true name to be inserted in the
complaint or information and the record.

When an offense is committed by more than

one person, all of them shall be included in the complaint
or information.
Name of the accused
The complaint or information must state the
name and surname of the accused or any appellation or
nickname by which he has been or is known. If his name
cannot be ascertained, he must be described under a
fictitious name with a statement that his true name is
unknown.

(c) If the offended party is a juridical person, it is

sufficient to state its name, or any name or
designation by which it is known or by which it may
be identified, without need or averring that it is a
juridical person or that it is organized in accordance
with law.

If the true name of the accused is thereafter

disclosed by him or appears in some other manner to the
court, such true name shall be inserted in the complaint
or information and record.

Duplicity of the offense

A compliant or information must charge only
one offense, except when the law prescribes a single
punishment for various offenses.

Designation of the offense

The complaint or information shall state the
designation of the offense given by the statute, aver the
acts or omissions constituting the offense, and specify its
qualifying and aggravating circumstances. If there is no
designation of the offense, reference shall be made to
the section or subsection of the statute punishing it.

Amendment or substitution
A complaint or information may be amended, in
form or in substance, without leave or court, at any time
before the accused enters his plea. After the plea and
during the trial, a formal amendment may be made with
leave of court and when it can be done without causing
prejudice to the rights or the accused.

Cause of the accusation

The acts or omissions complained of as
constituting the offense and the qualifying and
aggravating circumstances must be stated in ordinary
and concise language and not necessarily in the
language used in the statue but in terms sufficient to
enable a person of common understanding to know what
offense is being charged as well as its qualifying and
aggravating circumstances and for the court to
pronounce judgement.

However, any amendment before plea, which

downgrades the nature of the offense charged in or
excludes any accused from the complaint or information,
can be made only upon motion by the prosecutor, with
notice to the offended party and with leave of court, the
court shall state its reasons in resolving the motion and
copies of its order shall be furnished all parties,
especially the offended party.
If it appears at any time before judgment that a
mistake has been made in charging the proper offense,
the court shall dismiss the original complaint or
information upon the filing of a new one charging the
proper offense in accordance with section 19 Rule 119,
provided the accused shall not be placed in double
jeopardy. The court may require the witnesses to give
bail for their appearance at the trial.

Place of the commission of the offense

The complaint or information is sufficient if it
can be understood from its allegations that the offense
was committed or some of its essential ingredients
occurred at some place within the jurisdiction of the
court, unless the particular place where it was
committed constitutes an essential element of the
offense charged or is necessary for its identification.

Place where action is to be instituted

Date of commission of the offense

(a) Subject to existing laws, the criminal action

shall be instituted and tried in the court of the
municipality or territory where the offense was
committed or where any of its essential ingredients
occurred.

It is not necessary to state in the complaint or

information the precise date the offense was committed
except when it is a material ingredient of the offense.
The offense may be alleged to have been committed on
a date as near as possible to the actual date of its
commission.

(b) Where an offense is committed in a train,

aircraft, or other public or private vehicle in the course of
its trip, the criminal action shall be instituted and ___ in
the court of any municipality or territory where such
train, aircraft, or other vehicle passed during its trip,
including the place of its departure and arrival.

Name of the offended party

The complaint or information must state the
name and surname of the person against whom or
against whose property the offense was committed, or
any appellation or nickname by which such person has
been or is known. If there is no better way of identifying
him, he must be described under a fictitious name.

(c) Where an offense is committed on board a

vessel in the course of its voyage, the criminal action
shall be instituted and tried in the court of the first port
of entry or of any municipality or territory where the

75

www.rkmfiles.net

vessel passed during such voyage, subject to the

generally accepted principles of international law.

based on the amount awarded shall constitute a first lien

on the judgment.

(d) Crimes committed outside the Philippines

but punishable under Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code
shall be cognizable by the court where the criminal
action is first filed.

Where the civil action has been separately and

trial thereof has not yet commenced, it may be
consolidated with the criminal action upon application
with the court trying the latter case. If the application is
granted, the trial of both actions shall proceed in
accordance with section 2 of this Rule governing
consolidation of the civil and criminal actions.

Intervention of the offended party in criminal

action
Where the civil action for recovery of civil
liability is instituted in the criminal action pursuant the
Rule 111, the offended party may intervene by counsel
in the prosecution of the offense.

When separate civil is suspended

RULE 111 - PROSECUTION OF CIVIL ACTION

After the criminal action has been commenced,

the separate action arising therefrom cannot be
instituted until final judgment has been entered in the
criminal action.
If the criminal action is filed after the said civil
action has already been instituted, the latter shall be
suspended in whatever stage it may be found before
judgment on the merits. The suspension shall last until
final judgment is rendered in the criminal action.
Nevertheless, before judgment on the merits is rendered
in the civil action, the same may, upon motion of the
offended party, be consolidated with the criminal action
in the court trying the criminal action. In case of
consolidation, the evidence already adduced in the civil
action shall be deemed automatically reproduced in the
criminal action without prejudice tot he right of the
prosecution to cross-examine the witnesses presented by
the offended party in the criminal case and of the parties
to present additional evidence. The consolidated criminal
and civil actions shall be tried and decided jointly.
During the pendency of the criminal action, the
running of the period of prescription of the civil action
which cannot be instituted separately or whose
proceeding has been suspended shall be tolled.
The extinction of the penal action does not carry
with it extinction of the civil action. However, the civil
action based on delict shall be deemed extinguished if
there is a finding in a final judgment in the criminal
action that the act or omission from which the civil
liability may arise did not exist.

Institution of criminal and civil actions

(a) When a criminal action is instituted, the civil
action for the recovery of civil liability arising from the
offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the
criminal action unless the offended party waives the civil
action, reserves the right to institute it separately or
institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.
The reservation of the right to institute
separately the civil action shall be made before the
prosecution starts presenting its evidence and under
circumstances affording the offended party a reasonable
opportunity to make such reservation.
When the offended party seeks to enforce civil
liability against the accused by way of moral, nominal,
temperate, or exemplary damages without specifying the
amount thereof in the complaint or information, the filing
fees therefor shall constitute a first lien on the judgment
awarding such damages.
Where the amount of damage, other than
actual, is specified in the complaint or information, the
corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended
party upon the filing thereof in court.
Except as otherwise provided in these Rules, no
filing fees shall be required for actual damages.

When civil may proceed independently

No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party

complaint may be filed by the accused in the criminal
case, but any cause of action which could have been the
subject thereof may be litigated in a separate civil
action.

In the cases provided in Articles 32, 33, 34 and

2176 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, the
independent civil action may be brought by the offended
party. It shall proceed independently of the criminal
action and shall require only a preponderance of
evidence. In no case, however, may the offended party
recover damages twice for the same act or omission
charged in the criminal action.

(b) The criminal action for violation of Batas

Pambansa Blg. 22 shall be deemed to include the
corresponding civil action. No reservation to file such
civil action separately shall be allowed.

Effect of death on civil actions

Upon filing of the aforesaid joint criminal and

civil actions, the offended party shall pay in full the filing
fees based on the amount of the check involved, which
shall be considered as the actual damages claimed.
Where the complaint or information also seeks to recover
liquidated, moral, nominal, temperate or exemplary
damages, the offended party shall pay additional filing
fees based on the amounts alleged therein. If the
amounts are not so alleged but any of these damages
are subsequently awarded by the court, the filing fees

The death of the accused after arraignment and

during the pendency of the criminal action shall
extinguish the civil liability arising from the delict.
However, the independent civil action instituted under
section 3 of this Rule or which thereafter is instituted to
enforce liability arising from other sources of obligation
may be continued against the estate or legal
representative of the accused after proper substitution or
against said estate, as the case maybe. The heirs of the

76

www.rkmfiles.net

accused may be substituted for the deceased without

requiring the appointment of an executor or
administrator and the court may appoint a guardian ad
litem for the minor heirs.
The court shall forthwith order said legal
representative or representatives to appear and be
substituted within a period of thirty (30) days from
notice.
A final judgment entered in favor of the
offended party shall be enforced in the manner
especially provided in these rules for prosecuting claims
against the estate of the deceased.
If the accused dies before arraignment, the case
shall be dismissed without deceased.

Their
authority
to
conduct
preliminary
investigations shall include all crimes cognizable by the
proper court in their respective territorial jurisdictions.
Procedure
The
preliminary
investigation
conducted in the following manner:

A final judgment rendered in a civil action

absolving the defendant from civil liability is not a bar to
a criminal action against the defendant for the same act
or omission subject of the civil action.
Suspension by reason of prejudicial question

(b) Within ten (10) days after the filing of the

complaint, the investigating officer shall either dismiss it
if he finds no ground to continue with the investigation,
or issue a subpoena to the respondent attaching to it a
copy of the complaint and its supporting affidavits and
documents.
The respondent shall have the right to examine
the evidence submitted by the complainant which he
may not have been furnished and to copy them at his
expense. If the evidence is voluminous, the complainant
may be required to specify those which he intends to
present against the respondent, and these shall be made
available for examination or copying by the respondent
at his expense.
Objects as evidence need not be furnished a
partly but shall be made available for examination,
copying, or photographing at the expense of the
requesting party.

A petition for suspension of the criminal action

based upon the pendency of a prejudicial question in a
civil action may be filed in the office of the prosecutor or
the court conduction the preliminary investigation. When
the criminal action has been filed in court for trial, the
petition to suspend shall be filed in the same criminal
action at any time before the prosecution rests.
Elements of prejudicial question
The elements of a prejudicial question are: (1)
The previously instituted civil action involves an issue
similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the
subsequent criminal action, and (b) the resolution of
such issue determines whether or not the criminal action
may proceed.
RULE 112 - PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION

(c) Within ten (10) days from receipt of the

subpoena with the complaint and supporting affidavits
and documents, the respondent shall submit his counteraffidavit and that of his witnesses and other supporting
documents relied upon for his defense. The counteraffidavits shall be subscribed and sworn to and certified
as provided in paragraph (a) of this section, with copies
thereof furnished by him to the complainant. The
respondent shall not be allowed to file a motion to
dismiss in lieu of a counter-affidavit.

Preliminary investigation defined; when required.

Preliminary investigation is an inquiry or
proceeding to determine whether there is sufficient
ground to engender a well-founded belief that a crime
has been committed and the respondent is probably
guilty thereof, and should be held for trial.
Except as provided in section 7 of this Rule, a
preliminary investigation is required to be conducted
before the filing of a complaint or information for an
offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least
four (4) years, two (2) months and one (1) day without
regard to the fine.

The
following
investigations:
1.
2.
3.
4.

to
may

conduct
conduct

be

(a) The complaint shall state the address of the

respondent and shall be accompanied by the affidavits of
the complainant and his witnesses, as well as other
supporting documents to establish probable cause. They
shall be in such number of copies as there are
respondents, plus two (2) copies for the official file. The
affidavits shall be subscribed and sworn to before any
prosecutor or government official authorized to
administer oath, or, in their absence or unavailability,
before a notary public, each of whom must certify that
he personally examined the affiants and that he is
satisfied that he is satisfied that they voluntarily
executed and understood their affidavits.

Judgment in civil action not a bar

Officers
authorized
investigation.

shall

(d) If the respondent cannot be subpoenaed, or

if subpoenaed, does not submit counter-affidavits within
the ten (10) day period, the investigating officer shall
resolve the complaint based on the evidence presented
by the complainant.

preliminary

(e) The investigation officer may set a hearing if

there are facts and issues to be clarified from a party or
a witness. The parties can be present at the hearing but
without the right to examine or cross-examine. They
may, however, submit to the investigating officer
questions which may be asked to the party or witness
concerned.
The hearing shall be held within ten (10) days
from submission of the counter-affidavits and other
documents or from the expiration of the period for their
submission. It shall be terminated within five (5) days.

preliminary

Provincial or City Prosecutors and their

assistants;
Judges of the Municipal Trial Courts and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts;
National and Regional State Prosecutors; and
Other officers as may be authorized by law.

77

www.rkmfiles.net

(c) the undertaking or bail of the accused and the order

for his release; (d) the transcripts of the proceedings
during the preliminary investigation; and (e) the order of
cancellation of his bail bond, if the resolution is for the
dismissal of the complaint.

(f) Within ten (10) days after the investigation,

the investigating officer shall determine whether or not
there is sufficient ground to hold the respondent for trial.
Resolution of investigating prosecutor and its
review

Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the

records, the provincial or city prosecutor, or the
Ombudsman or his deputy, as the case may be, shall
review the resolution of the investigating judge on the
existence of probable cause. Their ruling shall expressly
and clearly state the facts and the law on which it is
based and the parties shall be furnished with copies
thereof. They shall order the release of an accused who
is detained if no probable cause is found against him.

If the investigating prosecutor finds cause to

hold the respondent for trial, he shall prepare the
resolution and information. He shall certify under oath in
the information that he, or as shown by the record, an
authorized officer, has personally examined the
complainant and his witnesses; that there is reasonable
ground to believe that a crime has been committed and
that the accused is probably guilty thereof; that the
accused was informed of the complaint and of the
evidence submitted against him; and that he was given
an opportunity to submit controverting evidence.
Otherwise, he shall recommend the dismissal of the
complaint.

When warrant of arrest may issue?

(a) By the Regional Trial Court.- Within ten (10)
days from the filing of the complaint or information, the
judge shall personally evaluate the resolution of the
prosecutor and its supporting evidence. He may
immediately dismiss the case of the evidence on record
clearly fails to establish probable cause. If he finds
probable cause, he shall issue a warrant of arrest, or a
commitment order if the accused has already been
arrested pursuant to a warrant issued by the judge who
conducted the preliminary investigation or when the
complaint or information was filed pursuant to section 7
of this rule. In case of doubt on the existence of probable
cause, the judge may order the prosecutor to present
additional evidence within five (5) days from notice and
the issue must be resolved by the court within thirty (30)
days from the filing of the complaint of information.

Within five (5) days from his resolution, he shall

forward the record of the case to the provincial or city
prosecutor or chief state prosecutor, or to the
Ombudsman or his deputy in cases of offenses
cognizable by the Sandigangbayan in the exercise of its
original jurisdiction. They shall act on the resolution
within ten (10) days from their receipt thereof and shall
immediately inform the parties of such action.
No complaint or information may be filed or
dismissed by an investigating prosecutor without the
prior written authority or approval of the provincial or
city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor or the
Ombudsman or his deputy.
Where
the
investigating
prosecutor
recommends the dismissal of the complaint but his
recommendation is disapproved by the provincial or city
prosecutor or chief state prosecutor or the Ombudsman
or his deputy on the ground that a probable cause exists,
the latter may, by himself, file the information against
the respondent, or direct another assistant prosecutor or
state prosecutor to do so without conducting another
preliminary investigation.

(b) By the Municipal Trial Court. When required

pursuant to the second paragraph of section 1 of this
Rule, the preliminary investigation of cased falling under
the original jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Trial Court,
Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or
Municipal Circuit Trial Court may be conducted by either
the judge or the prosecutor. When conducted by the
prosecutor, the procedure for the issuance of a warrant
of arrest by the judge shall be governed by paragraph (a)
of this section. When the investigation is conducted by
the judge himself, he shall follow the procedure provided
in section 3 of this Rule. If his findings and
recommendations are affirmed by the provincial or city
prosecutor, or by the Ombudsman or his deputy, and the
corresponding information is filed, he shall issue a
warrant of arrest. However, without waiting for the
conclusion of the investigation, the judge may issue a
warrant of arrest if he finds after an examination in
writing under oath of the complainant and his witnesses
in the form of searching questions and answers, that a
probable cause exists and that there is a necessity of
placing the respondent under immediate custody in
order not to frustrate the ends of justice.

If upon petition by a proper party under such

rules as the Department of Justice may prescribe or motu
proprio, the Secretary of Justice reverse or modifies the
resolution of the provincial or city prosecutor or chief
state prosecutor, he shall direct the prosecutor
concerned either to file the corresponding information
without conducting another preliminary investigation, or
to dismiss or move for dismissal of the complaint or
information with notice to the parties. The same rule
shall apply in preliminary investigations conducted by
the officers of the Office of the Ombudsman.
Resolution of investigating judge and its review

(c) When warrant of arrest not necessary. A

warrant of arrest shall not issue if the accused is already
under detention pursuant to a warrant issued by the
municipal trial court in accordance with paragraph (b) of
this section, or if the complaint or information was filed
pursuant to section 7 of this Rule or is for an offense
penalized by fine only. The court shall then proceed in
the exercise of its original jurisdiction.

Within ten (10) days after the preliminary

investigation, the investigating judge shall transmitted
the resolution of the case to the provincial or city
prosecutor, or to the Ombudsman or his deputy in cases
of offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction, for appropriate action.
The resolution shall state the findings of facts and the
law supporting his action, together with the record of the
case ;which shall include: (a) the warrant, if the arrest is
by virtue of a warrant; (b) the affidavits, counteraffidavits and other supporting evidence of the parties;

When accused lawfully arrested without warrant

78

www.rkmfiles.net

When a person is lawfully arrested without a

warrant involving an offense which requires a preliminary
investigation, the complaint or information may be filed
by a prosecutor without need of such investigation
provided an inquest has been conducted in accordance
with existing rules. In the absence or unavailability of an
inquest prosecutor, the complaint may be filed by the
offended party or a peace officer directly with the proper
court on the basis of the affidavit of the offended party
or arresting officer or person.

despite the additional evidence, within ten (10) days

from its submission or expiration of said period, dismiss
the case. When he finds probable case, he shall issue a
warrant of arrest, or a commitment order if the accused
had already been arrested, and hold him for trial.
However, if the judge is satisfied that there is no
necessity for placing the accused under custody, he may
issue summons instead of a warrant of arrest.
RULE 113 - ARREST

Before the complaint or information is filed, the

person arrested may ask for a preliminary investigation
in accordance with this rule, but he must sign a waiver of
the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code,
as amended, in the presence of his counsel.
Notwithstanding the waiver, he may apply for bail and
the investigation must be terminated within fifteen (15)
days from its inception.

Arrest defined Arrest is the taking of a person into

custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the
commission of an offense.
Arrest; how made An arrest is made by an actual
restraint of a person to be arrested, or by his submission
to the custody of the person making the arrest.

After the filing of the complaint or information in

court without a preliminary investigation, the accused
may, within five (5) days from the time he learns of its
filing, ask for a preliminary investigation with the same
right to adduce evidence in his defense as provided in
this Rule. (7a; sec. 2 R.A. No. 7438)

No violence or unnecessary force shall be used

in making an arrest. The person arrested shall not be
subject to a greater restraint than is necessary for his
detention
Duty of arresting officer

Records

It shall be the duty of the officer executing the

warrant to arrest the accused and deliver him to the
nearest police station or jail without unnecessary delay.

(a) Records supporting the information or

complaint. An information or complaint filed in court shall
be supported by the affidavits and counter-affidavits of
the parties and their witnesses, together with the other
supporting evidence and the resolution on the case.
(b) Record of preliminary investigation. The
record of the preliminary investigation, whether
conducted by a judge or a prosecutor, shall not from part
of the record of the case. However, the, court, on its own
initiative or on motion of any party, may order the
production of the record or any of its part when
necessary in the resolution of the case or any incident
therein, or when it is to be introduced as an evidence in
the case by the requesting party. (8a)

Executive of warrant
The head of the office to whom the warrant of
arrest was delivered for execution shall cause the
warrant to be executed within ten (10) days from its
receipt. Within ten (10) days after the expiration of the
period, the officer to whom it was assigned for execution
shall make a report to the judge who issued the warrant.
In case of his failure to execute the warrant, he shall
state the reasons therefor.
Arrest without warrant; when lawful

Cases not requiring a Preliminary Investigation

nor covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure

A peace officer or a private person may, without a

warrant, arrest a person:

(a) If filed with the prosecutor. If the complaint

is filed directly with the prosecutor involving an offense
punishable by imprisonment of less than four (4) years.
two (2) months and one (1) day, the procedure outlined
in section 3 (a) of this Rule shall be observed. The
prosecutor shall act on the complaint based on the
affidavits and other supporting documents submitted by
the complainant within ten (10) days from its filing.

(a) When, in his presence, the person to be

arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is
attempting to commit an offense;
(b) When an offense has just been committed
and he has probable cause to belief based on personal
knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to
be arrested has committed it; and
(c) When the person to be arrested is a prisoner
who has escaped from a penal establishment or place
where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily
confined while his case is pending, or has escaped while
being transferred from one confinement to another.

(b) If filed with the Municipal Trial Court. If the

complaint or information is filed with the Municipal Trial
Court or Municipal Circuit Trial Court for an offense
covered by this section, the procedure in section 3 (a) of
this Rule shall be observed. If within ten (10) days after
the filing of the complaint or information, the judge finds
no probable cause after personally evaluating the
evidence, or after personally examining in writing and
under oath the complainant and his witnesses in the
form of searching questions and answers, he shall
dismiss the same. He may, however, require the
submission of additional evidence, within ten (10) days
from notice, to determine further the existence of
probable cause. if the judge still finds no probable cause

In cases falling under paragraphs (a) and (b)

above, the person arrested without a warrant shall be
forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or jail
and shall be proceeded against in accordance with
section 7 of Rule 112. (5a)
Time of making arrest - An arrest may be made on
any day and at any time of the day or night.

79

www.rkmfiles.net

Method of arrest by officer by virtue of warrant

Any member of the Philippine Bar shall, at the

request of the person arrested or of another acting in his
behalf, have the right to visit and confer privately with
such person in the jail or any other place of custody at
any hour of the day or night. Subject to reasonable
regulations, a relative of the person arrested can also
exercise the same right. (14a)

When making an arrest by virtue of a warrant,

the officer shall inform the person to be arrested of the
cause of the arrest and the fact that a warrant has been
issued for his arrest, except when he flees or forcibly
resists before the officer has opportunity to so inform
him, or when the giving of such information will imperil
the arrest. The officer need not have the warrant in his
possession at the time of the arrest but after the arrest,
if the person arrested so requires, the warrant shall be
shown to him as soon as practicable.

RULE 114 - BAIL

Bail defined Bail is the security given for the
release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by
him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before
any court as required under the conditions hereinafter
specified. Bail may be given in the form of corporate
surety, property bond, cash deposit, or recognizance.

Method of arrest by officer without warrant

When making an arrest without a warrant, the
officer shall inform the person to be arrested of his
authority and the cause of the arrest, unless the latter is
either engaged in the commission of an offense, is
pursued immediately after its commission, has escaped,
flees, or forcibly resists before the officer has opportunity
to so inform him, or when the giving of such information
will imperil the arrest.

Conditions of the bail; requirements

All kinds of the bail are subject to the following
conditions:
(a) The undertaking shall be effective upon
approval, and unless cancelled, shall
remain in force at all stage of case until promulgation of
the judgement of the Regional Trail Court, irrespective of
whether the case was originally filled in or appealed to it;
(b) The accused shall appear before proper
court whenever required by the court or
these Rules;
(c) The failure of the accused to appear at the
trial without justification and despite due
notice shall be deemed a waiver of his right
to be present thereat. In such case, the
trial may proceed in absentia; and
(d) The bondsman shall surrender the accused
to the court for execution of the final
judgment.

Method of arrest by private person

When making an arrest, a private person shall
inform the person to be arrested of the intention to arrest
him and the cause of the arrest, unless the latter is
either engaged in the commission of an offense, is
pursued immediately after its commission, or has
escaped, flees, or forcibly resists before the person
making the arrest has opportunity to so inform him, or
when the giving of such information will imperil the
arrest.
Officer may summon assistance
An officer making a lawful arrest may orally
summon as many persons as he deems necessary to
assist him in effecting the arrest. Every person so
summoned by an officer shall assist him in effecting the
arrest when he can render such assistance without
detriment to himself.

The original papers shall state the full name

address of the address of the accused, the amount of the
undertaking and the conditions required by this section.
Photographs (passport size) taken within the last six (6)
months showing the face, left and right profiles of the
accused must be attached to the bail.

Right of officer to break into building or enclosure

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.

No release or transfer except on court or bail

No person under detention by legal process
shall be released or transferred except upon of the other
court or when he is admitted to bail.
Bail, a matter of right; exception

Right to break out from building or enclosure

All persons in custody shall be admitted to bail

as a matter of right, with sufficient sureties, or released
on recognizance as prescribed by law or this Rule (a)
before or after conviction by the Metropolitan Trial Court,
Municipal Trail Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, or
Municipal Circuit Trail Court, and (b) before conviction by
the Regional Trail Court of an offense not punishable by
death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment.

Whenever an officer has entered the building or

enclosure in accordance with the preceding section, he
may break out therefrom when necessary to liberate
himself.
Arrest after escape or rescue
If a person lawfully arrested escapes or is
rescued, any person may immediately pursue or retake
him without a warrant at any time and in any place
within the Philippines.

Bail, when discretionary

Upon conviction by the Regional Trial Court of
an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua ,
or life imprisonment, admission to bail is discretionary.
The application for bail may be filed and acted upon by
the trial court despite the filing of a notice of appeal,

Right of attorney or relative to visit person

arrested

80

www.rkmfiles.net

provided it has not transmitted the original record to the

appellate court. However, if the decision of the trial
court convicting the accused changed the nature of the
offense from non bailable to bailable, the application
for bail cab only be filed with and resolved by the
appellate court.

(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)

Financial ability of the accused to give bail;

Nature and circumstances of the offense;
Penalty for the offense charged;
Character and reputation of the accused;
Probability of the accused appearing at the
trial;
(f) Weight of the evidence against the
accused;
(g) Age and health of the accused;
(h) Forfeiture of the accused appearing at the
trial;
(i) Pendency of other cases where the accused
is on bail.
(j) The fact that the accused was a fugitive
from justice when arrested; and
Excessive bail shall not be required.

Should the court grant the application, the

accused may be allowed to continue on provisional
liberty during the pendency of the appeal under the
same bail subject to the consent of the bondsman.
If the penalty imposed by the trial court is
imprisonment exceeding six (6) years, the accused shall
be denied bail, or his bail shall be cancelled upon a
showing by the prosecution, with notice to the accused,
of the following or other similar circumstances:

Corporate surety

(a)

That he is a recidivist, quasi-recidivist, or

habitual deliquent, or has committed the crime
aggravated by the circumstance of reiteration;
(b)
That he has previously escaped from legal
confinement, evaded sentence, or violated the
conditions of his bail without valid justification;
(c)
That he committed the offense while under
probation, parole, or conditional pardon;
(d)
That the circumstances of his case indicate
the probability of flight if released on bail; or
(e)
That there is undue risk that he may
commit another crime during the pendency of the appeal.

Any domestic or foreign corporation, licensed as

a surety in accordance with law and currently authorized
to act as such, may provide bail by a bond subscribed
jointly by the accused and an officer of the corporation
duly authorized by its board of directors.
Property bond how posted
A property bond is an undertaking constituted
as lien on the real property given as security for the
amount of the bail. Within ten (10) days after the
approval of the bond, the accused shall cause the
annotation of the lien on the certificate of title on file
with the Registry of Deeds if the land is registered, or if
unregistered, in the Registration Book on the space
provided therefor in the Registry of Deeds for the
province or city where the land lies, and on the
corresponding tax declaration in the office of the
provincial, city and municipal assessor concerned.
Within the same period; the accused shall
submit to the court his compliance and his failure to do
so shall be sufficient cause for the cancellation of the
property bond his re-arrest and detention.

The appellate court may, motu proprio or on

motion of any party, review the resolution of the
Regional Trial Court after notice to the adverse party in
either case
Capital offense defined A capital offense is an
offense which, under the law existing at the time of its
commission and of the application for admission to bail,
may be punished with death.
Capital offense or
reclusion perpetua
bailable

an offense punishable by
or life imprisonment, not

No person charged with a capital offense or an

offense punishable by reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment, shall be admitted to bail when evidence
of guilt is strong, regardless of the stage of the criminal
prosecution.
Burden of proof in bail application
At the hearing of an application of bail filed by a
person who is custody for the commission of an offense
punishable by death, reclusion perpetua, or life
imprisonment, the persecution has the burden of
showing that evidence of guilt is strong. The evidence
presented during the bail hearing shall be considered
automatically reproduced at the trial but, upon motion of
either party, the court may recall any witness for
additional examination unless the latter is dead, outside
the Philippines, or otherwise unable to testify.

Qualifications of sureties in property bond

The qualifications of sureties in a property bond
shall be as follows:
(a) Each must be a resident owner of real estate within the
Philippines;
(b) Where there is only one surely, his real estate must be
worth at least the amount of the undertaking;
(c) If there are two or more sureties, each may justify in an
amount less than that expressed in the undertaking but
the aggregate of the justified sums must be equivalent
to the whole amount of the bail demanded.
In all cases, every surety must be worth the
amount specified in his own undertaking over and above
all just debts, obligations and properties exempt from
execution:
Justification of sureties
Every surety justify by affidavit taken before the
judge that he possesses the qualifications prescribed in
the preceding section. He shall describe the property
given as security, starting the nature of his title, its
encumbrances, the number and amount of other bails
entered into by him and still undischarged, and his other
liabilities. The court may examine the sureties upon oath

Amount of bail; guidelines

The judge who is issued the warrant or granted
the application shall fixed a reasonable amount of bail
considering primarily, but not limited to the following
factors:

81

www.rkmfiles.net

concerning their sufficiency in such manners as it may

deem proper. No bail shall be approved unless the surety
is qualified.

(c)

Any
person
in
custody who is not yet charged in court may
apply for bail with any court in the province,
city, or municipality where he is held.

Notice of application to prosecutor

In the application for bail under section 8 of this
Rule, the court must give reasonable notice of the
hearing to the prosecutor or require him to submit his
recommendation.

Deposit of cash as bail

The accused or any person acting in his behalf
may deposit in cash with the nearest collector of internal
revenue or provincial city, or municipal treasure the
amount of bail fixed by the court, or recommended by
the prosecutor who investigated or filed the case. Upon
submission of a proper certificate of deposit and a
written undertaking showing compliance with the
requirements of section 2 of this Rule, the accused shall
be discharged from custody. The money deposited shall
be considered as bail and applied to the payment of fine
and costs while the excess, if any, shall be returned to
the accused or to whoever made the deposit.

Release on bail
The accused must be discharged upon approval
of the bail by the judge with whom it was filed in
accordance with section 17 of this Rule.
When bail is filed with a court other than where
the case is pending, the judge who accepted the bail
shall forward it, together with the order of release and
other supporting papers, to the court where the case is
pending, which ma, for good reason, require a different
one to be filed.

Recognizance

Increase or reduction of bail

Whoever allowed by law or these Rules, the

court may release a person in custody on his own
recognizance or that of a responsible person.
Bail, when not
recognizance

required;

reduced

bail

After the accused is admitted to bail, the court

may, upon good cause, either increase or reduce its
amount. When increased, the accused may be
committed to custody if he does not give bail in the
increased amount within a reasonable period. an
accused held to answer a criminal charge, who is
released without bail upon filing of the complaint or
information, may, at any subsequent stage of the
proceedings and whenever a strong showing of guilt
appears to the court, the required to give bail in the
amount fixed, or in lieu thereof, committed to custody.

or

No bail shall be required when the law or these

Rules so provide.
When a person has been in custody for a period
equal to or more than the possible maximum
imprisonment prescribed for the offense charged, he
shall be released immediately, without prejudice to the
continuation of the trial or the proceedings on appeal. If
the maximum penalty to which the accused may be
sentences is destierro, he shall be released after thirty
(30) days of preventive imprisonment.
A person is custody for a period equal to or
more than the minimum of the principal penalty
prescribed for the offense charged, without application of
the Indeterminate Sentence Law or any modifying
circumstance, shall be released on a reduced bail or on
his own recognizance, at the discretion of the court.

Forfeiture of bail
When the presence of the accused is required
by the court or these Rules, his bondsmen shall notified
to produce him before the court on a given date and
time. If the accused fails to appear in person as required,
his bail shall be declared forfeited and the bondsmen
given thirty (30) days within which to produce their
principal and to show cause why no judgment should be
rendered against them for the amount of their bail.
Within the said period, the bondsmen must:

Bail, where filed

(a) produce the body of their principal or give

the reason for his non-production; and
(b) explain why the accused did not appear
before the court when first required to do so.

(a)

Bail in the amount

fixed may be filed with the court where the case
is pending, or in the absence or unavailability of
the judge thereof, with any regional trial judge,
metropolitan trial judge, municipal trial judge,
or municipal circuit trial judge in the province,
city, or municipality. If the accused is arrested
in a province, city, or municipality other than
where the case is pending, bail may also be
filed with any regional trial court of said place,
or if no judge thereof is available, with any
metropolitan trial judge, municipal trial judge,
or municipal circuit trial judge therein.
(b)
Where the grant of
bail is a matter of discretion, or the accused
seeks to be released on recognizance, the
application may only be filed in the court where
the case is pending, whether on preliminary
investigation, trial, or appeal.

Failing in these two requisites, a judgment shall

be rendered against the bondsmen, jointly and severally,
for the amount of the bail. The court shall not reduce or
otherwise mitigate the liability of the bondsmen, unless
the accused has been surrendered or is acquitted.
Cancellation of bail
Upon application of the bondsmen, with due
notice to the prosecutor, the bail may be cancelled upon
surrender of the accused or proof of his death.
The bail shall be deemed automatically
cancelled upon acquittal of the accused, dismissal of the
case, or execution of the judgment of conviction.

82

www.rkmfiles.net

In all instances, the cancellation shall be without

prejudice to any liability on the bail.

RULE 115 - RIGHTS OF ACCUSED

Rights of accused at the trial

Arrest of accused out on bail

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be

entitled to the following rights:

For the purpose of surrendering the accused,

the bondsmen may arrest him or, upon written authority
endorsed on a certified copy of the undertaking, cause
him to be arrested by a police officer or any other person
of suitable age and discretion.

(a) To be presumed innocent until the contrary

is proved beyond reasonable doubt.
(b) To be informed of the nature and cause of
the accusation against him.
(c) To be present and defend in person and by
counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from
arraignment to promulgation of the judgment. The
accused may, however, waive his presence at the trial
pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail, unless
his presence is specifically ordered by the court for
purposes of identification. The absence of the accused
without justifiable cause at the trial of which he had
notice shall be considered a waiver of his right to be
present thereat. When an accused under custody
escapes, he shall be deemed to have waived his right to
be present on all subsequent trial dates until custody
over him is regained. Upon motion, the accused may be
allowed to defend himself in person when it sufficiently
appears to the court that he can properly protect his
rights without the assistance of counsel.
(d) To testify as a witness in his own behalf but
subject to cross-examination on matters covered by
direct examination. His silence shall not in any manner
prejudice him.
(e) To be exempt from being compelled to be a
witness against himself.
(f) To confront and cross-examine the witnesses
against him at the trial. Either party may utilize as part
of its evidence the testimony of a witness who is
deceased, out of or can not with due diligence be found
in the Philippines, unavailable, or otherwise unable to
testify, given in another case or proceeding, judicial or
administrative, involving the same parties and subject
matter, the adverse party having the opportunity to
cross-examine him.
(g) To have compulsory, process issued to
secure the attendance of witnesses and production of
other evidence in his behalf.
(h) To have speedy, impartial and public trial.
(i) To appeal in all cases allowed and in the
manner prescribed by law.

An accused released on bail may be re- arrested

without the necessity of a warrant if he attempts to
depart from the Philippines without permission of the
court where the case is pending.
No bail final judgment; exception
No bail shall be allowed after a judgment of
conviction has become final. If before such finality, the
accused applies for probation, he may be allowed
temporary liberty under his bail. When no bail was filed
or the accused is incapable of filing one, the court may
allow his release on recognizance to the custody of a
responsible member of the community. In no case shall
bail be allowed after the accused has commenced to
serve sentence.
Court supervision of detainees
The court shall exercise supervision over all
persons in custody for the purpose of eliminating
unnecessary detention. The executive judges of the
Regional Trial Courts shall conduct monthly personal
inspections of provincial, city, and municipal jails and the
prisoners within their respective jurisdictions. They shall
ascertain the number of detainees, inquire on their
proper accommodation and health and examine the
condition of the jail facilities. They shall order the
segregation of sexes and of minors from adults, ensure
the observance of the right of detainees to confer
privately with counsel, and strive to eliminate conditions
inimical to the detainees.
In cities and municipalities to be specified by
the Supreme Court, the municipal trial judges or
municipal circuit trial judges shall conduct monthly
personal inspections of the municipal jails in their
respective municipalities and submit a report to the
executive judge of the Regional Trial Court having
jurisdiction therein.
A monthly report of such visitation shall be
submitted by the executive judges to the Court
Administrator which shall state the total number of
detainees, the names of those held for more than thirty
(30) days, the duration of detention, the crime charged,
the status of the case, the cause for detention, and other
pertinent information.

RULE 116 - ARRAIGNMENT AND PLEA

Arraignment and plea; how made
(a) The accused must be arraigned before the
court where the complaint or information was filed or
assigned for trial. The arraignment shall be made in open
court by the judge or clerk by furnishing the accused
with a copy of the complaint or information, reading the
same in the language or dialect known to him, and
asking him whether he pleads guilty or not guilty. The
prosecution may call at the trial witnesses other than
those named in the complaint or information.
(b) The accused must be present at the
arraignment and must personally enter his plea. both
arraignment and plea shall be made of record, but failure
to do so shall not affect the validity of the proceedings.
(c) When the accused refuses to plead or makes
a conditional plea, a plea of not guilty shall be entered
for him. (1a)
(d) When the accused pleads guilty but present
exculpatory evidence, his plea shall be deemed

Bail not a bar to objections on illegal arrest, lack

of or irregular preliminary investigation
An application for or admission to bail shall not
bar the accused from challenging the validity of his
arrest or the legality of the warrant issued therefor, or
from assailing the regularity or questioning the absence
of a preliminary investigation of the charge against him,
provided that he raises them before entering his plea.
The court shall resolve the matter as early as
practicable, but not later than the start of the trial of the
case.

83

www.rkmfiles.net

withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered for

him.
(e) When the accused is under preventive
detention, his case shall be raffled and its records
transmitted to the judge to whom the case was raffled
within three (30 days from the filing of the information r
complaint. The pre-trial conference of his case shall be
held within ten (10) days after arraignment.
(f) The private offended party shall be required
to appear at the arraignment for purposes of plea
bargaining determination of civil liability, and other
matters requiring his presence. In case of failure of the
offended party to appear despite due notice, the court
may allow the accused to enter a plea of guilty to a
lesser offense which is necessarily included in the
offense charged with the conformity of the trial
prosecutor alone. (cir. 1-89)
(g) Unless a shorter period is provided by
special law or Supreme Court circular, the arraignment
shall be held within thirty (30) days from the date the
court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the
accused. The time of the pendency of a motion to quash
or for a bill of particulars or other causes justifying
suspension of the arraignment shall be excluded in
computing the period. (sec. 2, cir.38-98)

Before arraignment, the court shall inform the

accused of his right to counsel and ask him if he desires
to have one. Unless the accused is allowed to defend
himself in person or has employed counsel of his choice,
the court must assign a counsel de oficto to defend him.
Appointment of counsel de oficio
The court, considering the gravity of the offense
and the difficulty of the questions that may arise, shall
appoint as counsel de oficio such members of the bar in
good standing who, by reason of their experience and
ability, can competently defend the accused. But in
localities where such members of the bar are not
available, the court may appoint any person resident of
the province and good repute for probity and ability, to
defend the accused.
Time for counsel
arraignment

de

oficio

to

prepare

for

Whenever counsel de oficio is appointed by the

court to defend the accused at the arraignment, he shall
be given a reasonable time to consult with the accused
as to his plea before proceeding with the arraignment.

Plea of guilty to a lesser offense

Bill of particulars

At arraignment, the accused, with the consent

of the offended party and the prosecutor, may be
allowed by the trial court to plead guilty to a lesser
offense which is necessarily included in the offense
charge. After arraignment but before trial, the accused
by still be allowed to plead guilty to said lesser offense
after withdrawing his plea of not guilty. No amendment
of the complaint or information is necessary. (sec. 4, circ.
38-98)

The accused may, before arraignment, move for

a bill of particulars to enable him properly to plead and
prepare for trial. The motion shall specify the alleged
defects of the complaint or information and the details
desired.
Production or inspection of material evidence in
possession of prosecution\
Upon motion of the accused showing good
cause and with notice to the parties, the court, in order
to prevent surprise, suppression, or alteration, may order
the prosecution to produce and permit the inspection
and copying or photographing of any written statement
given by the complainant and other witness in any
investigation of the offense conducted by the
prosecution or other investigating photographs, objects,
or tangible things not otherwise privileged, which
constitute or contain evidence material to any matter
involved in the case and which are in the possession or
under the control of the prosecution, police, or other law
investigating agencies.

Plea of guilty to capital offense; reception of

evidence
When the accused pleads guilty to a capital
offense, the court shall conduct a searching inquiry into
the voluntariness and full comprehension of the
consequences of his plea and shall require the
prosecution to prove his guilt and the precise degree of
culpability. The accused may present evidence in his
behalf.
Plea of guilty to non-capital offense; reception of
evidence, discretionary

Suspension of arraignment

When the accused pleads guilty to a non-capital

offense, the court may receive evidence from the parties
to determine the penalty to be imposed.

Upon motion by the proper party, the

arraignment shall be suspended in the following cases:
(a) The accused appears to be suffering from an
unsound mental condition which effectively renders him
unable to fully understand the charge against him and to
plead intelligently thereto. In such case, the court shall
order his mental examination and, if necessary, his
confinement for such purpose;
(b) There exists a prejudicial question; and
(c) A petition for review of the resolution of the
prosecutor is pending at either the Department of
Justice, or the Office of the President; provided that the
period of suspension shall not exceed sixty (60) days
counted from the filing of the petition with the reviewing
office.

Withdrawal of improvident plea of guilty

At any time before the judgment of conviction
becomes final, the court may permit an improvident plea
of guilty to be withdrawn and be substituted by a plea of
not guilty.

Duty of court to inform accused of his right to

counsel

84

www.rkmfiles.net

RULE 117 - MOTION TO QUASH

court may allow for good cause, the accused, if in

custody, shall be discharged unless he is also in custody
for another charge.

Time to move to quash

At any time before entering his plea, the
accused may moved to quash the complaint or
information.

Order sustaining the motion to quash not a bar to

another prosecution; exception
An order sustaining the motion to quash is not a
bar to another prosecution for the same offense unless
the motion was based on the grounds specified in section
3 (g) and (i) of this Rule.

Form and contents

The motion to quash shall be in writing, signed
by the accused or his counsel and shall distinctly specify
its factual and legal grounds. The court shall consider no
ground other than those stated in the motion, except
lack of jurisdiction over the offense charged.

Former conviction or acquittal; double jeopardy

When an accused has been convicted
or
acquitted, or the case against him dismissed or
otherwise terminated without his express consent by a
court of competent jurisdiction, upon a valid complaint or
information or other formal charge sufficient in form and
substance to sustain a conviction and after the accused
had pleaded to the charge, the conviction or acquittal of
the accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to
another prosecution for the offense charged, or for any
attempt to commit the or frustration thereof, or for any
offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily
included in the offense charged in the former complaint
or information under any of the following instances:
(a) the graver offense developed due to
supervening facts arising from the act or
omission constituting the former charge;
(b) the facts constituting the graver charge
became known or were discovered by after
a plea was entered in the former complaint
information; or
(c) the plea of guilty to the lesser offense was
made without the consent of the executor
and of the offended party except as
provided in section 1(f) of Rule 116.

Grounds
The accused may move to quash the complaint
or information on any of the following grounds:
(a) That the facts charged do not constitute an
offense;
(b) That the court trying the case has no
jurisdiction over the offense charged;
(c) That the court trying the case has no
jurisdiction over the person of the accused;
(d) That the officer who filed the information
had no authority to do so;
(e) That it does not conform substantially to
the prescribed form;
(f) That more than one offense is charged
except when a single punishment for
various offenses is prescribed by law;
(g) That the criminal action or liability has been
extinguished;
(h) That it contains averments which, if true,
would constitute a legal excuse of
justification; and
(i) That the accused has been previously
convicted or acquitted of the offense
charged, or the case against him was
dismissed or otherwise terminated without
his express consent.

In any of the foregoing cases, where the

accused satisfies or serves in whole or part of judgment,
be shall be credited with the same in the event of
conviction of the graver offense.
Provisional Dismissal
A case shall not be provisionally dismissed
except with the express consent of the accused and with
notice to the offended party.

Amendment of complaint or information

If the motion to quash is based on an alleged
defect of the complaint or information which can be
cured by amendment, the court shall order that an
amendment be made.
If it is based on the ground that the facts
charged do not constitute an offense, the prosecution
shall be given by the court an opportunity to correct the
defect by amendment. The motion shall be granted if the
prosecution fails to make the amendment, or the
complaint or information still suffers from the same
defect despite the amendment.

The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable

by imprisonment not proceeding six (6) years or a fine of
any amount, or both, shall become permanent one (1)
year after issuance of the order without the case having
been revived. With respect to offenses punishable by
imprisonment of more than six (6) years, their
provisional dismissal shall become permanent two (2)
years after issuance of the order without case having
been revived.

Effect of sustaining the motion to quash

Failure to move to quash or to allege any ground

therefore

If the motion to quash is sustained, the court

may order that another complaint or information be filed
except as provided in section 6 of this rule. If the order is
made, the accused, if in custody, shall not be discharged
unless admitted to bail. If no order is made or if having
been made, no new information is filed within the time
specified in the order or within such further time as the

The failure of the accused to assert any ground

of a motion to quash before he pleads to the complaint
or information, either because he did not file a motion to
quash or failed to allege the same motion, shall be
deemed a waiver of any objections used on the grounds

85

www.rkmfiles.net

provided for in paragraphs (a), (b), (g), and (i) of this

Rule.

Trial once commenced shall continue from day

to day as far as practicable until terminated. It may be
postponed for a reasonable period of time for good
cause.
The court shall, after consultation with the
prosecutor and defense counsel, set the case for
continuous trial on a weekly or other shot-item trial
calendar at the earliest possible time so as to ensure
speedy trial. In no case shall the entire trial period
exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from the fi4rst
day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the
Supreme Court. (sec. 8, cir.38-98).
The time limitations provided under this section
and the preceding section shall not apply where special
laws of the Supreme Court provide for a shorter period of
trial.

RULE 118 - PRE-TRIAL

Pre-trail; mandatory in criminal cases
In all criminal cases recognizable by the
Sandiganbayan, Regional Court, Metropolitan Trail Court,
Municipal Trail Court in Cities, Municipal Trail Court and
Municipal Circuit Trail Court, the court shall, after
arraignment and within thirty (30) days from the date be
court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the
accused, unless a shorter period is provided for in
special laws or circulars of the Supreme Court, order a
pre-trail conference to consider the following:
(a) plea bargaining;
(b) stipulation of facts;
(c) marking for identification of evidence of the
parties;
(d) waiver of objections to admissibility of
evidence;
(e) modification of the order of trial if the
accused admits the charge but interposes a
lawful defense; and
(f) such matter as well as promote a fair and
expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of case.
(Sec. 2 and 3, cir. 38-98)

Exclusions
The following periods of delay shall be exclude
in computing the time within which trial must
commence:
(a) Any period of delay resulting from other
proceedings concerning the accused, including but not
limited to the following:

Pre-trial agreement

All agreements or admissions made or entered

during the pre-trial conference shall be reduced in
writing and signed by the accused and counsel,
otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused. The
agreements covering the matters referred to in section 1
of this Rule shall be approved by the court. (sec. 4, cir.
38-98)

Non-appearance at pre-trial conference

If the counsel for the accused or the prosecutor

does not appear at the pre-trial conference and does not
offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of cooperation,
the court may impose proper sanction of penalties.
(sec.5, cir, 38-98)

Delay resulting from an examination of the

physical and mental condition of the accused;
Delay resulting from proceedings with respect
to other criminal charges against the accused;
Delay resulting from extraordinary remedies
against interlocutory orders;
Delay resulting from pre-trial proceedings;
provided, that the delay does not exceed thirty
(30) days;
Delay resulting from orders of inhibition, or
proceedings relating to change of venue of
cases or transfer from other courts;
Delay resulting from a finding of the existence
of a prejudicial question; and
Delay reasonably attributable to any period, not
to exceed thirty (30) days, during which any
proceeding concerning the accused is actually
under advisement.

Pre-trial order
(b) Any period of delay resulting from the
absence or unavailability of an essential witness.

After the pre-trial conference, the court shall

issue an order reciting the actions taken, the facts
stipulated, and evidence marked. Such order-shall bind
the parties, limit the trial to matters not disposed of, and
control the course of the action during the trial to
matters not disposed of, and control the course of the
action during the trail, unless modified by the court to
prevent manifest injustice.

For purposes of this subparagraph, an essential

witness shall be considered absent when his
whereabouts are unknown or his whereabouts cannot be
determined by due diligence. He shall be considered
unavailable whenever his whereabouts are known but his
presence for trial cannot be obtained by due diligence.

RULE 119 - TRIAL

(c) Any period delay resulting from the mental
incompetence or physical inability of the accused to
stand trial.

Time to prepare for trial

After a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused
shall have at least fifteen (15) days to prepare for trial.
The trial shall commence within thirty (30) days from
receipt of the pre-trial order. (sec. 6, cir. 38-98)

(d) If the information is dismissed upon motion

of the prosecution and thereafter to charge is filed
against the accused for the same offense, any period of
delay from the date the charge was dismissed to the
date the time limitation would commence to run as to
the subsequent charge had there been no previous
charge.

Continuous trial until terminated; postponements

86

www.rkmfiles.net

(a) Shall promptly undertake to obtain the

presence of the prisoner for trial or cause a notice to
served on the person having custody of the prisoner
requiring such person to so advise the prisoner of his
right to demand trial.
(b) Upon receipt of that notice, the custodian of
the prisoner shall promptly advise the prisoner of the
charge and of his right to demand trial. If at anytime
thereafter the prisoner informs his custodian that he
demands such trial, the latter shall cause notice to that
effect to be sent promptly to the public attorney.
(c) Upon receipt of such notice, the public
attorney shall promptly seek to obtain the presence of
the prisoner for trial.
(d) When the custodian of the prisoner receives
from the public attorney a properly supported request for
the availability of the prisoner for purposes of trial, the
prisoner shall be made available accordingly. (sec. 12,
cir. 38-98)

(e) A reasonable period of delay when the

accused is joined for trial with a co-accused over whom
the court has not acquired jurisdiction, or, as to whom
the time for trial ha not run and no motion for separate
trial has been granted.
(f) Any period of delay resulting from a
continuance granted by any court motu proprio, or on
motion of either the accused or his counsel, or the
prosecution, if the court granted the continuance on the
basis of its findings set forth in the order that the ends of
justice served by taking such action outweigh the best
interest of the public and the accused in a speedy trial.
(sec. 9, cir. 38-98)
Factors for granting continuance
The following factors, among others, shall be
considered by a court in determining whether to grant a
continuance under section 3 (f) of this Rule.
(a) Whether or not the failure to grant a
continuance in the proceeding would likely make a
continuation of such proceeding impossible or result in a
miscarriage of justice; and
(b) Whether or not the case taken as a whole is
so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number of
accused or the nature of the prosecution, or that it is
unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the
periods of time establish therein.
In addition, no continuance under section 3 (f)
of this Rule shall be granted because of congestion of the
courts calendar or lack of diligent preparation or failure
to obtain available witnesses on the part of the
prosecutor. (sec. 10, cir. 38-98)

Sanctions
In any case in which private counsel for the
accused, the public attorney, or the prosecutor:
(a) Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial
without disclosing that a necessary witness would be
unavailable for trial;
(b) Files a motion solely for delay which he
knows is totally frivolous and without merit;
(c) Makes a statement for the purpose of
obtaining continuance which he knows to be false and
which is material tot he granting of a continuance; or
(d) Willfully fails to proceed to trial without
justification consistent with the provisions hereof, the
curt may punish such counsel, attorney, or prosecutor,
as follows:

Time limit following an order for new trial

If the accused is to be tried again pursuant to
an order for a new trial, the trial shall commence within
thirty (30) days from notice of the order, provided that if
the period becomes impractical due to unavailability of
witnesses and other factors, the court may extend it but
not to exceed one hundred eighty (180) days from notice
of said order of a new trial. (sec. 1, cir. 38-98)

(1)

By imposing on a counsel privately

retained in connection with the defense
of an accused, a fine not exceeding
twenty thousand pesos (20,000.00);
(2)
By imposing on any appointed
counsel de oficio, public attorney, or
prosecutor a fine not exceeding five
thousand pesos (P5,000.00); and
(3)
By denying any defense counsel or
prosecutor the right to practice before
the court trying the case for a period
not exceeding thirty (30) days. The
punishment provided for by this section
shall be without prejudice to any
appropriate criminal action or other
sanction authorized under these rules.
(sec. 13, cir. 38-98)

Extended time limit

Notwithstanding the provisions of section 1 (g)
Rule 116 and the preceding section 1, for the first
twelve-calendar-month period following its effectivity on
September 15, 1998, the time limit with respect to the
period from arraignment to trial imposed by said
provision shall be one hundred eighty (180) days. for the
second twelve-month period, the time limit shall be one
hundred twenty (120) days, and for the third twelvemonth period, the time limit shall be eighty (80) days.
(sec. 7, cir. 38-98)
Public attorneys
imprisoned

duties

where

accused

Remedy where accused is not brought to trial

within the time limit

is

If the accused is not brought to trial within the

time limit required by Section 1 (g), Rule 116 and Section
1, as extended by Section 7 of this rule, the information
may be dismissed on motion of the accused on the
ground of denial of his right to speedy trial. The accused
shall have the burden of proving the motion but t he
prosecution shall have the burden of going forward with
the evidence to establish the exclusion of time under
section 3 of this Rule. The dismissal shall be subject to
the rules on double jeopardy.

If the public attorney assigned to defend a

person charged with a crime knows that the latter is
preventively detained, either because he is charged with
a bailable crime but has no means to post bail, or, is
charge with a non-bailable crime, or, is serving a term of
imprisonment in any penal institution, it shall be his duty
to do the following:

87

www.rkmfiles.net

Failure of the accused to move for dismissal

prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of the right to
dismiss under this section. (sec. 14, cir. 38-98)

Bail to secure appearance of material witness

When the court is satisfied, upon proof or oath
that a material witness will not testify when required, it
may, upon motion of either party, order the witness to
post bail in such sum as may be deemed proper. Upon
refusal to post bail, the court shall commit him to prison
until he complies or is legally discharged after his
testimony has been taken.

Law on speedy trial not a bar to provision on

speedy in the Constitution
No provision of law on speedy trial and no rule
implementing the same shall be interpreted as a bar to
any charge of denial of the right to speedy trial
guaranteed by section 14 (2), article III, of the 1987
Constitution. (sec. 15, cir. 38-98)

Examination of witness for the prosecution

Order of trial

When it satisfactorily appears that a witness for

the prosecution is too sick or infirm to appear at the trial
as directed by the court, or has to leave the Philippines
with no definite date of returning, he may forthwith be
conditionally examined before the court where the case
is pending. Such examination, in the presence of the
accused, or in his absence after reasonable notice to
attend the examination has been served on him, shall be
conducted in the same manner as an examination at the
trial. Failure or refusal of the accused to attend the
examination after notice shall be considered a waiver.
The statement taken may be admitted in behalf or
against the accused.

The trial shall proceed in the following order:

(a) The prosecution shall present evidence to
prove the charge and, in ht proper case, the civil liability.
(b) The accused may present evidence to prove
his defense and damages if any, arising from the
issuance of a provisional remedy in the case.
(c) The prosecution and the defense may, in
that order, present rebuttal and sur-rebuttal evidence
unless the court, in furtherance of justice, permits them
to present additional evidence bearing upon the main
issue.
(d) Upon admission of the evidence of the
parties, the case shall be deemed submitted for decision
unless the court directs them to argue orally or to submit
written memoranda.
(e) When the accused admits the act or
omission charged in the complaint or information but
interposes a lawful defense, the order of trial may be
modified

Trial of several accused

When two or more accused are jointly charged
with an offense, they shall be tried jointly unless the
court, in its discretion and upon motion of the prosecutor
or any accused, orders separate trial for one or more
accused.
Discharge of accused to be state witness

Application for examination of witness for accused

before trial

When two or more persons are jointly charged

with the commission of any offense, upon motion of the
prosecution before resting its case, the court may direct
one or more of the accused to be discharged with their
consent so that they may be witnesses for the state
when, after requiring the prosecution to present
evidence and the sworn statement of each proposed
state witness at a hearing in support of the discharge,
the court is satisfied that:
(a) There is absolute necessity for the testimony
of the accused whose discharge is requested;
(b) There is no other direct evidence available
for the proper prosecution of the offense committed,
except the testimony of said accused;
(c) The testimony of said accused can be
substantially corroborated in its material points;
(d) Said accused does not appear to be the
most guilty; and
(e) Said accused has not at any time been
convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude.
Evidence adduced in support of the discharge
shall automatically form part of the trial. If the court
denies the motion for discharge of the accused as state
witness, his sworn statement shall be inadmissible in
evidence.

When the accused has been held to answer for

an offense, he may, upon motion with notice to the other
parties, have witnesses conditionally examined in his
behalf. The motion shall state: (a) the name and
residence of the witness; (b) the substance of his
testimony; and (c) that the witness is sick or infirm as to
afford reasonable ground for believing that he will not be
able to attend the trial, or resides more than one
hundred (100) kilometers from the place of trial and has
no means to attend the same, or that other similar
circumstances exist that would make him unavailable or
prevent him from attending the trial. The motion shall be
supported by an affidavit of the accused and such other
evidence as the court may require.
Examination of defense witness; how made
If the court is satisfied that the examination f a
witness for the accused is necessary, an order shall be
made directing that the witness be examined at a
specific date, time and place and that a copy of the order
be served on the prosecutor at least three (3) days
before the schedule examination. the examination shall
be taken before a judge, or, if not practicable, a member
of the Bar in good standing so designated by the judge in
the order, or if the order be made by a court of superior
jurisdiction, before an inferior court to be designated
therein. The examination shall proceed notwithstanding
the absence of the prosecutor provided he was duly
notified of the hearing. A written record of the testimony
shall be taken.

Discharge of accused operates as acquittal

The order indicated
shall amount to an acquittal
and shall be a bar to future
offense, unless the accused

88

in the preceding section

of the discharge accused
prosecution for the same
fails or refuses to testify

www.rkmfiles.net

against his co-accused in accordance with his sworn

statement constituting the basis for his discharge.

RULE 120 - JUDGMENT

Judgment: definition and form

When mistake has been made in charging the

proper offense

Judgment is the adjudication by the court that

the accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense charged
and the imposition on him of the proper penalty and civil
liability, if any. It must be written in the official language,
personally and directly prepared by the judge and signed
by him an shall contain clearly and distinctly a statement
of the facts and the law upon which it is based.

When it becomes manifest at any time before

judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the
proper offense and the accused cannot be convicted of
the offense charged or any other offense necessarily
included therein, the accused shall not be discharged if
there appears good cause to detain him. In such case,
the court shall upon the filing of the proper information.

Content of the judgment

Appointment of acting prosecutor

If the judgment is of conviction, it shall state (1)

the legal qualification of the offense constituted by the
acts committed by the accused and the aggravating or
mitigating circumstances which attended its commission;
(2) the participation of the accused in the offense,
whether as principal, accomplice, or accessory after the
fact; (3) the penalty imposed upon the accused; and (4)
the civil liability or damages caused by his wrongful act
or omission to be recovered from the accused by the
offended party, if there is any, unless the enforcement of
the civil liability by a separate civil action has been
reserved or waived.

When a prosecutor, his assistant or deputy is

disqualified to act due to any of the grounds stated in
section 1 of Rule 137 of for any other reason, the judge
or the prosecutor shall communicate with the Secretary
of Justice in order that the latter may appoint an acting
prosecutor.
Exclusion of the public
The judge may, motu proprio, exclude the pubic
from the courtroom if the evidence to be produced
during the trial is offensive to decency or public morals.
He may also, on motion of the accused, exclude the
public from the trial except court personnel and the
counsel of the parties.

In case the judgment is of acquittal, it shall

state whether the evidence of the prosecution absolutely
failed to prove the guilt for the accused or merely failed
to prove his guilty beyond reasonable doubt. In either
case, the judgment shall determine if the act or omission
from which the civil liability might arise did not exist.

Demurrer to evidence
After the prosecution rests its case, the court
may dismiss the action on the ground of insufficiency of
evidence (1) on its own initiative after giving the
prosecution the opportunity to be heard or (2) upon
demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or
without leave of court.
If the court denies the demurrer to evidence
filed with leave of court, the accused may adduce
evidence in his defense. When the demurrer to evidence
is filed without leave of court, the court waives the right
to present evidence and submits the case for judgment
on the basis of the evidence for the prosecution.
The motion for leave of court to file demurrer to
evidence shall specifically state its grounds and shall be
filed within a non-extendible period of five (5) days after
the prosecution rests its case. The prosecution may
oppose the motion within a non-extendible period of five
(5) days from its receipts.
If leave of court is granted, the accused shall
file the demurrer to evidence within a non-extendible
period of ten (10) days from notice. The prosecution may
oppose the demurrer to evidence within a similar period
from its receipts.
The order denying the motion for leave of court
to file demurrer to evidence or the demurrer itself shall
not be reviewable by appeal or by certiorari before
judgment.

Judgment for two or more offense

When two or more offenses are charged in a
single complaint or information but the accused fails to
object to it before trial, the court may convict him of as
many offenses as are charged and proved, and impose
on him the penalty for each offense, setting out
separately the findings of fact and law in each offense.
Judgment in case of variance between allegation
and proof
Where there is variance between the offense
charged in the complaint or information and that proved,
and the offense as charged is included in or necessarily
includes the offense proved, the accused shall be
convicted of the offense proved which is included in the
offense charged, or of the offense charged which is
included in the offense proved.
When an offense includes or is included in anther
An offense charged necessarily includes the
offense proved when some of the essential elements or
ingredients of the former, as alleged in the complaint or
information, constitute the latter. And an offense charged
is necessarily included in the offense proved, when the
essential ingredients of the former constitute or form
part of those constituting the latter.

Reopening
At anytime before finality of the judgment of
conviction, the judge may, motu proprio or upon motion,
with hearing in either case, reopens the proceedings to
avoid a miscarriage of justice. The proceeding shall be
terminated within thirty (30) days from the order
granting it.

Promulgation of judgment
The judgment is promulgated by reading it in
the presence of the accused and any judge of the court
in which it was rendered. However, if the conviction is for
a light offense, the judgment may be pronounced in the

89

www.rkmfiles.net

presence of his counsel or representative. When the

judge is absent or outside the province or city, the
judgment may be promulgated by the clerk of court.
If the accused is confined or detained in another
province or city, the judgment may be promulgated by
the executive judge of the Regional Trial Court having
jurisdiction over the place of confinement or detention
upon request of the court which rendered the judgment.
The court promulgating the judgment shall have
authority to accept the notice of appeal and to approve
the bail bond pending appeal; provided, that if the
decision of the trial court convicting the accused
changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to
bailable, the application for bail can only be filed and
resolved by the appellate court.
The proper clerk of court shall give notice to the
accused personally or through his bondsman or warden
and counsel, requiring him to be present at the
promulgation of the decision. If the accused was tried in
absentia because he jumped bail or escaped from prison,
the notice to him shall be served at his last known
address.
In case the accused fails to appear at the
scheduled date of promulgation of judgment despite
notice, the promulgation shall be made by recording the
judgment in the criminal docket and serving him a copy
thereof at his last known address or thru counsel.
If the judgment is for conviction and the failure
of the accused to appear was without justifiable cause,
he shall lose the remedies available in these rules
against the judgment and the court shall order his arrest.
Within fifteen (15) days from promulgation f judgment,
however, the accused may surrender and file a motion
for leave of court to avail of these remedies. He shall
state the reasons for his absence at the scheduled
promulgation and if he proves that his absence was for a
justifiable cause, he shall be allowed to avail of said
remedies within fifteen (15) days from notice.

Grounds for a new trial

The court shall grant a new trial on any of the
following grounds:
(a) That errors of law or irregularities prejudicial
to the substantial rights of the accused have been
committed during the trial;
(b) That new and material evidence has been
discovered which the accused could not with reasonable
diligence have discovered and produce at the trial and
which if introduce and admitted would probably change
the judgment. (2a)
Ground for reconsideration
The court shall grand consideration on the
ground of errors of law or fact in the judgment, which
requires no further proceedings.
Form of motion and notice to the prosecutor
The motion for new trial or reconsideration shall
be in writing and shall state the grounds on which it is
based. If based on newly-discovered evidence, the
motion must be supported by affidavits copies of
documents which are proposed to be introduced in
evidence. Notice of the motion for new trial or
reconsideration shall be given to the prosecutor.
Hearing on motion
Where a motion for new trial calls for resolution
of any question of fact, the court may hear evidence
thereon by affidavits or otherwise.
Effects of granting a new trial or reconsideration
The effects of granting a new trial or reconsideration are
the following:

Modification of judgment
A judgment of conviction may, upon motion of
the accused, be modified or set aside before it becomes
final or before appeal is perfected. Except where the
death penalty is imposed, a judgment becomes final
after the lapse of the period for perfecting an appeal, or
when the sentence has been partially or totally satisfied
or served, or when the accused has waived in writing his
right to appeal, or has applied for probation.

(a) When a new trial is granted on the ground

of errors of law or irregularities committed during the
trial, all the proceedings and evidence affected thereby
shall be set aside and taken anew. The court may, in the
interest of justice, allow the introduction of additional
evidence.
(b) When a new trial is granted on the ground of
newly-discovered, the evidence already adduced shall
stand and the newly-discovered and such other evidence
as the court may, in the interest of justice, allow to be
introduced shall be taken and considered together with
the evidence already in the record.
(c) In all cases, when the court grants new trial
or reconsideration, the original judgment shall be set
aside or vacated and a new judgment rendered
accordingly.

Entry of judgment
After a judgment has become final, it shall be
entered in accordance with Rule 36.
Exiting
provisions
governing
suspension
of
sentence, probation and parole not affected by
this Rule

RULE 122 - APPEAL

Nothing in this Rule shall affect any existing

provisions in the laws governing suspension of sentence,
probation or parole.

Who may appeal?

Any party may appeal from a judgment or final
order, unless the accused will be placed in double
jeopardy.

RULE 121 - NEW TIAL OR RECONSIDERATION

New trial or reconsideration

Where to appeal?

At any time before a judgment of conviction

becomes final, the court may, on motion of the accused
or at its own instance but with the consent of the
accused, grant new trial or reconsideration.

The appeal may be taken as follows:

(a) To the Regional Trial Court, in cased decided
by the Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in

90

www.rkmfiles.net

Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit Trial

Court;
(b) To the Court of Appeals or to the Supreme
Court in the proper cases provided by law, in cases
decided by the Regional Trial Court; and
(d) To the Supreme Court, in cases decided by
the Court of Appeals.

the People of the Philippines, the trial court shall direct

the stenographic reporter to transcribe such portion of
his notes of the proceedings as the court, upon motion,
shall specify in writing. The stenographic reporter shall
certify to the correctness of the notes and the transcript
thereof, which shall consist of the original and four
copies, and shall file said original and four copies with
the clerk without unnecessary delay.
If death penalty is imposed, the stenographic
reporter shall, within thirty (30) days from promulgation
of the sentence, file with the clerk the original and four
copies of the duly certified transcript of his notes of the
proceedings. No extension of time for filing of said
transcript of stenographic notes shall be granted except
by the Supreme Court and only justifiable grounds.

How appeal is taken?

(a) The appeal to the Regional Trial Court, or to
the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional
Trial Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, shall
be taken by filing a notice of appeal with the court which
rendered the judgment or final order appealed from and
by serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party.
(b) The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases
decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its
appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for review
under Rule 42.
(c) The appeal to the Supreme Court in cases
where the penalty imposed by the Regional Trial Court is
death, reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment, or where
a lesser penalty is imposed but for offenses committed
on the same occasion or which arose out of the same
occurrence that gave rise to the more serious offense for
which the penalty of death, reclusion perpetua, or life
imprisonment is imposed, shall be by filing a notice of
appeal in accordance with paragraph (a) of this section.
(d) No notice of appeal is necessary in cases
where the death penalty is imposed by the Regional Trial
Court. The same shall be automatically reviewed by the
Supreme Court as provided in section 10 of this Rule.
(e) Except as provided in the last paragraph of
section 13, Rule 124, all other appeals to the Supreme
Court shall be by petition for review on certiorari under
Rule 45.

Transmission of papers to appellate court upon

appeal
Within five(5) days from the filing of the notice
of appeal, the clerk of the court with whom the notice of
appeal was filed must transmit to the clerk of court of
the appellate court the compete record of the case,
together with said notice. The original and three copies
of the transcript of stenographic notes, together with the
record, shall also be transmitted tot he clerk of the
appellate court without undue delay. The other copy of
the transcript shall remain in the lower court.
Appeal to the Regional Trial Court
(a) Within five (5) days from perfection of the
appeal, the clerk of curt shall transmit the original record
to the appropriate Regional Trial Court.
(b) Upon receipt of the complete record of the
case, transcripts and exhibits, the clerk of court of the
Regional Trial Court shall notify the parties of such fact.
(c) Within the fifteen (15) days from receipt of
said notice, the parties may submit memoranda or
briefs, or may be required by the Regional Trial Court to
do so. After the submission of such memoranda or briefs,
or upon the expiration of the period to file the same, the
Regional Trial Court shall decide the case on the basis of
the entire record of the case and of such memoranda or
briefs as may have been filed

Publication of notice of appeal

If personal service of the copy of the notice of
appeal can not be made upon the adverse party or his
counsel, service may be done by registered mail or by
substituted service pursuant to sections 7 and 8 Rule 13.
Waiver of notice

Transmission of records in case of death penalty

The appellee may waive his right to a notice

that an appeal has been taken. The appellate court may,
in its discretion, entertain an appeal notwithstanding
failure to give such notice if the interest of justice so
require.

In all cases where the death penalty is imposed

by the trial curt, the records shall be forwarded to the
Supreme Court for automatic review and judgment within
five (5) days after the fifteen (15) days following the
promulgation of the judgment of notice of denial of a
motion for new trial or reconsideration. The transcript
shall also be forwarded within ten (10) days after the
filing thereof by the stenographic reporter.

When appeal is to be taken?

An appeal must be taken within fifteen (15) day
from promulgation of the judgment or from notice of the
final order appealed from. This period for perfecting an
appeal shall be suspended from the time a motion for
new trial or reconsideration is filed until notice of the
order overruling the motion has been served upon the
accused or his counsel at which time the balance of the
period begins to run.
Transcribing and filing
reporter upon appeal

notes

of

Effect of appeal by any of several accused

(a) An appeal taken by one or more of several
accused shall not affect those who did not appeal, except
insofar as the judgment of the appellate court is
favorable and applicable to the latter.
(b) The appeal of the offended party from the
civil aspect shall not affect the criminal aspect of the
judgment or order appealed from.
(c) Upon perfection of the appeal, the execution
of the judgment or final order appealed from shall be
stayed as to the appealing party.

stenographic

When notice of appeal is filed by the accused,

the trial court shall direct the stenographic reporter to
transcribe his notes of the proceedings. When filed by

91

www.rkmfiles.net

Withdrawal of appeal

When brief for appellant to be filed

Notwithstanding perfection of the appeal, the

Regional Trial Court, metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal
Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal
Circuit Trial Court, as the case may be, may allow the
appellant to withdraw his appeal before the record has
been forwarded by the clerk of court to the proper
appellate court as provided in section 8, in which case
the judgement shall become final. The Regional Trial
Court may also, in its discretion, allow the appellant from
the judgment of a Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial
Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, or Municipal Circuit
Trial Court to withdraw his appeal, provided a motion to
that effect is filed before rendition of the judgment in the
case on appeal, in which case the judgment of the court
of origin shall become final and the case shall be
remanded to the latter court for execution of the
judgment.

Within thirty (30) days from receipt by the

appellant or his counsel of the notice from the clerk of
court of the Court of Appeal that the evidence, oral and
documentary, is already attached to the record, the
appellant shall file seven (7) copies of his brief with the
clerk of court which shall accompanied by proof of
service of two (2) copies thereof upon the appellee.
When brief for appellee to be filed; reply brief of
the appellant
Within thirty (30) days from receipt of the brief
of the appellant, the appellee shall file seven (7) copies
of the brief of the appellee with the clerk of court which
shall be accompanied by proof of service of two (2)
copies thereof upon the appellant.
Within twenty (20) days from receipt of the brief
of the appellee, the appellant may file a reply brief
traversing matters raised in the former but not covered
in the brief of the appellant.

Appointment of counsel de oficio for accused on

appeal
It shall be the duty of the clerk of court of the
trial court, upon filing of a notice of appeal, to ascertain
from the appellant, if confined in prison, whether he
desires the Regional Trial Court, Court of Appeals or the
Supreme Court to appoint a counsel de oficio to defend
him and to transmit with the record on a form to be
prepared by the clerk of court of the appellate court, a
certificate of compliance with this duty and of the
response of the appellant to his inquiry.

Extension of time for filing briefs

Extension of time for the filing of briefs will not
be allowed except for good and sufficient cause and only
if the motion for extension is filed before the expiration
of the time sought to be extended.
Form of briefs

RULE 123 - PROCEDURE IN THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL

COURTS

Briefs shall be printed, encoded or typewritten

in double space on legal size good quality unglazed
paper, 30 mm. in length by 216 mm. in width.

Uniform Procedure

Contents of brief

The procedure to be observed in the

Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall be the same as in the
Regional Trial Courts, except where a particular provision
applies only to either of said courts and in criminal cases
governed by the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure.

The briefs in criminal cases shall have the same

contents as provided in section 13 and 14 of Rule 44. A
certified true copy of the decision or final order appealed
from shall be appended to the brief of the appellant. (7a)
Dismissal of appeal for abandonment of failure to
prosecute

RULE 124 - PROCEDURE IN THE CURT OF APPEALS

Uniform Procedure

The Court of Appeals may, upon motion of the

appellee or motu proprio and with notice to the appellant
in either case, dismiss the appeal if the appellant fails to
file his brief within the time prescribed by this Rule,
except where the appellant is represented by a counsel
de oficio.

In all criminal cases appealed to the Court of

Appeals, the party appealing the case shall be called the
appellant and the adverse party the appellee, but
the title of the case shall remain as it was in the court of
origin.

The Court of Appeals may also upon motion of

the appellee or motu proprio, dismiss the appeal if the
appellant escapes from prison or confinement, jumps,
bail of flees to a foreign country during the pendency of
the appeal.
Appointment of counsel de oficio for the accused

Prompt disposition of appeals

If it appears from the record of the case as

transmitted that (a) the accused confined in prison, (b) is
without counsel de parte on appeal, or (c) has signed the
notice of appeal himself, the clerk of court of the Court of
Appeals shall designate a counsel de oficio.
An appellant who is not confined in prison may,
upon request, be assigned a counsel de oficio within ten
(10) days from receipt of the notice to file brief and he
establishes his right thereto.

Appeals of accused who are under detention

shall be given precedence in their disposition over other
appeals. The Court of Appeals shall hear and decide the
appeal at the earliest practicable time with due regard to
the rights of the parties. The accused need not be
present in court during the hearing of the appeal.

92

www.rkmfiles.net

Judgment not to be reversed or modified except

for substantial error

When a new trial is granted, the Court of

Appeals may conduct the hearing and receive evidence
as provided in section 12 of this Rule or refer the trial to
the court of origin.

No judgment shall be reversed or modified

unless the Court of Appeals, after and examination of the
record and of the evidence adduced by the parties, is off
the opinion that error was committed which injuriously
affected the substantial rights of the appellant.

Reconsideration
A motion for reconsideration shall be filed within
fifteen (15) days from notice of the decision or final order
of the Court of Appeals, with copies thereof served upon
the adverse party, setting forth the grounds in support
thereof. The mittimus shall be stayed during the
pendency of the motion for reconsideration. No party
shall be allowed a second motion for reconsideration of a
judgment or final order.

Scope of judgment
The Court of Appeals may reverse, affirm, or
modify the judgment and increase or reduce the penalty
imposed by the trial court, remand the case to the
Regional Trial Court for new trial or retrial, or dismiss the
case.
Power to receive evidence
The Court of Appeals shall have the power to try
cases and conduct hearings, receive evidence and
perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual
issues raised in cases (a) falling within its original
jurisdiction, (b) involving claims for damages arising from
provisional remedies, or (c) where the court grants a new
trial based only on the ground of newly discovered
evidence.

Judgment transmitted and filed in trial court

When the entry of judgment of the Court of
Appeals is issued, a certified true copy of the judgment
shall be attached to the original record which shall be
remanded to the clerk of the court whom from which the
appeal was taken.
Application of certain rules in civil procedure to
criminal cases

Quorum of the court; certification or appeal of

cases to Supreme Court

The provisions of Rules 42, 44 to 46 and 48 to

56 relating to procedure in the Court of Appeals and in
the Supreme Court in original and appealed civil cases
shall be applied to criminal cases insofar as they are
applicable and not inconsistent with the provisions of this
Rule.

Three (3) Justices of the Court of Appeals shall

constitute a quorum of the sessions of a division. The
unanimous vote of the three (3) Justices of a division
shall be necessary for the pronouncement of a judgment
or final resolution, which shall be reached in consultation
before the writing of the opinion by a member of the
division. In the event that t he three (3 Justices can not
reach a unanimous vote, the Presiding Justice shall direct
the raffle committee of the Court to designate two (2)
additional Justices to sit temporarily with them, forming a
special division of five (5) members and the concurrence
of a majority of such division shall be necessary for the
pronouncement of a judgment or final resolution. The
designation of such additional Justices shall be made
strictly by raffle and rotation among all other Justices of
the Court of Appeals.

RULE 125 - PROCEDURE IN THE SUPREME COURT

Uniform procedure
Unless otherwise provided by the Constitution
or by law, the procedure in the Supreme Court in Original
and in appealed cases shall be the same as in the Court
of Appeal.
Review of decisions of the Court of Appeals

Whenever the Court of Appeals finds that the

penalty
of
death,
reclusion
perpetua,
or
life
imprisonment should be imposed in a case, the court
after discussion of the evidence and the law involved
shall render judgment imposing the penalty of death,
reclusion perpetua, or life imprisonment as the
circumstances warrant. However, it shall refrain from
entering the judgment and forthwith certify the case and
elevate the entire record thereof to the Supreme Court
for review.

The procedure for the review by the Supreme

Court of decisions in criminal cases rendered by the
Court of Appeals shall be the same as in civil cases.
Decision if opinion is equally divided
When the Supreme Court en banc is equally
divided in opinion or the necessary majority cannot be
had on whether to acquit the appellant, the case shall
again be deliberated upon and if no decision is reached
after re-deliberation, the judgment of conviction of the
lower court shall be reverse and the accused acquitted.

Motion for new trial

At any time after the appeal from the lower
court has been perfected and before the judgment of the
Court of Appeals convicting the appellant becomes final,
the latter may move for a new trial on the ground of
newly-discovered evidence material to his defense. The
motion shall conform to the provision of section 4, Rule
121. (14a)

RULE 126 - SEARCH AND SEIZURE

Search warrant defined A search warrant is an order
in writing issued in the name of the People of the
Philippines, signed by a judge and directed to peace
officer, commanding him to search for personal property
described therein and bring it before the court.

Where new trial conducted

93

www.rkmfiles.net

Court where application for search warrant shall

be filed

No search of a house, room, or any other

premises shall be made except in the presence of the
lawful occupant thereof or any member of his family or in
the absence of the latter, two witnesses of sufficient age
and discretion residing in the same locality.

An application for search warrant shall be filed

with the following:
1.
2.

Time making search

Any
court
within
whose
territorial
jurisdiction a crime was committed.
For compelling reasons stated in the
application, any court within the judicial
region where the crime was committed if
the place of the commission of the crime is
known, or any court within the judicial
region where the warrant shall be enforce.

The warrant must direct that it be served in the

day time, unless the affidavit asserts that the property is
on the person or in the place ordered to be search, in
which case a direction may be inserted that it be served
at any time of the day or night.
Validity of search warrant

However, if the criminal action has already been

filed, the application shall only be made in the court
where the criminal action is pending.

A search warrant shall be valid for ten (10) days

from its date. Thereafter, it shall be void.

Personal property to be seized

Receipt for the property seized

A search warrant may be issued for the search and

seizure of personal property:
(a) Subject of the offense;
(b) Stolen or embezzled and other proceeds, or
fruits of the offense, or
(c) Used or intended to be used as the means
of committing an offense.

The officer seizing property under the warrant

must give a detailed receipt for the same to the lawful
occupant of the premises in whose presence the search
and seizure were made, or in the absence of such
occupant, must, in the presence of at least two witnesses
of sufficient age and discretion residing in the same
locality, leave a receipt in the place in which he found
the seized property.

Requisites for issuing search warrant

Delivery of property and inventory thereof to

court; return and proceedings thereon

A search warrant shall not issue except upon

probable cause in connection with one specific offense to
be determined personally by the judge after examination
under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the
witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing
the place to be searched and the things to be seized
which may be any wherein the Philippine

(a) The officer must forthwith deliver the

property seized to the judge who issued the warrant,
together with a true inventory thereof duly verified under
oath.
(b) Ten (10) days after issuance of the search
warrant, the issuing judge shall ascertain if the return
has been made, and if none, shall summon the person to
whom the warrant was issued and require him to explain
why no return was made. If the return has been made,
the judge shall ascertain whether section 11 of this Rule
has been complied with and shall require that the
property seized be delivered to him. The judge shall see
to it that subsection (a) hereof has been complied with.
(c) The return on the search warrant shall be
filed and kept by the custodian of the log book on search
warrants who shall enter therein the date of the return,
the result, and other actions of the judge.

Examination of complainant; record

The judgment, before issuing the warrant,
personally examine in the form of searching questions
and answers, in writing and under oath, the complainant
and the witnesses he may produce on facts personally
known to them and attach to the record their sworn
statements, together with the affidavits submitted. (4a)
Issuance and form of search warrant
If the judge is satisfied of the existence of facts
upon which the application is based or that there is
probable cause to believe that they exist, he shall issue
the warrant, which must be substantially in the form
prescribed by these Rules.

A violation of this section shall constitute

contempt of court.
Search incident to lawful arrest
A person lawfully arrested may be searched for
dangerous weapon or anything which may have been
used or constitute proof in the commission of an offense
without a search warrant.

Right to bread door or window to effect search

The officer, if refused admittance to the place of
directed search after giving notice of his purpose and
authority, 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 or liberate himself or any person
lawfully aiding him when unlawfully detained therein.

Motion to quash a search warrant or to suppress

evidence; where to file
A motion to quash a search warrant and/or to
suppress evidence obtained thereby may be filed in and
acted upon only by the court where the action has been
instituted. If no criminal action has been instituted, the
motion may be filed in and resolved by the court that

Search of house, room, or premises to be made in

presence of two witnesses

94

www.rkmfiles.net

issued the search warrant. However, if such court failed

to resolve the motion and a criminal case is
subsequently filed in anther court, the motion shall be
resolved by the latter court.

- Rebutting evidence - Prima facie evidence - Conclusive

evidence - Real evidence - Testimonial evidence
Rule of Evidence expresses the mode of
manner of proving the facts and circumstances upon
which the party relies to establish the fact in dispute
(Ruporto Martin, Rules of Court in the Philippines. Vol. V.
citing 20 Am. Jur. 34, p. 1)

RULE 127 - PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN CRIMINAL

CASES
Availability of provisional remedies

Material evidence tends to prove the fact in

issue as that issue is determined by the rules of
substantive law and pleadings (Jaime R. Nuevas,
Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed., citing Wigmore,
Students Ed., p. 530)

The provisional remedies in civil actions, insofar

as they are applicable, may be availed of in connection
with the civil action deemed instituted with the criminal
action.
Attachment

Relevant evidence evidence is relevant

when it has a tendency in reason to establish the
probability or improbability if a fact in issue. (Vicente
Francisco, The Revised Rules of Court in the Philippines,
1990 Ed., citing 1 Elliot on Evidence, p. 5)

When the civil action is properly instituted in the

criminal action as provided in Rule 111, the offended
party may have the property of the accused attached as
security for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be
recovered from the accused in the following cases:
(a) When the accused is about to abscond from
the Philippines;
(b)
When the criminal action is based on a
claim for money or property embezzled or fraudulently
misapplied or converted to the use of the accused who is
a public officer, officer of a corporation, attorney, factor,
broker, agent or clerk, in the course of his employment
as such, or by any other person in a fiduciary capacity, or
for a willful violation of duty;
(c) When the accused has concealed, removed,
or disposed of his property, or is
about to do so, and
(d) When the accused resides outside the
Philippines.

Competent evidence not excluded by law in

a particular case (Bautista vs. Aparece, (CA ), 51 O.G.
805 )
Direct and circumstantial evidence direct
evidence proves the fact in dispute without the aid of
any inference or presumption., while circumstantial
evidence is the proof of a fact or facts from which, taken
either singly or collectively, the existence of the
particular fact in dispute may be inferred as a necessary
or probable consequence (5 Moran, Remedial Law
Review, p. 2)
Primary or best and secondary evidence
primary or best evidence is that which the law regards as
affording the greatest certainty of the fact in question,
while secondary evidence is that which is inferior to the
primary evidence and is permitted by the law only when
the best evidence is not available ( 5 Moran, op. cit., p.
3)

oo

Positive and negative evidence evidence

is positive when the witness affirms that a fact did or did
not occur, and negative when the witness states he did
not see or know of the occurrence of a fact (People vs.
Ramos, L-30420, Sept. 22, 1971)
Expert evidence given by one possessing in
regard to a particular subject or department of human
activity knowledge does not usually acquired by other
persons (U.S. vs. Gil, 13 Phil. 530)
CRIMINAL EVIDENCE
WHAT IS EVIDENCE?

Cumulative evidence evidence of the same

kind and character as that already given, and tends to
prove the same proposition (Francisco, Ibid., citing
Gardner vs. Gardner, 2 Gray (Mass. 434), p. 5)

Evidence is the means, sanctioned by the

Revised Rules of Court, of ascertaining to a judicial
proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact
(Sec.
1, Rule 128)

Corroborative evidence additional evidence

of different kind and character, tending to prove the
same [point (Francisco, supra, citing Wyne vs. Newman,
75, Va., 811, 817, p. 4)

DEFINE THE FOLLOWING TERM:

Rebutting evidence evidence given to repel,

counteract or disprove facts proved by the other side
( Nuevas, citing State vs. Silva, 21 Ida. 247, p. 531 )

Rule of Evidence - Material Evidence - Relevant

Evidence - Competent Evidence - Direct and
circumstantial evidence - Primary or best or secondary
evidence - Positive and negative evidence - Export
evidence - Cumulative evidence - Corroborative evidence

Prima facie evidence evidence which

suffices for the proof of a fact in issue until rebutted or
overcome by other evidence (Nuevas, citing Cal. Code of
Civil Procedure, Sec. 1833, p. 531)

95

www.rkmfiles.net

WHEN IS EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE?

Conclusive evidence evidence which is

inconvertible (Nuevas, citing Wood vs. Chapin, 13 NY
509)

Evidence is admissible when it is relevant to the

issue and is not excluded by the law or these rules (Sec.
3, Rule 128)

Real evidence object (real) evidence is that

which is addressed to the senses of the tribunal, as
where objects are presented for the inspection of the
court ( Franciso, citing 1 Jones on Evidence, 2 nd ed., Sec.
16, p. 9 0)

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY OF

EVIDENCE?
In order that the evidence may be admissible,
two requisites must concur, namely:
a.
that is relevant to the issue; and
b.
that is competent. That is, that it does
not belong to the class of evidence which is
excluded by the law or Rules of Evidence
( Vicente Francisco, The Revised Rules of
Court in the Philippines, Vol. VII, 1990 Ed.,
p. 19 )

Testimonial evidence testimony given to the

court of deposition by one who has observed that to
which he is testifying; or one who, though who has not
observed the facts, is nevertheless qualified to give an
opinion relative to the fact ( Francisco, citing Gilbert, Law
Summaries of Evidence, p. 9 )
WHERE ARE OUR RULES OF EVIDENCE FOUND?
Our entire rule s of evidence have been
incorporated in the Revised Rules of Court

WHEN IS EVIDENCE RELEVANT?

Evidence to be relevant must throw light upon,
or have logical relation to the facts in issues to be
established by one party or disproved by the other
( Ruperto G. Martin, Rules of Court in the Philippines, Vol.
V., 1987 ed., citing 20 Am. Jur. 240, p. 9 )

DISTINGUISH EVIDENCE FROM PROOF

Evidence is the means of proof: proof is the
effect of evidence, the establishment of as fact by
evidence. Proof results as a probative effect of evidence
and is the conviction or persuasion of mind resulting
from a consideration of the evidence (Jaime R. Nuevas,
Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed., p. 531)

WHEN IS EVIDENCE COMPETENT?

Evidence is competent when it is not excluded
by any of the rules of evidence such as when it is
hearsay or because it is not best evidence which is
within the power of a party to produce. Evidence must
not only be logically relevant, but must be of such
character as to be receivable in courts of justice
( Ruperto G. Martin, Ibid., citing Gilbert Law Summaries
on Evidence, p. 3 )

WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE RULES OR LAW OF

EVIDENCE?
The law of evidence deals with the rules to be
followed in presenting a matter of fact to a court for its
use in the judicial investigation. (1) it prescribes the
manner of presenting the evidence personally by one
who knows the thing, the subject to cross-examination,
or by means of a preposition (2) it fixes the qualification
and the privileges of witnesses, and the mode of
examining them (3) and chiefly, it determines, as among
probative matter, what classes of things shall not be
received
(Ruperto Martin, Rules of Courts in the
Philippines, Vol. V, 1978 Ed., pp. 1-2)

IS EVIDENCE ILLEGALLY OBTAINED ADMISSIBLE?

WHY?
Evidence illegally obtains is admissible, the
reason being that exclusion of such kind of evidence is
the only practical way of enforcing the constitutional
right against unreasonable search and seizure ( Stonehill
vs. Diokno, L-19550, June 19, 1967 )

WHAT IS THE OBJECT OF THE LAW OF EVIDENCE?

WHAT ARE THE TWO AXIOMS OF ADMISSIBILITY

WHICH UNDERLIE THE ENTIRE STRUCTURE OF THE
LAW OF EVIDENCE?

The object of the law of evidence is to have a

specific inquiry of the truth to establish the truth by the
use of the perceptive and reasoning faculties (Martin,
supra., p. 2)

The following: none but facts having rational

probative value are admissible, which is the axiom on
relevancy; and all facts having rational probative value
are admissible, unless some specific rule forbids, which
is the axiom on competency ( Nuevas, citing 1 Wigmore
289-95, p. 532 )

DISTINGUISH FACTUM PROBANDUM FROM FACTUM

PROBANS
Factum probandum is the ultimate fact or the
fact to be established; factum probans is the evidentiary
fact, or the fact by which the factum probandum is to be
established ( Nuevas, citing Wigmore 5-9, p. 531-532 )

WHAT ARE THE THREE KINDS OR CLASSES OF

ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE?

ARE THE RULES OF EVIDENCE THE SAME, IN

CRIMINAL AS WELL AS IN CIVIL CASES?

They are:
a.
b.
c.

Yes, the rules of evidence shall be the same in

all courts and in all trials and hearings except as
otherwise provided by law or these rules (Sec. 2, Rule
128)

multiple admissibility;
conditional admissibility;
curative admissibility

WHAT IS MEANT BY MULTIPLE ADMISSIBILITY OF

EVIDENCE?

96

www.rkmfiles.net

This means evidence which is [plainly relevant

and competent for two or more purposes. When this
happens, such evidence will be received if it satisfies all
the requirements prescribed by law in order that it may
be admissible for the purpose for which it is presented,
even if it does not satisfy the other requisites for its
admissibility for other purposes (People vs. Yatco. 97 Phil.
940)

b.

c.

WHAT IS MEANT BY CONDITIONAL ADMISSIBILITY

OF EVIDENCE?
It means that the evidence which appear to be
material is admitted by the court subject to the condition
that its connection to other facts subsequently to be
proved will be established (People vs. Yatco. Supra)

WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THE RULES OF EVIDENCE?

The basis upon which all rules of evidence must
rest, if they are to rest upon reason, is their adaptation to
the successful development of the truth; and the rule of
evidence at one time though necessary to the
ascertainment of truth should yield to the experience has
clearly demonstrate the fallacy or unwisdom of the old
rule (Nuevas Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed., A & J
Publishing, p. 534 citing Funk vs. U.S., 290 U.S. 391)

WHAT IS MEANT BY CURATIVE ADMISSIBILITY OF

EVIDENCE?
This means that evidence, otherwise improper is
admitted to contradict improper evidence introduce by
the other party (Jaime R. Nuevas, Remedial Law
reviewer, 1971 ed., A & J Publishing citing Wigmore 30409, p. 533)

DEFINE JUDICIAL NOTICE

STATE THE RULE OF RELEVANCY OF EVIDENCE

Judicial notice is the cognizance of certain facts

which judges may properly take and act on without proof
because they already know them. It means no more than
that the court will bring to its aid and consider, without
proof of the facts, its knowledge of those matter of public
concern which are known by all well-informed persons
( Martin, Revised Rules of Evidence, 1985 Ed., Premium
Book Store, p. 3 citing C.J.S. 509 )

Evidence must have such a relation to the fact in

issue as to induce belief in its existence or nonexistence. Evidence on collateral matter shall not be
allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable degree
to establish the probability or improbability of the fact of
issue (Sec. 4, Rule 128)
WHAT IS THE
RELEVANCY?

PURPOSE

OF

THE

RULE

ON

WHAT IS THE FUNCTION OF JUDICIAL NOTICE?

The purpose of the rule on relevancy is to restrict

the field of inquiry to its proper scope and to prevent the
issues of becoming beclouded. It also aims to prevent
surprise on the litigant, or the subjection to the party to
the necessity of meeting the evidence that is possibly
prejudicial and of which he has no means of anticipating
(Martin, p. 15 citing 2 Jones on Evidence, 2 nd Ed., 1086,
1087)

It displaces evidence since, as it stands for proof,

it fulfills the object which evidence is designed to fulfill
and make evidence unnecessary. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 535
citing State vs. Main, 69 Conn 123)
STATE THE PRINCIPLE ON WHICH JUDICIAL NOTICE
IS BASED?
The doctrine of judicial notice is based upon
obvious reasons of convenience and expediency and
operated to have trouble, expense and time which would
be lost in establishing, in the ordinary way, facts which
do not admit of contradiction (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 535 citing
20 Am., Jur. 47; Tracys Handbook, 62 ed., p. 44)

WHAT ARE COLLATERAL MATTERS?

Collateral matters are those other than the facts
in issue and which are offered as a basis for inference as
to existence of the facts in issue (Sec. 4, Rule 129)
WHEN MAY THE COURT ALLOW EVIDENCE ON
COLLATERAL MATTERS?

WHEN IS JUDICIAL NOTICE MANDATORY?

Evidence on collateral matters shall not be

allowed, except when it tends in any reasonable degree
to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in
issue (Sec. 4, Rule 128 )

A court shall take judicial notice without the

introduction of evidence, of the existence and territorial
extent of states, their political history, forms of
government and symbols of nationality, the law of
nations, the admiralty and maritime courts of the world
and their seals, the political constitution and history of
the Philippines, the official acts of legislative, executive
and judicial departments of the Philippines, the laws of
nature, the measure of time and the geographical
divisions ( Sec. 1, Rule 129, Revised Rules on Evidence )

GIVE
THE
CONCEPT
OF
(1)
PROSPECTANT
COLLATERAL
MATTERS;
(2)
CONCOMITANT
COLLATERAL
MATTERS;
(3)
RETROSPECTANT
COLLATERAL MATTERS
a.

Concomitant collateral matters are

matters are those accompanying the fact in
issue and pointing to it, like alibi, or opportunity
and incompatibility;
Retrospectant collateral matters are
those succeeding the fact in issue but pointing
forward to it, like flight and concealment,
behavior of the accused upon being arrested;
finger prints or foot prints; articles left at the
scene of the crime which may identify the
culprit ( Judge Ed Vincent S. Albano, Remedial
Law Reviewer 1st Ed. 1995, Rex Book Store, p.
888 citing 1 Wigmore 442-43 )

Prospectant collateral matters are

those preceding of the fact in issue but pointing
forward to it, like moral character, motive;
conspiracy, etc.

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF JUDICIAL NOTICE?

97

www.rkmfiles.net

Generally speaking, matters of judicial notice have three

material requisites, namely:
d.
the matter be common and
general knowledge;
e.
the matter must be well and
authoritatively settled and not doubtful or
uncertain; and
f.
the matter must be known to be
within the limits of jurisdiction of the court
( Martin, Ibid. p. 35 citing 1 Jones on Evidence,
2nd ed., 643; 20 Am. Jur. 48 )

WHAT
ARE
THE
LIMITATIONS
ADMISSIBILITY OF OBJECT EVIDENCE?

A court may take judicial notice of matters

which are of public knowledge, or are capable of
unquestionable demonstration, or ought to be known to
judges because of their judicial functions (Sec. 2, Rule
129 )
HEARING

NECESSARY

IN

THE

The following:
c.
the evidence must e relevant;
( Sec. 1, Rule 130 )
d.
indecent or improper objects
should be excluded, unless the same is
necessary for ascertaining the truth;
( Brown vs. Swineford, 28 Am. Rep. 582 )
e.
repulsive objects should also be
excluded if not absolutely necessary for the
administration of justice (Knowless vs.
Crampton, 55 Conn. 366 )

WHEN IS JUDICIAL NOTICE DISCRETIONARY?

WHEN IS
NOTICE?

TO

WHAT IS THE SCOPE OB OBJECT OF EVIDENCE?

It is the best and the highest form of proof
(Gentry vs. Mominiss, 3 Dana, Ky. 382 )

JUDICIAL

WHAT IS THE PRE-REQUISITE FOR THE ADMISSION

OF THE OBJECT EVIDENCE?

During the trial, the court, on its own initiative,

or on request of the party, may announce its intention to
take judicial notice of any matter and allow the parties to
be heard thereon

The object must be first identified, which means

that it must be shown, by independent evidence, that
the object offered is the thing in dispute ( People vs.
Besold, 154 Cal. 363)

After the trial, and before judgment or on

appeal, the proper court. On its own initiative or request
of a party, may take judicial notice of any matter and
allow the parties to be heard thereon if such matter is
decisive of a material issue in the case (Sec. 3, Rule
129 )

WHAT ARE DOCUMENTS AS EVIDENCE?

IS THERE ANY NEED TO PROVE ADMISSIONS IN THE

COURT OF PROCEEDING IN COURT?

STATE THE BEST EVIDENCE RULE

Documents as evidence consists of writings or

any material containing letters, words, numbers, figures,
symbols or other modes of written expressions offered as
proof of their contents ( Sec. 2, Rule 130 )

When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a

document, no evidence shall be admissible other than
the original document itself (Sec. 3, Rule 130 )

An admission, verbal or written, made by a

party in the course of the proceedings in the same case,
does not require proof ( Sec. 4, Rule 129 )

THE RULE IS THAT, NO EVIDENCE SHALL BE

ADMISSIBLE OTHER THEN THE DOCUMENTS ITSELF,
ARE THERE EXCEPTION?

HOW MAY AN ADMISSION BE CONTRADICTED?

Through admission may be contradicted only by
showing that it was made through palpable mistake or
that no such admission was made ( Sec. 4, Rule 129 )

Yes, in the following cases:

a. when the original has been lost or destroy, or
cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the
part of the offeror;
b. when the original is in the custody or under
the control of the party against whom the evidence is
offered, and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable
notice;
c. when the original consists of numerous
accounts or other documents which cannot be examined
in court without great loss of time and fact sought to be
established from them is only the general result of the
whole; and
d. when the original is a public record in the
custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office
( Sec. 3, Rule 130 )

WHAT ARE THE OBJECTS AS EVIDENCE?

Objects as evidenced are those addressed to
the senses of the court. When an object is relevant to the
fact in issue, it mat be exhibited to, examined or viewed
by the court ( Sec. 1, Rule 130 )
WHAT IS THE PRO BATIVE VALUE OF OBJECT AS
EVIDENCE?
Proof which is addressed directly to the senses
of the court is a most convincing and satisfactory class of
proof (Martin, p. 57 citing 20 Am. Jur.) object evidence is
usually the most trustworthy type of evidence (Martin,
citing Gilbert Law Summaries on Evidence, p. 1)

WHAT
ARE
DOCUMENT?

CONSIDERED

ORIGINALS

OF

The following:
a. the original of a document is one of the
contents of which are the subject of inquiry
b. when a document is in two or more copies
executed at or about the same time, with identical

98

www.rkmfiles.net

contents, all such copies are equally regarded as

originals
c. when an entry is repeated in a regular course
of business, one being copied from another at or near
the time of transaction, all the entries are likewise
equally regarded as originals ( Sec. 4, Rule 130 )
HOW MAY THE ORIGINAL OF A
DESTROYED DOCUMENT BE PROVED?

LOST

A party may present evidence to modify,

explain or add to the terms of the written agreement if
he puts in issue in his pleading;
a.
an
intrinsic
ambiguity
mistake,
or
imperfection in the written agreement;
b. the failure of the written agreement to
express the true intent and agreement of the parties
thereto;
c. the validity of written agreement;
d. the existence of other terms agreed to by the
parties or their successors in interest after the execution
of the written agreement

OR

When the original document has been lost or

destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, the offeror,
upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause of
its unavailability without bad faith on its part, may prove
its contents by a copy or by a recital of its contents in
some authentic documents, or by the testimony of
witness in the order stated ( Sec. 5, Rule 130 )

The term agreement includes wills (Sec. 9,

Rule 130 )
HOW SHALL THE
INTERPRETED?

WHEN MAY SECONDARY EVIDENCE BE SHOWN IF

THE ORIGINAL OF A DOCUMENT IS IN THE
POCESSION OF THE ADVERSE PARTY?

LANGUAGE

OF

WRITING

BE

The language of writing is to be interpreted

according to the legal meaning; it bears in the place of
execution, unless the parties intended otherwise (Sec.
10, Rule 130)

If the document is in the custody or under the

control of the adverse party he must have a reasonable
notice to produce it. If after such notice and after
satisfactory proof of its existence, he fails to produce
that document secondary evidence may be presented as
in the case of its lost ( Sec. 6, Rule 130 )

GIVE SOME RULES IN THE INTERPRETATION OF

DOCUMENTS
1. In the construction of an instrument where
there are several provision of particulars,
such a construction is, if possible, to be
adopted as will give effect to all ( Sec. 11,
Rule 130 )
2. In the construction of an instrument, the
intention of the parties is to be pursued and
when a general and a particular provision
are inconsistent, the latter is paramount to
the former. So a particular intent will
control a general one that is inconsistent
with it (Sec.12, Rule 130)
3. For the proper construction of an
instrument, the circumstances under which
it was made, including the situation of the
subject thereof and of the parties to it, may
be shown, so that the judge may be place
in the position of those whose language he
is to interpret ( Sec. 13, Rule 130 )
4. The terms of writing are presumed to have
been used in their primary and general
acceptation, but evidence is admissible to
show that they have local, technical, or
otherwise peculiar signification, and were
so used and understood in the particular
instance, in which case the agreement
must be constructed accordingly ( Sec. 14,
Rule 130 )
5. When an instrument consists partly of
written words and partly of a printed form,
and the two are inconsistent, the former
controls the latter ( Sec. 15, Rule 130 )
6. When the character in which the
instruments are difficult to be deciphered,
or the language is not understood by the
court, the evidence of persons skilled in
deciphering
the
character,
or
who
understand the language is admissible to
declare the characters or the meaning of
the language ( Sec. 16, Rule 130 )
7. When the terms of an agreement have
been intended in a different sense by the
different parties to it, that sense is to
prevail against either party in which he

HOW MAY A PUBLIC DOCUMENT BE PROVED?

When the original of a document is in the
custody of a public officer and is recorded in a public
office, its contents may be proved by a certified copy
issued by the public office in custody thereof ( Sec. 7,
Rule 130 )
IS THE PARTY WHO CALLS FOR THE PRODUCTION
OF A DOCUMENT BOUND TO OFFER IT IN
EVIDENCE?
No. A party who calls for the production of a
document and inspects the same is not obliged to offer it
as evidence
WHAT IS PAROL EVIDENCE?
Parol evidence literally means oral or verbal
testimony of a witness ( Ballentines Law Dict.., 2 nd Ed.,
p. 932 ) However, in the application of the rule, it has
been extended to writings other than the complete
written agreement of the parties ( Phil. Sugar Estates
Dev. Co. vs. Govt of P.I. 247 U.S. 385; Woodhous vs.
Halili, 93 Phil. 526 ) Another term for parol evidence is
intrinsic evidence or evidence aliunde ( Uy Coque vs.
Sioca, 43 Phil. 405 )
STATE THE RULE WHEN THE TERMS OF AGREEMENT
ARE PUT TO WRITING
When the terms of an agreement have been
reduced to writing, it is considered as containing all the
terms agreed upon and there can be, between the
parties and their successors in interest, no evidence of
such terms other than the contents of the written
agreement ( Sec. 9, Rule 130 )
UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES MAY A PARTY
PRESENT EVIDENCE TO MODIFY, EXPLAIN OR ADD
TO THE TERMS OF THE WRITTEN EVIDENCE?

99

www.rkmfiles.net

supposed the other understood it, and

when different constructions of a provision
are otherwise equally proper, that is to be
taken which the most favorable to the party
in whose favor the provision was made
( Sec. 17, Rule 130 )
8. When an instrument is equally susceptible
of two interpretations, one in favor of
natural right and the other against it, the
former is to be adopted ( Sec. 18, Rule
130 )
9. An instrument may be construed according
to usage, in order to determine its true
character ( Sec. 19, Rule 130 )

IS THE INTOXICATED
TESTIFY?

TO

IS A PERSON UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF OPIUM OR

OTHER DRUGS, COMPETENT TO TESTIFY?
If the witness at the time of his examination, is
so intoxicated by opium or other drugs that he is
deprived of his mental powers to such a degree as to be
capable of making known his perceptions, he is
disqualified from testifying. Otherwise, he is competent

All persons who can perceive, and perceiving

can make known their perception to others, may be
witnesses
Neither religious or political belief, interest in
the outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime unless
otherwise provided by law, shall not be a ground for
disqualification.(Sec. 20, Rule 130 )

HOW CAN THE COMPETENCY OF AN INFANT BE

DETERMINED?

WHO MAY NOT BE A WITNESS BY REASON OF

MENTAL INCAPACITY OR IMMATURITY?

It is a doctrine laid down in modern decisions

that the test of an infants competency to testify is his
capacity to receive just impressions truly. If he possesses
the necessary mental capacity to that effect and
comprehends the obligation of an oath, he is a
competent witness (Moran, Ibid., p. 579 citing Wheeler
vs. U.S. 523)

The following persons cannot be witnesses:

a. those whose mental condition, at the time of
there production for examination, is such that they are
incapable of intelligently making known their perception
to others; and
b. children whose mental maturity is such to
render them incapable of perceiving the facts respecting
which they are examined and of relating them truthfully (
sec. 21, rule 130 )

WHO ARE DISQUALIFIED

REASON OF MARRIAGE?

TO

BE

WITNESS

BY

During their marriage, neither the husband nor

the wife may testify for or against the other without the
consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil case by
one against the other or the latters direct descendants
or ascendants ( Sec. 22, Rule 130 )

WHEN ARE INSANE PERSONS ICOMPETENT TO

TESTIFY?
What renders insane persons incompetent to
testify is their insanity at the time of their production
Insanity at the time of the occurrence on which as
witness is called upon to testify merely affects his
credibility, not his competency ( Moran, Remedial Law
Reviewer, p. 578 )
DISQUALIFIES

COMPETENT

Drunkenness does not pursue disqualify a

witness from testifying. The port of Pennsylvania said on
this matter: The point of inquiry is the moment of
examination. Is the witness then offered so besotted in
his understanding as to be deprived of his intelligence? If
he is, excluded him; even if he be a hard drinker or
habitual drunkard yet, if at that time, he is sober, and
possessed of a sound mind, he is to be perceived.
(Gebhar vs. Shindle, 15 Serg. & R. (Pa 283)

WHO ARE COMPETENT TO BE WITNESSES?

WHAT DEGREE OF INSANITY

PERSON FROM TESTIFYING?

PERSON

WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE RULE

FORBIDDING ONE SPOUSE TO TESTIFY FOR OR
AGAINST THE OTHER?
The rule forbidding one spouse to testify or
against the other is based on principles which are
deemed important to preserve the marriage relation as
one of full confidence and affection, and that this is
regarded as more important in public welfare than that
the exigencies of the lawsuits should authorize domestic
peace to be disregarded for the sake of ferreting out
some fact within the knowledge of strangers ( U.S. vs.
Concepcion, 31 Phil 182 )

A person is incompetent to testify if he is insane

to such degree as to be incapable of perceiving and
making known his perception to others. (Moran, ibid., p.
578 citing State v. Meyers, 46 Nebr. 152)

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF THE RULE

OF FORBIDDING ONE SPOUSE TO TESTIFY FOR OR
AGAINST THE OTHER?

IS A DEAF AND DUMB PERSON COMPETENT TO

TESTIFY?

There are three:

a. that the spouse for or against whom the
testimony of the other is offered, is a party to the case;
b. that the spouse are legally married; and
c. that the case is not by one against the other (
Moran, Remedial Law Reviewer, p. 584 )

A deaf and dumb person may testify in any

manner satisfactory to the court, as by writing or signs
through an interpreter. (People vs. De Leon 50 Phil. 539)
If he testifies by signs, there must be an interpreter with
whom he may have an understanding by such means
(Territory vs. Duran 3 N.M. 189) Otherwise he cannot
testify (People vs. Bustos, 51 Phil. 385)

IN ONE CASE, THE DEFENDANT, WHO WAS

ACCUSEDOF KILLING HIS SON TESTIFIED IN HIS
OWN BEHALF DID NOT LIMIT HIMSELF TO DENYING
THAT HE WAS A KILLER BUT WENT FURTHER AND

100

www.rkmfiles.net

IMPUTED THE CRIME TO HIS WIFE. MAY THE WIFE

BE ALLOWED TO TESTIFY IN REBUTTAL AGAINST
THE HUSBANDS CONSENT?

by client to him, or his advice given thereon in the

course of, or with a view to, professional employment,
nor can an attorneys secretary, stenographer, or clerk
be examined, without the consent of the client and his
employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which
has been acquired in such capacity;

Yes. In giving such testimony, the husband

must, in all fairness, be held to have intended all its
natural and necessary consequences. By his said act, the
husband himself exercising the very right which he
would deny to his wife upon the ground of their marital
relations must be taken to have waived all objections to
the latters testimony upon rebuttal, even considering
that such object would have been available at the outset.
(People vs. Francisco, 78 Phil 694)

c. A person authorized to practice medicine,

surgery or obstetrics cannot in a civil case, without the
consent of the patient, be examined as to any advice or
treatment given by him or any information which he may
have acquired in attending such patient in a professional
capacity, which information was necessary to enable him
to act in that capacity, and which would blacken the
reputation of the patient.
d. A minister or priest cannot, without the
consent of the person making the confession made to or
any advice given by him in his professional character in
the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which
the minister or priest belongs;

WHO ARE QUALIFIED TO BE WITNESS BY REASON

OF DEATH OR INSANITY OF ADVERSE PARTY?
Parties or assignors of parties to a case, or
persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted, against an
executor or administrator or other representative of a
deceased person, or against a person of unsound mind,
upon a claim or demand against the estate of such
deceased person or against such person of unsound
mind, cannot testify as to any matter of fact occurring
before the death of such diseased person or before such
person became of unsound mind. (Sec. 23, Rule 130)

e. A public officer cannot be examined during

his term of office or afterwards, as to communications
made to him in official confidence, when the courts find
that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.
(Sec., Rule 130)
GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE RULE ON MARITAL
COMMUNICATIONS

WHO MAY NOT BE A WITNESS AS TO MATTERS

LEARNED IN CONFIDENCE?

a. The spouses are legally married;

b. The communication, oral or written, is made
during the marriage;.
c. The communication is confidential. (Nuevas,
Ibid., p. 559)

The following persons cannot testify as to

matters learned in confidence in the following cases:
a. the husband or the wife, during or after the
marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of
the other as to any communication receive in confidence
by one from the other during the marriage except in a
civil case by one against the other, or in the criminal
case for a crime committed by one against the other or
the latters direct descendants or ascendants;
b. an attorney cannot, without the consent of
his client, be examined as to any communication made
by the client to him, or his advice given thereon in the
course of, or with a view to, professional employment,
nor can an attorneys secretary, stenographer, or clerk
be examined, without the consent of the client and his
employer, concerning any fact the knowledge of which
has been acquiring in such capacity;
c. a person authorized to practice medicine,
surgery or obstetrics.

WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVELEGE?

The reason is to preserve the peace of families
and maintain the sacred institution of marriage. (Nuevas,
Ibid., p. 559 citing Mever svs. State, 40 Fla. 216).
MAY THE PRIVILEGE BE WAIVED AND IF SO, HOW AND BY
WHOM?
The privilege is claimable by the spouse not
called as a witness, so that it is waivable only by him or
her; and it is waivable by any act of such spouse which
might be considered as an express or implied consent to
the disclosure of the communication. (Neuvas, Ibid.,
citing People vs. Hayes, 140 N.Y. 484).

WHO MAY NOT BE A WITNESS AS TO MATTERS

LEARNED IN CONFIDENCE?

GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF ATTORNEY

AND CLIENT

The following persons cannot testify as to

matters learned in confidence in the following cases:

The following:
a) There must be a relation of attorney and
client;
b) There must be a communication by the
client to the attorney, or advice thereon
given by the latter to the former;
c) The communication or advice must have
been given confidentially;
d) The communication must have been made
in the course of professional employment.

a. The husband of the wife, during or after the

marriage, cannot be examined without the consent of
the other as to any communication received in
confidence by one from the other during the marriage
except in a civil case by one against the other, or in
criminal case for a crime committed by one against the
other or the latters direct descendants or ascendants;
b. An attorney cannot, without the consent of
his client, be examined as to any communication made

WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVILEGE?

101

www.rkmfiles.net

The reason is to promote the confidence of the

people in attorneys for their work is essential to the
administration of justice and to encourage the freedom
of consultation of lawyers for clients. (Nuevas, Ibid., p.
561 citing Fosters vs. Hall, 12 Pick 89; Alexander vs. U.S.,
138 U.S. 353)

WHEN IS THERE PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYMENT OF

A PHYSICIAN?
There is such employment of a physician when
he is called for the purpose of treatment, whether
curative, preventive or palliative. (Smart vs. Kansas City,
208 Mo. 162) There is no professional employment when
a physician is consulted for an unlawful purpose, like the
procuring of an abortion. (Nuevas, Ibd., p. 563 citing
Seifert vs. State, 67 N.E. 100)

MAY THE LAWYER BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY ON

COMMUNICATIOS MADE TO HIM AS TO A FUTURE
CRIME OR WRONG? WHY?
YES, because those communications are not
covered by the privilege for the reason that a lawyer is
not supposed to be consulted on a future crime or wrong.
(Matthews vs. Hoaglang, 21 Atl. 1054)

WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THIS PRIVILEGE?

The privilege applies not only to the testimony
of the physician on the stand, but also to affidavits,
certificates, prescription, and hospital records. (Krap vs.
Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 143 Mich. 309)

MAY A LAWYER BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY ON

COMMUNICATIONS MADE TO HIM AS TO A PAST
CRIME OR WRONG? WHY?

GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF

PRIEST AND PENITENT.

NO, for those communications are protect by

the privilege. (Alexander vs. U.S., 138 U.S. 353)

The following:

WHAT IS THE DURATION OF THIS PRIVILEGE?

a) There must be a priest and a penitent;

b) There must be a confession;
c) The confession must have been given to the
priest in his professional capacity; and
d) The confession must have been made in the
course of discipline enjoined by the church
to which the penitent belongs.

Its duration is forever. (Carter vs. West, 93 Ky.

211)
GIVE THE EXCEPTION TO THE APPLICATION OF THIS
PRIVILEGE AND REASON THEREFOR.
This privilege does not apply to an action filed
by the lawyer against his client, and this exception is for
the protection of the lawyer. (Hunt vs. Blackburn, 128
U.S. 464)
GIVE THE REQUISITES OF
PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT.

THE

PRIVILEGE

WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE PRIVILEGE?

The reason is to preserve the sanctity of the
confessional institution. (Peoples vs. Philipps, 1 West L.J.
109)

OF

GIVE THE REQUISITES OF THE PRIVILEGE OF A

PUBLIC OFFICER.

The following:
a)
b)
c)

d)

The following:

That the privilege is claimed in a civil case;

That the person against whom the privilege
is claimed, is one duly authorized to
practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics;
That such person acquired the information
while he was attending the patient in his
professional capacity, which information
was necessary to enable him to act in that
capacity; and
That the information was confidential, and
if disclosed, shall tend to blacken the
character of the patient.

a)There must be a confidential official

communication;
b)The communication must have been made to
a public officer; and
c) The disclosure of the communication would
affect public interest.
WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THEPRIVILEGE?
The privilege is intended not for the protection
of public officers, but for the protection of public interest.
(Morn, Ibid., p. 599 citing Vogel vs. Gruaz, 110 U.S. 311)

IS THE PRIVILEGE OF COMUNICATIONS BETWEEN

PHYSICIAN AND PATIENT APPLICABLE IN CRIMINAL
CASES?

WHAT IS THE DURATION OF THE PRIVILEGE?

The public officer is privileged not to testify to
official secrets, not only during his term of office, but also
afterwards. The law, therefore, intends that secrecy be
permanent. (Moran, Ibid., p. 509)

In criminal cases, the privilege does not apply.

WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS PRIVILEGE?
The reason is to facilitate and make safe, full
and confidential disclosure by patient to physician of all
symptoms, untrammeled by apprehension of their
subsequent and enforced disclosure and publication on
the witness stand. (Nuevas, Ibid., 562 citing Will of
Bruendl, 102 Wis. 47)

IS A DESCENDANT DISQUALIFIED TO TESTIFY, IN A

CRIMINAL CASE, AGAINST HIS PARENTS OR HIS
ASCENDANTS?
A descendant is not disqualified to testify
against his parents and descendants. The rules provides
that No person may be compelled to testify against his

102

www.rkmfiles.net

parents, other direct ascendants, children or other direct

descendants. (Sec. 25, Rule 130)

The act, declaration or omission of a party as to

a relevant fact may be given in evidence against him.
(Sec. 26, Rule 130)

It made in a civil case, it is not an admission

that anything is due and, therefore, not admissible in
evidence. (Obejera vs. Iga Sy, 76 Phil. 580)
If made in a criminal case, it is an implied
admission of guilt and, therefore, admissible in evidence,
unless those involving quasi-offense(criminal negligence)
or those allowed by laws to be compromised. (Sec. 27,
Rule 130).

AGAINST WHOM ARE ADMISSION RECEIVABLE?

DEFINE COMPROMISE

Admissions are receivable against the party who

made them, but not in his favor, because then they
would be self-serving evidence (5 Moran, Comments, p.
212, 1963 Ed.)

A compromise is a contract whereby the parties,

by making reciprocal concessions, avoid a litigation or
put an end tone already commenced. (Art. 2028, Civil
Code of the Philippines)

DEFINE SELF-SERVING EVIDENCE AND STATE IF IT

IS ADMISSIBLE. WHY?

WHAT CONSTITUTE AN OFFER OF COMPROMISE?

WHAT IS AN ADMISSION?

It is often difficult to determine in a particular

case what amounts to an ordinary admission and what
constitutes an offer of compromise. The intention of the
parties must be the guide in each case. If the proposal is
tentative, and any statement made in connection with it
is hypothetical if the offer was made to buy peace
and in contemplation of mutual concessions, it is as to
such point a mere offer of compromise. On the other
hand, if the intention is apparently a liability recognized
as such, the proposal is an ordinary admission. (Martin,
Revised Rules on Evidence, 1985 Ed., p. 220 citing 31- A
C.J.S. 728-729)

Self-serving evidence is an admission favorable

to the party making it. (Lichauco vs. Atlantic Gulf, etc.,
84 Phil. 330). It is not admissible in evidence because of
its hearsay character, and for the further reason that a
man may be safely believed if he declares against his
own interest, but not if he advocates his interest.
(Lichauco vs. Atlantic Gulf, etc., supra).
CLASSIFY ADMISSIONS
Admissions are generally divided into two classes:
1.
2.

Judicial or those made on the record, or in

connection with the judicial proceeding in
which it is offered;
Extra-judicial, or those made elsewhere,
irrespective of time, place, or to whom
made. (Martin, Revised Rules on Evidence,
p. 209 citing The Chamberlayne Trial
Evidence, p. 42)

STATE THE RULE OF RES INTER ALIOS ACTA AND

THE EXCEPTIONS.
The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an
act, declaration, or omission of another (Sec. 28, Rule
130) except when between the party making the
admission and the party against whom the admission is
offered, the relation of (a) partnership, (b) agency, (c)
joint interest, (d) conspiracy or (e) privity exists. (Secs.
29 to 33, Rule 130).

DISTINGUISH ADMISSION FROM A CONFESSION

Admission operates equally in both civil and
criminal cases and with the same effect, while confession
is
an admission by the person accused of having
committed the act of which he is accused. It pertakes
largely of the nature of an offer to compromise with the
criminal authorities. (Martin, Ibid., p 210 citing The
Chamberlayen Trial Evidence, p. 441).

GIVE THE REASON FOR THE RULE OF RES INTER

ALIOS ACTA
On the principle good faith and mutual
convenience, a mans acts, conduct and declarations are
binding upon him and, therefore, evidence, against him.
Yet, it does not only seem inconvenient, but also
manifestly, unjust, that a man should be bound by the
acts of strangers, neither can their acts or conduct be
used as evidence against him. (Nuevas, Ibid, p. 568
citing Stack on Evidence, 35d., pp. 58-59)

STATE THE RULE ON OFFER OF COMPROMISE.

In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an
admission of any liability, and is not admissible in
evidence against the offeror.
In criminal cases, except those involving quasioffenses (criminal negligence) or those allowed by law to
be compromised, an offer of compromise by the accused
may be received in evidence as an implied admission of
guilt.
A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or an
unaccepted offer of a lea of guilty to a lesser offense, is
not admissible in evidence against the accused who
made the plea or offer. (Sec. 27, Rule 130).

WHEN MAY THE ACT OR DECLARATION OF COPARTNER OR AGENT BE ADMISSIBLE AS EVIDENCE

AGAINST HIS PRINCIPAL?
The act or declaration of a partner or agent of
the party within the scoop of his authority and during the
existence of the partnership or agency, may be given in
evidence of the partnership or agency, against such
party after the partnership or agency is shown by
evidence other than such act or declaration. The same
rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint owner,
joint debtor, or other person jointly interested with the
party. (Sec. 29, Rule 130).

GIVE THE EFFECTS OF AN OFFER TO COMPROMISE.

It depends on whether the offer is made in a
civil or criminal case.

WHEN MAY AN ADMISSION OF A PARTNER BE

RECEIVED IN EVIDENCE AGAINST HIS CO-PARTNER?

103

www.rkmfiles.net

When the following requisites occur:

1. The partnership must be established by
independent evidence;
2. The statement refers to a matter within the
scope of the partnership; and
3. The statement was made during the
existence of the partnership. (Sec. 29, Rule
130).

naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and

when proper and possible for him to do so, may be given
in evidence against him. (Sec. 32, Rule 130). This rule
applies to both civil and criminal cases. The reason is
the recognized rule that if a man remains silent when he
ought to speak, he will be debarred from speaking later.
Qui tacet consentire videtur or silent means consent.
(Gabriel vs. Baens, 56 Phil. 314)

WHEN MAY THE ADMISSION OF AN AGENT BE

RECEIVED IN EVIDENCE AGAINST HIS PRINCIPAL?

The exceptions to this rule are the following:

1.

When the following requisites concur:

1. The agency must be established by
independent evidence;
2. The statement refers to a matter within the
scope of the agency; and
3. The statement was made during the
existence of the agency. (Nuevas, Ibid., p.
569 citing Hitchman Coal etc. vs. Mithcell,
245 U.S. 229)

2.
3.

STATE THE RULE ON ADMISSION BY

CONSPIRACTOR?

Where no good reason exists for the party to

comment on the act or declaration as when the
act or declaration was not specifically directed
to the party who remained silent (80 A.L.R.,
Anno., 1272)
When the party had no opportunity to comment
on the act or declaration; (People vs. Ranario,
49 Phil. 220)
Where the act or declaration was made in the
course of an official investigation; (U.S. vs Dela
Cruz 12 Phil. 87)

WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THE RULE ON ADMISSION

BY SILENCE?

The act or declaration of a conspiractor relating

to the conspiracy and during its existence, may be given
in evidence against the co-conspirator after the
conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act or
declaration. (Sec. 30, Rule 130).

The basis of such rule is that the natural

reaction of one accused of the commission of a crime or
of the implication therein is to deny the accusation if it is
unjust or unfounded.
(Martin, Revised Rules on
Evidence, p. 252 citing Mathews vs. State, 55 Ala, 187,
28 Ann. Rep. 698)

WHEN IS THE ADMISSION OF A CONSPIRACTOR

RECEIVABLE IN EVIDENCE AGAINST HIS COCONSPIRACTOR?

DEFINE CONFESSION

When the following requisites concur:

a)
The conspiracy must be established by
independent evidence;
b)
The statement refers to the purpose or
object of the conspiracy: and
c)
The statement was made during the
existence of the conspiracy. (Sec. 30, Rule
130); People vs. Dacanay, 92 Phil. 873)

The declaration of an accused acknowledging

his guilt of the offense charged or of any offence
necessarily included therein, may be given in evidence
against him. (Sec. 33, Rule 130).
DISTINGUISH CONFESSION FROM ADMISSION
A confession as distinguished from an admission
is a declaration made at any time by a person
voluntarily, without compulsion or inducement, stating or
acknowledging that he has committed or participated in
the commission of a crime. The term admission on the
other hand is usually applied in criminal cases to
statements of fact by the accused which do not directly
involve an acknowledgement of the guilt of the accused
or of criminal intent to commit the offense with which he
is charged. (U.S. vs. Corraled, 28 Phil. 362; U.S. vs.
Razon & Tayag, 37 Phil. 856)

This rule refers to extrajudicial acts and

declarations of a conspiractor, and not to his testimony
as a witness at the trial. (People vs. Dacanay, supra).
GIVE THE RULE ON ADMISSION BY PRIVIES.
Where one derives title to property from
another, the act, declaration, or omission of the latter,
while holding the title, in relation to the property, is
evidence against the former. (Sec. 31, rule 130).

CLASSIFY CONFESSIONA AND DEFINE EACH

DEFINE PRIVIES.

A confession may be judicial or extra-judicial. A

judicial confessions is that made in the trial court in the
due course of legal proceedings, whereas an extrajudicial confession is that made elsewhere, either in a
prior trial, in the preliminary investigation, or out of court
to any person. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 571 citing Underhill on
Criminal Evidence, p. 241).

The word privies denotes not only the idea of

succession in right of heirship or testamentary legacy,
but also succession by virtue of acts intervivos, as by
assignment, subrogation, or purchase in fact any act
whereby the successor is substituted in the place of the
predecessor in interest. (Alpuerto vs. Pastor & Roa, 38
Phil. 785).

WHEN IS A CONFESSION ADMISSIBLE?

GIVE THE RULE ON ADMISSION BY SILENCE, THE

REASON THEREFORE, AND THE EXCEPTION, IS ANY.

A confession is admissible when it is voluntary.

(People vs. Pulido, 85 Phil. 695)

An act or declaration made in the presence and

within the hearing or observation of a party who does or
say nothing when the act or declaration is such as

WHEN MAY A CONFESSION BE REJECTED? WHY?

104

www.rkmfiles.net

A confession may be rejected when the

following requisites concur:
1.
2.
3.

e)

The confession is involuntary; and

The confession is false (People vs.
Villanueva, 98 Phi. 327; People vs. De Los
Santos, 93 Phil. 83)
The reason for the rule is that what the law
abhors is compelling an accused, by means
of force, violence, or intimidation, to tell a
falsehood, and not compelling him by the
same means to tell the truth. (People vs.
Prias, L-13767, July 30, 1960) So that, even
if a confession is involuntary, if it is proved
or turns out to be true, the same is
admissible. (Ibid).

f)

WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF AN EXTRA JUDICIAL

CONFESSION OF A THIRD PERSON TENDING TO
EXCULPATE AN ACUSED?
Unless such confession can be considered as
part of the res gestae, it cannot be received in favor of
the accused for the reason that the same is hearsay.
(People vs. Catalino, L-25403, March 15, 1968) Besides,
the court before which said extra-judicial confession is
offered has ample power to determine its credibility, and
the court may discard the same if it finds the confession
in inherently improbable. (Ibid)

IN
ORDER
TO
RENDER
A
CONFESSION
INVOLUNTARY ON THE GROUND OF FORCE AND
VIOLENCE, IS IT REQUIRED THAT IT BE DIRECTLY
EMPLOYED UPON THE PERSON OF THE ACCUSED?
WHY?
No, because it is enough that the force or
violence were employed upon the person of his coaccused, in his presence and within his observation, such
that he had reasonable grounds to believe that he would
suffer the same maltreatment. (U.S. vs. Baluyot, 1 Phil.
451)

WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF A

CONFESSION?
It depends on whether the confession is judicial
or extrajudicial.
A judicial confession, like a plea of guilty, is in
law and in fact evidence of guilt of the most trustworthy
kind, is conclusive upon the court and is sufficient to
sustain a judgment of conviction. (People vs. Lastimoso,
83 Phil. 714)
A extrajudicial confession is not sufficient for
conviction unless corroborated by evidence of corpus
delicti. (People vs. Mananla, L 13142, Jan. 30, 1959)

WHEN IS THREAT SUFFICIENT TORENDER A

CONFESSION INVOLUNTARY?
It must be a threat of bodily harm or injury and
accompanied by overt acts showing determination to
carry out the threat. (People vs. Cabrera, 82 Phil 839).
WHEN IS A PROMISE OF REWARD OR LENIENCY
SUFFICIENT TO RENDER A CONFESSION
INVOLUNTARY?

STATE THE RULE ON SIMILAR ACTS AS EVIDENCE

It must be a promise of immunity from or

leniency in the criminal prosecution and made by a
person who is in a position to grant the same. (People
vs. Hernandez, 91 Phil. 334)

Evidence that one did or did not do a certain

thing at one time is not admissible to prove that he did
or did not do the same or a similar thing at another time;
but it may be received to prove a specific intent or
knowledge,
identity, plan, system, scheme, habit,
custom or usage, and the like. (Section 34, Rule 130).

AGAINST WHOM IS A CONFESSION ADMISSIBLE?

WHY? GIVE THE EXCEPTIONS, IF ANY.

WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE RULE ON SIMILAR

ACTS AS EVIDENCE?

A confession is admissible only against the

accused who made it and not against his co-accused,
for, as against the latter, the confession would be
hearsay and res inter alios acta (People vs. Talledo, 85
Phil. 533)

To admit the proof of crimes other that the

particular one with the accused is charged would be
unfair to the accused. It will compel the defendant to
meet the charges of which the indictment gives him no
information, confuses him in his defense, raises a variety
of issue, and thus diverts the attention of the court from
the charge immediately before it. In fact it would be
allowing evidence of collateral offenses as substantive
evidence of the offense on trial (Martin, Revised Rules on
Evidence, p. 290 citing 20 Am. Jur. 288-289

The exceptions to this rule are the following:

a)
b)
c)

d)

evidence, each confession is admissible against

the others; (People vs. Go, 88 Phil. 203)
The confession of a conspirator is admissible
against his co-conspirators provided it was
made during the existence of the conspiracy;
(People vs. Ramirez, L-5875), May 15, 1953)
When the recitals in the extra judicial confession
of an accused are corroborated in its important
details by other proofs in the record, it may be
admitted against the other accused. (People vs.
Villanueva, L12687, July 31, 1962)

When the confession of an accused implicating

his co-accused is made judicially at a joint trial;
(U.S. vs. Macamay, 36 Phil 893)
When the offer in evidence of an extra judicial
confession against a co-accused is not objected
to; (People vs. Atienza, 83 Phil 576)
When the co-accused against whom an extrajudicial confession is offered had, by his acts,
conduct
and
declarations,
adopted
the
confession as his own; (People vs. Atienza,
supra)
Where several accused, without collusion, made
extra judicial confessions which are identical in
essential details and corroborated by other

GIVE THE RULE ONUNACEPTED OFFER.

An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of
money to deliver a written instrument or specific
personal property is, if rejected without valid cause,
equivalent to the actual production and tender of the
money, instrument, or property. (Sec. 35, Rule 130)

105

www.rkmfiles.net

IN GENERAL, TO WHAT FACTS MAY A WITNESS

TESTIFY?

c)

A witness can testify only to those facts which

he knows of his personal knowledge; that is, which are
derived from his own perception, exception as otherwise
provided in these rules. (Sec. 36, Rule 130)

WHAT IS A DYING DECLARATION?

A dying declaration is that made by a person at
the point of death, concerning the case and
circumstances of the injury from which he thereafter
dies. (Moran, Remedial Law Review, p. 619)

WHAT IS HEARSAY EVIDENCE?

Hearsay evidence is that which derives its
value, not solely from the credit to be given to the
witness upon the stand, but in part from the veracity and
competency of some other person. (Clement vs. Packer,
125 U.S. 309) It is not limited to oral testimony; it also
includes writings. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 576 citing 20 Am.
Jur. 400)?

WHY IS A DYING DECLARATIN ADMISSIBLE?

DISCUSS BRIEFLY.
A dying declaration is admissible on two
grounds, namely, (a) necessity and (b) trustworthiness.
Necessity, because the declarantss death makes it
impossible to obtain his testimony is the best evidence of
the crime. (U.S. vs. Virrey, 37 Phil. 618) Trustworthiness,
because it is made at the point of death, a situation so
solemn and awful as creating an obligation equal to that
created by a positive oath administered in a court of
justice. (U.S. vs. Gil, 13 Phil. 530)

IS HEARSAY EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE? WHY?

Hearsay evidence is not admissible because it
knows of his own knowledge a witness can testify only on
facts which he knows of his own knowledge (Sec. 36, rule
130); and, furthermore, to preserve the right of parties ot
cross-examine the original witness or person claiming to
have knowledge of the transaction or occurrence.
(People vs. Pagkaliwagan, 76 Phil. 457) The right to
cross-examine the adverse partys witnesses is essential
in the administration of justice for it is the only means of
testing the credibility of witnesses and their testimony,
and this right is not available in respect of hearsay
evidence since the declarant is not in court. (Nuevas,
Ibid., p. 576 citing Donnelly vs. United States, 228 U.S.
243)

WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF A DYING

DECLARATION?
It must be received with utmost care and given
the same weight as the testimony of a living witness.
(People vs. Almendralejo, 48 Phil. 268)
IS IT NECESSARY THAT THE DECLARANT STATE
EXPLICITY THAT HE HAD GIVEN HOE OF LIVING?

GIVE THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE.

The following:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
k)

No. it is not necessary to the validity or

admissibility of a declaration that the declarant expressly
state that he has lost all hope of recovery; it is sufficient
that the circumstances are such to lead inevitably to the
conclusion that at the time the declaration was made,
the declarant did not expect to survive the injury from
which he actually died. (Peole vs. Serrano, 58 Phil. 669)

Dying declaration;
Declaration against interest;
Act or declaration about pedigree;
Family reputation or tradition regarding
pedigree;
Common reputation;
Part of the res gestae;
Entries in the course of business;
Entries in official records;
Commercial lists and the like;
Learned treatises; and
Testimony or disposition at a former proceeding.

IS THE INSTANTEOUS DEATH OF DECLARANT

SHOULD FOLLOW IMEDIATELY AFTER MAKING HIS
DYING DECLARATION?
No. The force of dying declaration is not
affected by the circumstances that the declarant did not
die until many hours or days afterwards provided he
finally did die from the wound, whose gravity did not
diminish from the time he made his declaration until the
hour of his death. (Ruperto Martin, Revised Rules on
Evidence, Vol. IV, Premium Book Store, 1989 Ed., pp.
311-312 citing Moore vs. State, 96 Ten. 209 and U.S. vs.
Mallari, 29 Phil. 14)

GIVE THE RULE ON DYING DECLARATION

The declaration of a dying person, made under
the consciousness of an impending death, may be
received in any case wherein his death is the subject of
inquiry, as evidence of the cause and surrounding
circumstances of such death. (Sec. 37, Rule 130, Revised
Rules on Evidence)

WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF RECOVERY OF

DECLARANT FATAL WOUND INFLICTED UPON HIM
ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF DYING DECLARATION?

WHEN IS DYING DECLARATION ADMISSIBLE?

a)
b)

The declaration is offered in a criminal case

wherein the subject of inquiry is the declarants
death. (Sec. 37, Rule 130; People vs. Sagrario,
L-18659, June 29, 1965)

The admissibility of the dying declaration of a

deceased person with respect to the person who inflicted
the fatal injury depends upon whether at the time the
declaration was made the deceased believed that the
injury receive would be fatal. The circumstances that he
thereafter recovered sufficiently to engender the belief
that he was going to live, does not render the declaration

When the following requisites concur:

The declaration refers to the cause and
surrounding circumstances of the declarants
death;
The declaration was made under consciousness
of impending death;

106

www.rkmfiles.net

inadmissible, where death in fact resulted from the same

injury. (People vs. Lara, 54 Phil. 96).

3.
4.

IS THE OPINION CONTAINED IN A DYING

DECLARATION ADMISSIBLE?
Opinions in dying declarations are inadmissible.
Dying declarations should consist solely of facts, and not
of conclusions, mental impressions or opinions. Thus, a
dying statement that the deceased thought or believed
the accused had shot him, or that he expected the
accused would try to kill him, is inadmissible where the
deceased did not see his assailant, but based his
declaration wholly upon threats which had been made by
the accused. (Ruperto Martin, Ibid., p. 318 citing state
vs. Horn, 204, No. 528, 103 S.W. 96)

GIVE THE RULE ON ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT

PEDIGREE.

The act or declaration of a person deceased, or

unable to testify, in respect to the pedigree of another
person related to him by birth or marriage, may be
received in evidence where it occured before the
controversy, and the relationship between the two
persons is shown by evidence other than such act or
declaration. The word pedigree includes relationship,
family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the dates when
and the places where these facts occurred, and the
names of the relatives. It embraces also facts of family
history intimately connected with pedigree. (Sec. 39,
Rule 130)

EXPLAIN BRIEFLY THE MEANING OF

CONSCIOUSNESS OF AN IMPENDING DEATH.
The declarants belief must be that death was
inevitable, not merely possible, nor even probably, but
sure. In other words, the declarant, at the time he
makes his declaration, must have no hope of recovery. If
at the time he had an expectation, even only a little hope
of recovery, the declaration would be inadmissible. Fear,
or even belief, that illness end in death, if consistent with
hope, is not sufficient. There must be a settled hopeless
expectation. (Mora, Ibid., p. 621)

WHEN IS AN ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT

PEDIGREE ADMISSIBLE?
When the following requisites concur:
1.
2.
3.

GIVE THE RULE ON DECLARATION AGAINST

INTEREST.

4.

The declaration made by a person deceased, or

unable to testify, against the interest of the declarant, if
the fact asserted in the declaration was at the time it
was made so far contrary to declarants own interest,
that a reasonable man in his position would not have
made the declaration unless he believed it to be true,
may be received in evidence against himself or his
successors in interest and against third person. (Sec. 38,
Rule 130)

The declarant is related to the person whose

pedigree is in question;
Such relationship is shown by evidence other
than the act or declaration;
The act or declaration was made ante litem
motam; and
The declarant is dead or unable to testify. (Sec.
39, Rule 130)

WHY IS AN ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT

PEDIGREE ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY?
It is admissible on two grounds, namely (a)
necessity and (b) trustworthiness. Necessity, because
facts about pedigree are usually those which occurred
long before the trial and known to only a few persons,
and trustworthiness, because those facts are matters
which members of the family are presumed to be
interested in ascertaining the truth. (J.Nuevas, Ibid., p.
582 citing Fulkenson vs. Holmes, 117 U.S. 389; III
Wigmore 218; Tracys Handbook, 62 Ed., p. 259

WHY IS A DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST

ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.
It is admissible on two grounds, name, (a)
necessity, and (b) trustworthiness. Necessity, because
the declarant is dead or not available as witness, and
trustworthiness, because it is against the declarants
interest, and therefore, a guarantee of its truth. (Jaime
R. Nuevas, Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed., A & J
Publishing, p. 581 citing Fitch vs. Chapman, 10 Conn. 11;
Smith vs. Moore, 142 N.C. 277)

WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE TERM PEDIGREE?

The word pedigree includes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSIN OF

DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST?
To render a statement admissible as a
declaration against interest the following requirements
must be met:
1.
2.

The declaration must have concerned a fact

personally cognizable by declarant.
That circumstances must render it improbable
that a motive to falsify existed . (Ruperto
Martin, Ibid., p. 327 citing C.J.S. 959)

7.
8.

Declarants must be unavailable as a witness

The declaration must have related a fact
against the apparent pecuniary or proprietary or
moral interest of declarant when his statement
was made.

Relationship;
Family genealogy;
Birth;
Marriage;
Death;
Dates when the places where these facts
occurred;
Names of relatives; and
Facts of family history intimately connected with
pedigree. (Sec. 39, Rule 130)

GIVE THE RULE ON FAMILY REPUTATION OR

TRADITION REGARDING PEDIGREE.

107

www.rkmfiles.net

The reputation or tradition existing in a family

previous to the controversy, in respect to the pedigree of
any one of its members, may be received in evidence if
the witness testifying thereon be also a member of the
family, either by consanguinity or affinity. Entries in
family bibles or other family books or charts, engravings
on rings, family portraits and the like, may be received
as evidence of pedigree. (Sec. 40, rule 130)

It is not hearsay if common reputation is the

fact in issue, or part thereof. Thus, in a prosecution for
maintenance of a house of ill-fame, a gambling house, or
an opium joint, the reputation of the house itself is the
issue, so that testimony of witnesses thereto is not
hearsay. (U.S. vs. Choa Chick, 36 Phil. 831)

WHEN IS FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION

REGARDING PEDIGREE ADMISSIBLE?

Statement made by a person while a startling

occurrence is taking place or immediately prior to
subsequent thereto with respect to the circumstances
thereof, may be given in evidence as part of the res
getae. So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal
act material to the issue, and giving it a legal
significance, may be received as part of the res gestae.

GIVE THE RULE ON RES GESTAE.

When the following requisites concur:

1.
2.
3.

the reputation or tradition must refer to the

pedigree of any member of such family;
the reputation or tradition must have been
formed previous to the controversy, i.e., ante
litem motam and
the witness testifying thereto must be a
member of the familiy. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 340)

WHAT STATEMENTS MAY BE ADMISSIBLE IN

EVIDENCE AS PART OF THE RES GESTAE?

MAY FACTS OF PEDIGREE BE PROVED BY COMMON

REPUTATION?

They are of two classes:

No; fact of pedigree, if provable by reputation,

can be proved only by reputation in the family, but not
by reputation in the community, except marriage which
is provable by both family and common reputation.
(Sison vs. Amblada, 30 Phil. 118)

1.

2.

GIVE THE RULE ON COMMON REPUTATION

Common reputation existing previous to the
controversy, respecting facts of public or general interest
more than thirty years old or respecting marriage or
moral character, may be given in evidence. Monuments
and inscriptions in public places may be received as
evidence of common reputation. (Sec. 41, Rule 130)

3.

DEFINE RES GESTAE

Res gestae literally means, thing done, and
includes the circumstances, facts and declarations
incidental to the main fact or transaction necessary to
illustrate its character. It is so connected therewith as to
constitute a part of the transaction. (R. Martin, Ibid., p.
349 citing Underhills Criminal Evidence, p. 348)

WHEN IS EVIDENCE OF COMMON REPUTATION

ADMISSIBLE?
When the following requisites concur:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Spontaneous statements made by a person

while a startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequent thereto with
respect to the circumstances thereof; and
Statements accompanying an equivocal act
material to the issue, and giving it legal
significance.
The former is referred to as spontaneous
exclamations, while the latter as verbal acts.

The reputation refers to a matter of public or

general interest more than thirty (30) years old;
or to marriage or moral character;
The reputation is ancient:
The reputation was formed ante litem motam;
and
The reputation is one formed in the community
interested. (Sec. 41, Rule 130)

WHAT IS ADMISSIBLE AS PART OF THE RES

GESTAE?
What is admissible as part of the res gestae is
not the details of an occurrence, but the human
assertions or statements about those details.
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF SPONTANEOUS
STATEMENTS?

WHY IS EVIDENCE OF COMMON REPUTATION

ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.

The requisites for the admissibility of this kind

of evidence as an exception to the rule excluding
hearsay are the following:

It is admissible on two ground, namely, (a)

necessity and (b)trustworthiness. Necessity, because
the fact to be proved is of too ancient a date such that
eye-witnesses
are
no
longer
available,
and
trustworthiness, because if the reputation had existed for
so long a time, there be some truth to it. (J. Nuevas,
Ibid., p. 584 Mc Kinnon vs. Bliss, 21 N.Y. 206; Reg. vs
Bedforshire, 4E. 535)

1.
2.
3.

WHEN IS EVIDENCE OF COMMON REPUTATION

NOT HEARSAY? EXPLAIN BRIEFLY.

Statements must have been made while a

startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequently thereto;
Such statements must be spontaneous; and
Such
statements
must
relate
to
the
circumstances of the startling occurrence. (R.
Martin, Ibid., p. 350- 351 citing 32 C.J.S. and
People vs. Ricaplaza, 23 SCRA 374)

WHAT IS THE BASIS OF THE RULE ON RES GESTAE?

108

www.rkmfiles.net

The principle rests upon the common

experience
that
utterances
made
under
such
circumstances are devoid of self-interest, and are in the
same category as exclamations.
The probability of
falsehood is so remote as to be negligible. (People vs.
Gondayao, 30 SCRA 226)

may be interpreted either as licit or illicit. According to

the present rule, any statements made by the parties
during such equivocal conduct showing it to be
matrimonial, meretricious or otherwise, are admissible as
verbal acts. (Morann, Ibid., p. 636 citing Matter of Taylor,
9 Paige (N.Y.), 611)

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES OF VERBAL ACTS?

GIVE THE RULE ON ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF

BUSINESS.

The requisites of verbal acts are:

1.
2.
3.
4.

Entries made at, or near the time of the

transactions to which they refer, by a person deceased,
or unable to testify, who was in a position to known the
facts therein stated, maybe received as prima facie
evidence, if such person made the entries in h is
professional capacity or in the performance of duty and
in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty
(Sec. 43, Rule 130)

The res gestae is an equivocal act;

The equivocal act must be material to the issue;
The statement in question must be necessary
for the understanding of the equivocal act; and
The statement must accompany the equivocal
act. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p. 587 citing Tracys
Handbook, 62 Ed., p 22).

WHY ARE SPONTANEOUS EXCLAMATIONS AND

VERBAL ACTS ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.

WHEN ARE ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS

ADMISSIBLE?

They are admissible on two ground, namely, (a)

necessity and (b) trustworthiness. Necessity, because
such natural and spontaneous utterances are more
convincing than the testimony of the same person on the
stand; and trustworthiness, because those statements
are made instinctively. (Jaime Nuevas, Ibid., p. 587 citing
Mobile vs. Ascraft, 48 Ala. 31 and Wesley vs. State, 53
Ala. 182)

When the following requisites concur:

1.
2.

3.
DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A DYING DECLARATION
AND A DECLARATION AS PART OF THE RES GESTAE.
4.

If the requsites of a dying declaration do not

concur, the declaration may be admitted as part of the
res gestae. (People vs. Talledo, 85 Phil. 533)

5.

WHAT IS AN EQUIVOCAL ACT FOR THE PURPOSE OF

THE RULE ON VERBAL ACTS?

The entries must have been made at or

near the time of the transaction to which they
refer;
The person who made the entry must be,
at the time the entry is presented as evidence,
deceased, outside of the Philippines or unable
to testify;
The person who made the entry must be
in a position to know the facts there in stated at
the time he made the entries;
The entries must have been made in his
professional capacity or in the performance of
duty; and
The entries must have been made in the
ordinary or regular course of business. (Ruperto
G. Martin, Revised Rules on Evidence, vol. IV.
1989 Ed., p. 363)

An equivocal act is one susceptible of various

interpretations. (Allen vs. Duncan, 11 pick 308)

WHY ARE ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS

ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.

WHAT ARE VERBAL ACTS? ILLUSTRATE.

They are admissible on two grounds, namely, (a)

necessity, and (b trustworthiness. Necessity, because
the entrant is dead or not available as witness, and no
equally satisfactory proof of the entry can be had; and
trustworthiness, because a man who makes regular
entries for purposes of business or duty usually makes
them with accuracy. As these entries are relied upon by
businessmen everyday they can be relied upon the
courts. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p. 589 citing Welsh vs. Barret,
15 Mass. 380 and Tracys Handbook, 62 Ed., p. 276)

Verbal acts are statements accompanying an

equivocal act material to the issue and giving it legal
significance. Such declarations are called verbal acts,
because they are considered as verbal parts of the
equivocal or ambiguous acts which they explain.
For
example, when one delivers money to another, such act
does not by itself show whether the money is intended,
say as a gift or as a payment of a debt. But if the act of
delivery is accompanied by the statement that the
money is for payment of a debt, or is a birthday gift, the
statement gives legal significance to the act.

IN SHORT, TO WHAT KIND OF ENTRIES DOES THIS

RULE REFER?

MAY AN EQUIVOCAL ACT EXTEND OVER A LONG

PERIOD OF TIME? MAY THE STATEMENTS
NECESSARY FOR AN UNDERSTANDING OF SUCH
EQUIVOCAL ACT BE ADMISSIBLE AS VERBAL ACTS?

It refers to an entry made by a person whose

business or duty it was to make the entry, and which
appears to be part of a regular system of entries kept in
that establishment. (Jaime Nuevas, Ibid., p. 590 citing
ODay vs. Spencer, 189 Pac. 394; Kibbe vs. Bancraft, 77
III. 19)

The equivocal act may extend over a long

period of time, and during that period, those statements
that are necessary for an understanding of the meaning
of said equivocal act, are admissible as verbal acts. If a
man and a woman are cohabiting together and for a
certain period of time they have been appearing in
public together, there is here an equivocal conduct which

IF THE ENTRANT IS ALIVE WOULD HIS ENTRY BE

RECEIVABLE AS INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE?
No; the entrant must be presented as witness.
However, while on the stand, he can refer to his entry as

109

www.rkmfiles.net

memorandum to refresh his memory. (Cang Ui vs.

Gardner, 34 Phil. 376). But, if notwithstanding the aid of
his entry as a memorandum, the entrant cannot recollect
the facts stated therein, and then his entry is admissible
as independent evidence, provided all the other
requisites for its admissibility are present. (Shove vs.
Wiley, 18 Mass. 558)

3.

WHEN ARE THESE COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE

LIKE ADMISSIBLE?
They are admissible if published for use by
persons engaged in that occupation, and is generally
used and relied upon by them. (Sec. 45, Rule 130)

GIVE THE RULE ON OFFICIAL ENTRIES.

Entries in official records made in the
performance of h is duty by a public officer of the
Philippines, or by a person in the performance of a duty
especially enjoined bylaw, are prima facie evidence of
the facts therein stated. (Sec. 44, Rule 130)

GIVE THE RULES ON LEARNED TREATISES.

A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on
a subject of history, law, science or art is admissible as
tending to prove the truth of a matter stated therein if
the court takes judicial notice, or a witness expert in the
subject testifies, that the writer of the statement in the
treatise periodical or pamphlet is recognized in his
profession or calling as expert in the subject. (Sec. 46,
Rule 130)

WHEN ARE ENTRIS IN OFFICIAL RECORDS

ADMISSIBLE?
To render such entries admissible the following requisites
concur:
1.
2.
3.

The entry must be made by a public

officer or by another person especially enjoined
by law to do so;
It must be made by a public officer in the
performance of a duty specially enjoined by
law; and
The entrant must have personal
knowledge of the facts stated by him. (Ruperto
Martin. Ibd., p. 370 citing V. Wigmore on
Evidence, p.

WHEN ARE LEARNED TREATISES ADMISSIBLE?

They are admissible if the fact therein stated
can be judicially noticed, or if another expert testifies
that the author is a recognized expert on the subject.
(Sec. 46, Rule 130).
GIVE THE RULE ON TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT
A FORMER PROCEEDING.

WHY ARE ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS

ADMISSIBLE? DISCUSS BRIEFLY.

The testimony or deposition of a witness

deceased or unable to testify, given in a former caser of
proceeding, judicial or administrative, involving the same
parties and subject matter, may be given in evidence
against the adverse party who had the opportunity to
cross-examine him. (Sec. 47, Rule 130)

They are admissible on two grounds, namely,

(a) necessity, and (b) trustworthiness.
Necessity,
because litigations are numberless in which the
testimony of public officials is required, and
trustworthiness, because the law reposes a particular
confidence in public officials such that is presumes that
they will discharge their duties with fidelity and accuracy.
(Antillon vs. Barcelon, 37 Phil. 148)

WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES IN ORDER THAT THE

TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION OF A WITNESS AT A
FORMER PROCEEDING MAY BE ADMISSIBLE AS
EVIDENCE IN A SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDING?

WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF ENTRIES IN

OFFICIAL RECORDS?

There are five requisites:

1.

They are prima facie evidence of the fact

therein entered. (Sec. 44, Rule 130)

2.
3.
4.

GIVE THE RULE ON COMMERCIAL LISTS.

Evidence of statements of matters of interest to
persons engaged in an occupation contained in a list,
register, periodical, or other published compilation is
admissible as tending to proved the truth of any relevant
matter so stated if that compilation is published for use
by persons engaged in that occupation and is generally
used and relied upon by them therein. (Sec. 45, Rule
130).

5.

That the testimony was rendered in a

former case;
Between the same parties;
Relating to the same matter;
That the witness is dead, out of the
Philippines, or unable to testify in the
subsequent proceeding; and
That the adverse party has had an
opportunity to cross-examine the witness.
(Moran, Ibid., p. 645)

IS THE TESTIMONY GIVEN BEFORE A LEGISLATIVE

OR ADMINSITRATIVE COMMITTEE ADMISSIBLE IN A
SUBSEQUENT PROCEEDING?

WHEN ARE COMMERCIAL LIST AND THE LIKE

ADMISSIBLE?

No, because they are not judicial in character.

Besides, in legislative and administrative investigations,
the rules of evidence are not binding. (Moran, Ibid., p.
645)

When the following requisites concur:

1.
2.

it is generally used and relied upon by

them therein. (Ruperto Martin, ibid., p. 378)

such statements are contained in a list;

the compilation is published for use by
person engaged in that occupation; and

DISCUSS BRIEFLY THE OPINION RULE.

As a rule, a witness must confine his testimony
to matters within his actual knowledge. He cannot be

110

www.rkmfiles.net

asked questions calling for his opinion or conclusions

upon facts, which are for the court to make. (J. Nuevas,
Ibid., p 595 citing 20 Am. Jur. 635). Hence, the opinion of
a witness is not admissible. (Sec. 48, Rules 130)

Expert Evidence may be defined as the

testimony of one possessing in regard to a particular
subject or department of human activity, knowledge not
usually acquired by other persons. (U.S.A vs Gil, 13 Phil.
530)

GIVE THE EXCEPTIONS TO THE OPINION RULE.

WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSARY?

The following are admissible:

a)

b)

c)

Expert evidence is necessary when there are

certain matters which do not come within the knowledge
of ordinary witnesses. (Moran, Ibid., p. 650)

The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring

special knowledge, skill, experience or
training which he is shown to possess, may be
received in evidence. (Sec. 49, Rule 130)
The opinion of a witness for which proper
basis is given, may be received in evidence
regarding.
1. The identity of a person about whom
he has adequate knowledge;
2. A handwriting with which he has
sufficient familiarity; and
3. The mental sanity of a person with
whom he is sufficiently acquainted.
The witness may also testify on his
impressions of the emotion, behavior,
condition or appearance of a person. (Sc. 50,
Rule 130)

WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSSARY TO

PROVE THE GENUINENESS OF
HANDWRITING?
When the genuineness of handwriting is to be
proven by comparison expert evidence is necessary.
Whether or not the handwriting in questions is similar to
other writings of the same person is a matter which
requires the testimony of a man who has been trained,
or has actual skill or knowledge on the same. (U.S. vs.
Santiago, 41 Phil. 793,802)
WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSARY TO PROVE
MENTAL INSANITY?

WHEN IS EXPERT EVIDENCE ADMISSIBLE?

Mental insanity may be proven by the opinion of

ordinary witnesses, but when the mental disease is to be
inferred from an examination and observation of its
symptoms, the opinion of an expert is necessary. (Torres
vs. Lopex, 48 Phil. 772)

When the following requisites concur:

a)
b)

The fact to be proved is one requiring expert

knowledge; and
The witness is really an expert. (Nuevas,
Ibid., p. 595 citing 20 Am. Jur. 647-649)

WHAT IS MEANT BY QUALIFYING THE WITNESS?

HOW IS IT DONE?

IS EXPERT EVIDENCE NECESSSARY IN THE

IDENTIFICAITON OF FINGERPRINTS?

Qualifying the witness means proving that the

witness presented is an expert, and this is done by
asking him preliminary questions as to his education,
training, experience, and the like. (Nuevas, Ibid., p. 596
citing Tracys Handbook, 62 Ed., p. 207)

Yes, because it is a science requiring close

study. (People vs. Medina, 59 Phil. 330)
GIVE THE RULES GOVERNING CHARACTER
EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES.

WHAT IS MEANT OF OPINION EVIDENCE?

The following:

Opinion evidence as the term is used in law,

means the testimony of a witness, given or offered in the
trial of an action, that the witness is of the opinion that
some fact pertinent to the case exists or does not exists,
offered as proof of the existence or non-existence of the
fact. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 396 citing 20 Am. Jur. 634)

a)

WHAT IS THE PROBATIVE VALUE OF EXPERT

TESTIMONY?

c)

b)

Expert testimony no doubt constitutes evidence

worthy of meeting consideration although not exclusive
on questions of a professional character. Courts of
justice, however, are not bound to submit their findings
necessarily to such testimony. They are free to weigh,
them, and they can give or refuse to give them any value
as proof, or they can even counter-balance such
evidence with the other elements of conviction which
may have been adduced during the trial. (R. Martin,
Ibid., p. 409 U.S. vs. Trono, et. al., 3 Phil. 219-220).

The accused may prove his good moral

character which is pertinent to the moral
involved in the offense charged.
Unless in rebuttal, the prosecution may not
prove his bad moral character which is
pertinent to the moral trait involved in the
offense charged.
The good or bad moral character of the
offended party may be proved if it tends to
establish in any reasonable degree the
probability or improbability of the offense
charged. (Sec. 51, Rule 130).

DEFINE CHARACTER
Character is defined s that combination of
properties, qualities or peculiarities which distinguishes
one person from others. (Martin, Ibid., p. 420 citing The
Cmaberlayne Trial Evidence, p. 578)
IS EVIDENCE OF GOOD CHARACTER OF THE
ACCUSED ADMISSIBLE IN CRIMINAL CASES?

DEFINE EXPERT EVIDENCE.

111

www.rkmfiles.net

The good character of an accused is admissible

in evidence to show that improbability of his doing the
act charged. The principle upon which good character
may be proven is, that it affords a presumption against
the commission of crime. This presumption arises from
the improbability, as a general rule, as proven by
common observation and experience that a person who
has uniformly pursued an honest and upright course of
conduct will depart from it and do an act so inconsistent
with it. Such a person may be overcome by temptation
and fall into crime, and cases of that kind often occur,
but they are exceptions; the general rule is otherwise.
(Moran, p. 656 citing Cancemi vs. People, 16 N.Y. 501)

b)

deliberately led another to believe a

particular thing true and to act upon such
belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out
of such declaration, act or omission, be
permitted to falsify it;
The tenant is not permitted to deny the title
of his landlord at the time of the
commencement of the relation of the landlord
and tenant between them. (Sec. 2 Rule 131)

WHAT IS A PRESUMPTION?
A presumption is an inference as to the
existence of a fact not actually known, arising from its
usual connection with another which is known. (Jaime
Nuevas, Ibid., p. 602 citing III C.R. Co. vs. Interstate Co.,
206)

MAY THE PROSECUTION PROVE THE BAD MORAL

CHARACTER OF THE ACCUSED?
The prosecution is not permitted to impeach the
character of an accused, if the latter does not put it in
issue by giving evidence in his support. (People vs.
Hodges, 48 Phil. 592). The reason for the rule is that
evidence of bad character may create an unfair prejudice
against the acused who may be convicted not because
he is guilty of the crime charged, but because of his
being a crooked man. (Moran, Ibid., p. 657 citing People
vs. Shen, 147 N. Y. 78, 41 N.E. 508)

WHAT ARE THE CLASSES OF PRESUMPTIONS OF

LAW?

Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present

evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his
claim or defense by the amount of evidence required by
law. (Sec. 1, Rule 131)

There are two classes of presumptions of

law: (a) conclusive presumptions or presumptions
juris et de jure and (b) disputable presumption or
presumption juris tantum. Conclusive presumptions
are inferences which the law makes so peremptory that it
will not allow them to be overturned by any contrary
proof however strong. (Mercado vs. Santos, 66 Phil. 216)
Disputable presumptions are those presumptions which
may be disputed, opposed, refuted or rebutted. Such
presumptions continue until overcome by proof to the
contrary or by some stronger presumption. (R. Martin,
Ibid., p 447 citing Annotation: Ann. Cas. 1917 E. 11221).

DEFINE BURDEN OF EVIDENCE.

IS PRESUMPTION EVIDENCE?

Burden of Evidence is defined as that logical

necessity which rests on a party at any particular time
during a trial to create a prima facie case in his own
favor, or to overthrow one when created against him.
The burden of evidence is determined by the progress of
the trial, and shifts to one party when the other party has
produced sufficient evidence to be entitled as a matter of
law to a ruling in his favor. (R. Martin, Ibid, p. 431 citing
2 Jones on Evidence. 2nd Ed., 355)

No. The effect of a presumption is to do away

with evidence. It is not evidence, even though it takes
the place of it in the trial of causes. (R. Martin, Ibid., p.
448 citing The Chamberlayne Trial Evidence, p. 732)

WHAT IS BURDEN OF PROOF?

WHAT IS ESTOPPEL IN PAIS?

Whenever a party has, by his own declaration,
act or omission, intentionally and deliberately led
another to believe a particular thing true, and to act
upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out
of such declaration, act or omission, be permitted to
falsify it. (Sec. 2, par. (a)Rule 131)

WHO HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL

CASES? WHY?
In criminal cases, the burden of proof as to the
offense charged lies on the prosecution (People vs. De
Reyes, 82 Phil. 130), because the accused has in his
favor the presumption of innocence.

WHAT IS THEREASON FOR THE RULE ON ESTOPPEL

IN PAIS?
The doctrine of estoppel in pais or equitable
estoppel is said to be dictated by the principles of
morality and fair dealing and it intended to subserve the
ends of justice. It concludes the truth in order to prevent
fraud and falsehood and imposes silence on a party only
when in conscience and honesty he should not be
allowed to speak. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 449 citing 19 Am.
Jur. 641). Through estoppel an admission or presentation
is rendered conclusive upon the person making it and
cannot be denied or disproved as against the person
relying thereon. (Art. 1431, New Civil Code of the
Philippines)

WHAT IS THE BURDEN OF PROOF TO REBUT THE

PRESUMPTION OF CRIMINAL INTENT?
When it has been proven that the accused
committed the unlawful acts alleged, it is properly
presumed that they were committed with full knowledge
and with criminal intent, and it is incumbent upon them
to rebut such presumption. (R. Martin, Ibid., p. 441 citing
State vs. Sullivan, 34 Idaho 68, 199 p. 647, 17 A.L.R.
902)
GIVE THE RULE ON CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION.

WHO MAY INVOKE ESTOPPEL?

The following are instances of conclusive presumptions:

a)

An equitable estoppel can only be invoked by

one who is in a position to be misled by the
misrepresentation with respect to which the estopped is

Whenever a party has, by his own

declaration, act, or omission, intentionally and

112

www.rkmfiles.net

invoked; and under circumstances where damage would

result to him from the adoption by the person estopped
of a position different from that which has been held out
to be true. (Cristobal vs. Gomez, 50 Phil 810)

23.

That after an absence of seven years, it

being unknown whether or not the absentee
still lives, he is considered dead for all
purposes, except for those of succession.

GIVE THE INSTANCES WHERE THERE IS

DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS.

WHAT IS THE REASON FOR THE PRESUMPTION OF

INNOCENCE?

The following presumptions are satisfactory if

uncontradicted, but may be contradicted and overcome
by other evidence:

A person accused of crime is presumed to be

innocent until the contrary is proved and this
presumption remains with him throughout the trial until
it is overcome by proof of guilt beyond a reasonable
doubt. The presumption of innocence is founded upon
the first principles of justice and is not a mere form, but
a substantial part of the law.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

11.

12.
13.
14.
15.

16.
17.
18.
19.
20.

21.
22.

That a person is innocent of crime or

wrong;
That an unlawful act was done with an
unlawful intent;
That a person intends the ordinary
consequences of his voluntary act;
That a person takes ordinary care of his
concerns;
That evidence willfully suppressed would
be adverse if produced;
That money paid by one to another was
due to the latter;
That a thing delivered by one to another
belonged to the latter;
That an obligation delivered up to the
debtor has been paid;
That prior rents or installments had been
paid when a receipt for the latter ones is
produced;
That a person found in possession of a
thing in the doing of a recent wrongful act is the
taker and the doer of the whoe act; otherwise,
that things which a person possesses, or
exercises acts of ownership over, are owned by
him;
That a person in possession of an order
on himself for the payment of the money, or the
delivery of anything, has paid, the money, or
the delivery of anything, has paid the money or
delivered the thing accordingly;
That a person acting in a public office
was regularly appointed or elected to it;
That official duty has been regularly
performed;
That a court, or judge acting as such,
whether in the Philippines or elsewhere was
acting in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction;
That all the matters within an issue
raised in a case were laid before the court and
passed upon by it; and in like manner that all
matters within an issue raised in a dispute
submitted for arbitration were laid before the
arbitrators and passed upon by them;
The private transactions have been fair
and regular;
That the ordinary course of business has
been followed;
That there was a sufficient consideration
for a contract;
That a negotiable instrument was given
or indorsed for a sufficient consideration;
That an endorsement of a negotiable
instrument was made before the instrument
was overdue and at the place where the
instrument is dated;
That a writing is truly dated;
That a letter duly directed and mailed
was received in the regular course of the mail;

The presumption of innocence is a conclusion of

law in favor of the accused, whereby his innocence is not
only established but continues until sufficient evidence is
introduced to overcome the proof which the law has
created namely, his innocence. When a doubt is
created, it is the result of proof, and not the proof itself.
The courts will not impute a guilty construction or
inference compatible with innocence arises therefrom
with equal force and fairness. In fact, it si always the
duty of the court to resolve the circumstances of
evidence upon a theory of innocence rather than upon a
theory of guilt where it is possible to do so. The accused
is not to be presumed guilty because the facts are
consistent with his guilt; this will be done where the facts
are inconsistent with his innocence.
(Vicente J.
Francisco, The Revised Rules of Court in the Philippines
(Evidence), Vol, VII, Part I, 1990 Ed., p. 79-80 citing
Whartons Criminal Evidence, 11th Ed., Sec. 72).

DISTINGUISH PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE FROM

REASONABLE DOUBT.
In making the distinction between the terms
presumption of innocence and of reasonable doubt, it
has been stated that presumption of innocence is a
conclusion drawn by law in favor of a citizen , while
reasonable doubt is a condition of mind produced by
proof resulting from evidence in the case. The former is
regarded as evidence, introduced by the law to be
considered by the court, while the latter is the result of
insufficient proof. (Vicente J. Francisco, Ibid., 81 citing 10
Encyclopedia of Evidence, 625).
EXPLAIN THE PRESUMPTION THAT AN UNLAWFUL
ACT WAS DONE WITH AN UNLAWFUL
INTENT.
The general rule is that, if it is proved that the
accused committed an unlawful act charged, it will be
presumed that the act was done with a criminal
intention, and it is for the accused to rebut this
presumption. The act in itself is evidence of the intent.
(Vicente J. Francisco, Ibid., p. 82 citing 16 C.J. 81)
EXPLAINT EH PRESUMTION THAT A PERSON
INTENDS THE ORDINARY CONSEQUENCES OF HIS
VOLUNTARY ACT.
Though it is maxim of law, as well as the dictate
of charity, that every person is to be presumed innocent
until he is proved to be guilty, yet it is a rule equally
sound that every sane person must be supposed to
intended that which is the ordinary and natural

113

www.rkmfiles.net

consequences of his own purposed act. (V.J. Francisco,

Ibid., p. 84 citing 3 Green Evidence, 15th ed., 13)

WHAT PRESUMPTION ARISES FROM FABRICATION

OF EVIDENCE?

EXPLAIN THE PRESUMPTION THAT A PERSON

INTENDS THE ORDINARY CONSEQUENCES OF HIS
VOLUNTARY ACT.

The presumption arises that the case is

groundless and affects the whole mass of evidence
presented by the party. (De Leon vs. Layco, 73 Phil. 588)

Men of sound mind are presumed to intend the

natural and necessary consequences of acts which they
intentionally perform. (Ruperto G. Martin, Revised Rules
on Evidence, Vol. IV 1989 ed., p. 465 citing 1 Jones on
Evidence, 2nd Ed., 210). It is said that man intends that
consequence which he contemplates and which he
expects to result from his act, and he, therefore, must be
taken to intend every consequence which is the natural
and immediate result of any act which he voluntarily
does. (Ibid).

WHAT IS THE SCOPE OF THE PRESUMPTION OF

REGULARITY OF OFFICAL ACTS?
It includes regularity of appointment and
performance of duty (Tolentino vs Catoy, 82 Phil. 300)
and applies to corporate officers. (J. Nuevas, Remedial
Law Reviewer, 1971 ed., p. 605)
IN THOSE CASES WHERE DEATH MAY BE
PRESUMED, IS THERE A PRESUMPTION AS TO THE
EXACT DATE OF DEATH?

IN ORDER THAT THE ADVERSE PRESUMPTION

FROM SUPPRESSION OF EVIDENCE MAY ARISE,
WHAT ARE THERE REQUISITES?

None, the exact date of death is a matter of

proof. (J. Nuevas, Ibid., p 607 citing Davis vs. Briggs, 97
U.S. 628)

The following must concur:

a)
b)
c)
d)

(Sec. 3, Rule 131)

WHEN ARE PRESUMPTIONS ADMISSIBLE?

The suppression is willful;

They are admissible when the facts from which

they may be deduced are fully proven; a presumption
cannot be made to rest on another presumption.
(Cuaycong vs. Rius, 86 Phil. 170)

The suppression is not in

the exervcise of a privilege; (U.S. vs.
Melchir, 2 Phil. 588)
The evidence suppressed
is not merely corroborative or cumulative;
(People vs. Tuazon, 56 Phil. 649) and
The evidence is at the
disposal only of the suppressing party.
(People vs. Otero, 51 Phil 201)

WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF PRESUMPTIONS?

Presumptions do not constitute evidence and
have no weight as such, but only determined the party
who has the duty of presenting evidence, and when that
duty is met, presumptions recede. (Nuevas, Ibd., p. 608
citing Anno. 15 A.L.R. 881) In other words, presumptions
merely aid in establishing a prima facie case and have
no probative effect when countervailing proof is offered.
(J. Nuevas, Ibid., p. 608 citing 20 Am. Jur. 171)

WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF NON-PRODUCTION OF

MATERIAL EVIDENCE BY A PARTY?
Non-production of evidence that would naturally
have been produced by an honest and, therefore,,
fearless claimant permits the inference that its tenor is
unfavorable to the partys cause. (Marvel Corp. vs.
David, 94 Phil. 376)

GIVE THE RULE ON THE PRESUMPTION OF

LEGITIMACY OR ILLEGITIMACY OF A CHILD.
There is no presumption of legitimacy or
illegitimacy of a child born after three hundred days
following the dissolution of the marriage of the
separation of the spouses.
Whoever alleged the
legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove his
allegation. (Sec. 4, Rule 131)

IN ORDER THAT THE ADVERSE PRESUMPTION

FROM POSSESSION OF STOLEN GOODS MAY ARISE,
WHAT ARE THE REQUISITES?
The following must concur:
a)
b)
c)
d)

e)

The crime of theft or

robbery was committed; (U.S. vs. Carreon, 12
Phil.) 51).
It was committed
recently; (U.S. VS. Carlipio,, 18 Phil. 421)
The property object
ofthecrime was found in accuseds possession;
(U.S. vs. Ungal, 37 Phil. 835) and
The accccused is
unable to explain his possession satisfactorily;
(U.S. vs. Espia, 16 Phil. 506) anmd, or for the
application of the presumption of doer of the
whole act.
It must be shown that
the goods were looted at the same time, in the
ssame place and on the same occasion. (People
vs. De Jose, CA-G-R. No. 02352- CR, Jan. 31,
1963)

HOW MAY THE EXAMINATION OF A WITNESS BE

DONE?
The examination of witnesses presented in a
trial or hearing shall be done in open court, and under
oath or affirmation. Unless the witness is incapacitated
to speak, or the question calls for a different mode of
answer, the answers of the witnesses shall be given
orally. (Sec. 1)
MUST A WITNESS ANSWER ANY QUESTION ASKED?
Yes, a witness must answer questions, although
his answer may tend to establish a claim against him
(Sec. 3)
WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS OF A WITNESS?
The rights of a witness are:

114

www.rkmfiles.net

a)
b)
c)
d)
e)

To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or

insulting questions, and from harsh or
insulting demeanor;
Not to be detained longer than the interests
of justice require;
Not to be examined exception as to matters
pertinent to the issue;
Not to give an answer which will tend to
subject him to a penalty for an offense unless
otherwise provided by law; or
Not to give an answer which will tend to
degrade his reputation, unless it be to the
very fact at issued to a fact from which the
fact in issue would presumed. But a witness
must answer to the fact of his previous final
conviction for offenses. (Sec. 3)

A leading question is one which suggests to the

witness the answer which the examining party desires.
(Sec. 10)
ARE LEADING QUESTIONS ALLOWED ON DIRECT
EXAMINATION?
As a general rule, they are not allowed, except in the
following cases
a) On cross examination;
b) On preliminary matters;
c) When there is difficulty in getting direct and
intelligible answers from a witness who is
ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of
feeble mind or a deaf-mute;
d) Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
e) Of a witness who is an adverse party, or an
officer, director, or managing agent of a
public or private corporation or of a
partnership or association which is an adverse
party. (Sec. 10)

STATE THE ORDER OF EXAMINATION OF AN

INDIVIDUAL WITNESS
The order in which individual witnesses may be
examined is as follows:
a)
b)
c)
d)

WHAT IS A MISLEADING QUESTION?

Direct examination by the proponent;

Cross-examination by the opponent;
Re-direct examination by the proponent;
Re-cross-examination by the opponents.
(Sec. 4)

A misleading question is one which assumed as

true a fact not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary
to that which he has previously stated. It is not allowed
(Sec. 10)

GIVE THE CONCEPTS AND PURPOSES OF DIRECT

EXAMINATION; CROSS EXAMINATION; REDIRECT
EXAMINATION AND RE-CROSS-EXAMINATION.

HOW MAY THE ADVERSE PARTYS WITNESS BE

IMPEACHED?
A witness may be impeached by the party
against whom he was called, by contradictory
evidence,by evidence that his general reputation for
truth, honesty, or integrity is bad, or by evidence that he
has made at other times statements inconsistent with his
present testimony, but not by evidence of particular
wrongful acts, except that it may be shown by the
examination of the witness, or the record of the
judgment, that he has been convicted of an offense.
(Sec. 11)

Direct examination is the examination-in-chief

of a witness by the party presenting him on the facts
relevant to the issue. (Sec. 5)
Cross-examination; its purpose and extent.
Upon the termination of the direct examination, the
witness may be cross-examined by the adverse party as
to any matters stated in the direct examination, or
connected therewith, with sufficient fullness and freedom
to test his accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from
interest or bias, or the reverse, and to elicit all important
facts bearing upon the issue. (Sec. 6)

WHAT IS IMPEACHMENT OF A WITNESS?

Re-direct examination; its purpose and extent.

After the cross-examination pf the witness has been
concluded, he may be re-examined by the party calling
him, to explain or supplement his answers given during
the cross-examination, may be allowed by the court in its
discretion. (Sec. 7)

It is simply an attack on the credibility of a

witness. (J. Nuevas, Remedial Law Reviewer, 1971 Ed., P.
611 citing Ballentiness Law Dict. 2nd Ed., p. 610)
MAY A PARTY IMPEACH HIS OWN WITNESS?
As a rule, no, except, if the witness is an
unwilling or hostile witness or if the witness is an adverse
party of an officer, director, or managing agent of a
public or private corporation or a partnership or
association which is an adverse party. (Sec. 12)

Re-cross-examination. Upon the conclusion of

the re-direct examination, the adverse party may recross-examine the witness on matters stated in his redirect examination, and also on such other matters as
may be allowed by the court in its discretion. (Sec. 8)
WHEN MAY A WITNESS BE RECALLED?

WHEN MAY A WITNESS MAYBE CONSIDERED AS

UNWILLING OR HOSTILE?

After the examination of a witness by both sides

has been concluded, the witness cannot be recalled
without leave of the court. The court will grant or
withhold leave in its discretion, as the interest of justice
may require.

A witness may be considered as unwilling or

hostile only if so declared by the court upon adequate
showing of his adverse interest, unjustified reluctance to
testify of his having misled the party into calling him to
the witness stand. (Sec. 12)

WHAT IS A LEADING QUESTION?

HOW MAY A WITNESS BE IMPEACED BY EVIDENCE

OF INCONSISTENT STATEMENTS?

115

www.rkmfiles.net

Before a witness can be impeached by evidence

that he has made at other times statements inconsistent
with his present testimony, the statements must be
related to him, with the circumstances of the times and
places and the persons present, and he must be asked
whether he made such statements, and if so, allowed to
explain them. If the statements be in writing they must
be shown to the witness before any question is put to
him concerning them. (Sec. 13)

includes all kinds of documents, records and writings.

(Nuevas, Ibid., p 614 citing Curtis vs. Bradley, 65 Conn
99)
It may be classified into public and private
documents. (Sec. 19).
WHAT ARE PUBLIC DOCUMENTS? PRIVATE
DOCUMENTS?
Public documents are:

MAY EVIDENCE OF GOOD MORAL CHARACTER OF

AN ACCUSED BE PRESENTED?

a)

As a rule, no. Evidence of the good character of

a witness is not admissible until such character has been
impeached. (Sec. 14)

b)
c)

STATE THE RULES ON THE EXCLUSION AND

SEPARATION OF WITNESSES
On any trial or hearing, the judge may exclude
from the court any witness not at the time under
examination sot that he may not hear the testimony of
other witnesses. The judge any also cause witnesses to
be kept separate and to be prevented from conversing
with one another until all shall have been examined.
(Sec. 15)

The written official acts, or records of official

acts of the sovereign authority, official bodies
and tribunals, and public officers whether of
the Philippines, or of a foreign country.
Documents acknowledged before a notary
public except last wills and testaments; and
Public records, kept in the Philippines, of
private documents required by law to be
entered therein.

WHAT IS THE PRE-REQUISITE FOR THE

ADMISSIBILITY OF A PRIVATE DOCUMENT?
It must be authenticated, which means that its
due execution and authenticity must first be
proved. (Sec. 20)
HOW MAY A PRIVATE DOCUMENT BE
AUTHENTICATED?

WHEN MAY A WITNESS REFER TO A MEMORADUM

AND STATE THE PROCEDURE?

In any of the following modes:

A
witness may be allowed to refresh his
memory respecting a fact, by anything written or
recorded by himself or under his direction at the time
when the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at
any other time when the fact was fresh in his memory
and he knew that the same was correctly written or
recorded; but in such case the writing or record must be
produced and may be inspected by the adverse party,
who may, if he chooses, cross-examined the witness
upon it, and may read it in evidence. So, also, a witness
may testify from such a writing or record, though he
retain no recollection of the particular facts, if he is able
to swear that the writing or record correctly stated the
transaction when made; but such evidence must be
received with caution. (Sec. 16)

a)
b)

By anyone who saw the document executed

or written; or
By evidence of the genuineness of the
signature or handwriting of the maker. (Sec.
20)

WHAT IS AN ANCIENT DOCUMENT?

A document is ancient if the following requisites concur:
a)
b)
c)

STATE THE RULE WHEN PART OF AN ACT,

DECLARATION OR WRITING IS GIVEN IN EVIDENCE
BY ONE PARTY.

The document is more than thirty years old;

It is produced from a custody in which it
would naturally be found if genuine; and
It is unblemished by any alterations or
circumstances of suspicion. (Sec. 21).

HOW MAY THE HANDWRITING OF A PERSON

PROVED?

When part of an act, declaration, conversation,

writing or record is given in evidence by one party, the
whole of the same subject may be inquired into by the
other, and when a detached act, declaration,
conversation, writing or record is given in evidence, any
other ct declaration, conversation, writing or record
necessary to its understanding may also be given in
evidence. (Sec. 17).

The handwriting of a person may be proved by

any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such
person because he ahs seen the person write or has
seen writing purporting to be his upon which the witness
has acted or been charged, and has thus acquired
knowledge of the handwriting of such person. Evidence
respecting the handwriting may also be given by a
comparison, made by the witness or the court, with
writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party
against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be
genuine to the satisfaction of the judge. (Sec. 22)

GIVE THE RULE ON THE RIGHT TO INSPECT

WRITING SHOWN TO WITNESS.
Whenever writing is shown to witness, it may be
inspected by the adverse party. (Sec. 18)

WHAT DOES A PUBLIC DOCUMENT PROVE?

Document consisting of entries in public records
made in the performance of a duty by a public officer are
prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. All
other public documents are evidence, even against a
third person, of the fact which gave rise to their
execution and of the date of the latter. (Sec. 23)

DEFINE AND CLASSIFY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

Documentary evidence refers to any tangible
object capable of expressing a fact, or which tend to
establish the truth or untruth of matters at issue, and

116

www.rkmfiles.net

c)

HOW MAY AN OFFICIAL RECORD BE PROVED?

The record of public documents referred to in
paragraph (a) of Section 19, when admissible for any
purpose may be evidenced by an official publication
thereof of by a copy attested by the officer having the
legal custody of the record or by his deputy and
accompanied if the record is not kept in the Philippines,
with a certificate that such officer has the custody. If the
office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country,
the certificate may be made by a secretary of the
embassy or legation, consul general, consul, vice consul,
or consular agent or by any officer in the foreign service
of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in
which the record is kept and authenticated by the seal of
his office (Sec. 24)

STATE THE RULE ON PROOF OF NOTARIAL

DOCUMENTS.
Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved
an certified as provided by law, may be presented in
evidence without further proof the certificate of
acknowledgement being prima facie evidence of the
execution of the instrument of document involved. (Sec.
30)
HOW MAY THE ALTERATIONS IN A DOCUMENT BE
EXPLAINED BY THE PARTY PRODUCING IT?
The party producing a document as genuine
which has been altered and appears to have been
altered after its execution, in a part material to the
question in dispute, must account for the alteration. He
may show that the alteration was made by another
without his concurrence, or was made with the consent
of the parties affected by it or was otherwise properly or
innocently made, or that the alteration did not change
the meaning or language of the instrument. If he fails to
do that, the document shall not be admissible in
evidence. (Sec. 31)

WHEN A COPY OF A WRITING IS ATTESTED FOR

THE PURPOSE OF EVIDENCE, WHAT MUST THE
ATTESTATION STATE?
Whenever a copy of a document or record is
attested for the purpose of evidence, the attestation
must state, in substance, that the copy is a correct copy
of the original or a specific part thereof, as the case may
be. The attestation must be under the official seal of the
attesting officer, if there be any, or if he be the clerk of a
court having a seal, under the seal of such court. (Sec.
25)

GIVE THE RULE ON SEALED AND UNSEALED

PRIVATE DOCUMENTS.

WHAT IS MEANT BY IRREMOVABILITY OF PUBLIC

RECORD?

There shall be no difference between sealed and

unsealed private documents insofar as their admissibility
as evidence is concerned. (Sec. 32).

It means that any public record an official copy

of which is admissible in evidence must not be removed
from the office in which it is kept except upon order of a
court where the inspection of the record is essential to
the just determination of a pending case. (Sec. 26)

WHEN MAY DOCUMENTS WRITTEN IN UNOFFICIAL

LANGUAGE BE ADMISSIBLE?
Documents written in an unofficial language
shall not be admitted as evidence, unless accompanied
with a translation into English or Filipino. To avoid
interruption of proceedings, parties or their attorneys are
directed to have such translation prepared before trial.
(Sec. 33)

HOW MAY THE AUTHORIZED PUBLIC RECORD OF A

PRIVATE DOCUMENT BE PROVED?
An authorized public record of a private document may
be proved:
a)
b)

By the original record; or

By a coy thereof, attested by the legal
custodian of the record, with an appropriate
certificate that such officer has the custody.
(Sec. 27)

WHAT IS THE REASON AND PURPOSE FOR THE

OFFER OF EVIDENCE?
The court shall consider no evidence which has
not been formally offered. The purposes for which the
evidence is offered must be specified. (Sec. 34)

GIVE THE RULE ON PROOF OF LACK OF RECORD.

WHEN SHALL OFFER OF EVIDENCE BE MADE?

A written statement signed by an officer having

the custody of an official record or by his deputy that
after diligent search no record or entry of a specified
tenor is found to exist in the records of his office,
accompanied by a certificate as above provided, is
admissible as evidence that the records of his office
contain no such records or entry. (Sec. 28).

As regards the testimony of a witness, the offer

must be made at the time the witness is called to testify.
Documentary and object evidence shall be offered after
the presentation of a partys testimonial evidence. Such
offer shall be done orally unless allowed by the court to
be done in writing. (Sec. 35)

HOW MAY A JUDICIAL RECORD BE IMPEACHED?

WHEN SHALL OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE OFFERED

BE MADE?

Any judicial record may be impeached be impeached by

evidence of:
a)
b)

fraud in the party offering the record, in

respect to the proceedings.
(Sec. 29)

Objection to evidence offered orally must be made

immediately after the offer is made.

want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial

officer;
collusion between the parties or

Objection to a question propounded in the

coursed of the oral examination of a witness shall be

117

www.rkmfiles.net

made as soon as the grounds therefore shall become

reasonably apparent.

Should a witness answer the question before

the adverse party had the opportunity to voice fully its
objection to the same, and such objection is found to be
meritorious, the court shall sustain the objection and
order the answer given to be striken off the record.

An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected

to within three (3) days after notice of the offer unless a
different period is allowed by the court.

On proper motion, the court may also order the

striking out of answers which are incompetent, irrelevant
or otherwise improper. (Sec. 39)

In any case, the grounds for the objections must

be specified. (Sec. 36)
WHEN IS OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE UNNECESSARY?

STATE THE PROCEDURE IF THE COURT EXCLUDES

DOCUMENTS OR THINGS OFFERED IN
EVIDENCE.

When it becomes reasonably apparent in the

course of the examination of a witness that the questions
being propounded are of the same class as those to
which objection has been made, whether such objection
was sustained or overruled, it shall not be necessary to
repeat the objection, it being sufficient for the adverse
party to record his continuing objection to such class of
questions. (Sec. 37)

If documents or things offered in evidence are

excluded by the court, the offeror may have the same
attached to or made part of the record. If the evidence
excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record the
name and other personal circumstances of the witness
and the substance of the proposed testimony. (Sec. 40)

DISTINGUISH BETWEEN A GENERAL AND SPECIFIC

OBJECTION.

WHAT IS THE DEGREE OF PROOF IN CRIMINAL

CASES?

An objection is general when the grounds

thereof are not stated, or are generally stated. An
objection that the evidence offered is irrelevant,
incompetent, or inadmissible is a general one. (Moran,
Remedial Law Reviewer, p. 690 citing Rush vs. French, 1
Ariz., 99, 25 Pac. 819) An objection is specific where it
states wherein or how or why the evidence is irrelevant
or incompetent. (Moran, Ibid., Rush vs. French, supra)
The general rule is that an objection must be specified.
(Sec. 36)

In a criminal case, the accused is entitled to an

acquittal, unless his guilt is shown beyond reasonable
doubt. (Sec. 2, Rule 133)
WHAT IS PROOF BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT?
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean
such a degree of proof as, excluding possibility of error,
produces absolute certainty. Moral certainty only is
required, or that degree of proof which produces
conviction in uprejudiced mind. (Sec. 2)

WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF A GENERAL OBJECTION?

A general objection is sufficient, if on the face of
the evidence objected to units relation to the rest of the
case, there appears no purpose whatever for which it
would have been admissible. Thus, it has been held that
where there is a general objection to evidence and it is
overruled, and the evidence is received, the ruling will
not be held erroneous unless the evidence, in its
essential nature, is inadmissible. Where the general
objection is sustained, and the evidence excluded, the
ruling will not be upheld, unless any ground in fact
existed for the exclusion (6 Moran, Comments, p. 128,
1963 ed.)

WHAT DEGREE OF PROOF IS NECESSARY FOR

CONVICTION IN CRIMINAL CASES?
A defendant in a criminal action shall be
presumed to be innocent until the contrary is proved,
and in case of reasonable doubt that his guilt is
satisfactorily shown, he shall be entitled to an acquittal.
(People vs. Bequino, 77 Phil. 629) Therefore, the guilt of
the accused must be established by the prosecution by
proof beyond reasonable doubt.
WHAT ARE THE FACTORS TO BE CONSIDERED ON
THE WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF TESTIMONIAL
EVIDENCE?

WHEN SHALL THE COURT RULE ON THE

OBJECTIONS TO THE OFFER OF EVIDENCE?

In determining where the superior weight of

evidence on the issues involved lies the court may
consider all the facts and circumstances of the case
including the following:

The ruling of the court must be given

immediately after the objection is made, unless the court
desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the
question presented by the ruling (Sec. 38)

a)
b)

SHOULD THE COURT STATE THE REASON FOR ITS

RULING IN CASE OF OBJECTION TO
EVIDENCE?

c)

The reason for sustaining or overruling an

objection need not be stated. However, if the objection
is based on two or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the
objection on one or some of them must specify the
ground or grounds relied upon. (Sec. 38)

d)
e)
f)

WHEN MAY THE COURT STRIKE OUT AN ANSWER

OF A WITNESS DURING THE TRIAL?

118

the witness manner of testifying;

the intelligence of the witnesses, their means
and opportunity of knowing the facts to which
they are testifying;
the nature of the facts to which the witnesses
testify;
the probability or improbability of the
testimony of witnesses;
the interest or want of interest of the
witnesses;
the personal credibility of the witnesses so far
as the same may legitimately appear upon
the trial, and

www.rkmfiles.net

g)

the number of witnesses. (U.S. vs. Lasada, 18

Phil. 90)

HOW MAY A PERSON PERPETUATE HIS OWN

TESTIMONY?

WHEN IS THE EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION OF AN

ACCUSED SUFFICIENT TO CONVICT?

A person who desires to perpetuate his own

testimony or that of another person regarding any
matter that may be cognizable in any court of the
Philippines, may file a verified petition in the court of the
province of the residence of any expected adverse party.
(Sec. 1)

An extrajudicial confession made by an

accused, shall not be sufficient ground for conviction,
unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti. (Sec.
3)

WHAT SHALL BE ALLEGED IN THE PETITION?

WHAT IS THE CORPUS DELICTI?

The petition shall be entitled in the name of the

petitioner and shall show (a) that the petitioner expects
to be a party to an action in a court of the Philippines
but is presently unable to bring it or cause it to be
brought; (b) the subject matter of the expected action
and his interest therein; (c) the facts which is he desires
to establish by the proposed testimony and his reasons
for desiring to perpetuate it; (d) the names or a
description of the persons he expects will be adverse
parties and their addresses so far as known; and (e) the
names and addresses of the persons to be examined and
the substance of the testimony which he expects to elicit
from each, and shall ask for an order authorizing the
petitioner to take the depositions of the persons to be
examined named in the petition for the purpose of
perpetuating their testimony. (Sec. 2)

It is the fact of specific loss or injury. In

homicide, the fact of death, whether or not feloniously
caused is the corpus delicti (Cortez vs. Court of Appeals,
G.R. No. L-32246, June 2, 1988)
WHAT MANNER OF PROOF IS REQUIRED IN SELFDEFENSE?
Accused who claims self-defense has the burden
to prove its elements by clear and convincing evidence.
That evidence must be clear, satisfactory and
convincing. (People vs. Macariola, 120 SCRA 92)
WHEN IS CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE SUFFICIENT
FOR CONVICTION?
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
a)
b)
c)

WHAT SHALL THE NOTICE OF PETITION CONTAIN,

AND UPON WHOM, WHEN AND HOW SHALL IT BE
SERVED?

There is more than one circumstance;

The facts from which the inferences are
derived are proven; and
The combination of all the circumstances is
such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt. (Sec. 4)

The petitioner shall thereafter serve a notice

upon each person named in the petition as an expected
adverse party, together with a copy of the petition,
stating that the petitioner will apply to the court, at a
time and place named therein, for the order described in
the petition. At least twenty (20) days before the date of
hearing the notice shall be served in the manner
provided for service of summons. (Sec. 3)

GIVE THE RULE ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

In cases filed before administrative or quasijudicial bodies, a fact may be deemed established if it is
supported by substantial evidence, or that amount of
relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept
as adequate to justify a conclusion. (Sec. 5)

WHAT SHALL THE COURT DO IF IT IS SATISFIED

THAT THE PERPETUATION OF TESTIMONY MAY
PREVENT A FAILURE OR DELAY OF JUSTICE?

WHAT IS SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE?

If the court is satisfied that the perpetuation of

the testimony may prevent a failure or delay of justice,
it shall make an order designating or describing the
persons whose deposition may be taken and specifying
the subject matter of the examination, and whether the
deposition shall be taken upon oral examination or
written interrogatories. The depositions may then be
taken in accordance with Rule 24 before the hearing
(Sec. 4)

Substantial evidence has been defined to be

such relevant evidenced as a reasonable mind might
accept as adequate to support a conclusion. (Berenguer,
Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-60287, Aug. 17, 1988)
WHEN MAY THE COURT STOP THE PRESENTATION
OF FURTHER EVIDENCE?
The court may stop the introduction of further
testimony upon any particular point when the evidence
upon it is already so full that more witnesses to the same
point cannot be reasonably expected to be additionally
persuasive. But this power should be exercised with
caution. (Sec. 6)

For the purpose of applying Rule 24 to

depositions for perpetuating testimony, each reference
therein to the court in which the action is pending shall
be deemed to refer to the court in which the petition for
such deposition was filed. (Sec. 5)
GIVE THE RULE ON THE USE OF DEPOSITION.

GIVE THE RULE ON THE EVIDENCE ON MOTION

If a deposition to perpetuate testimony is taken

under this rule, or if, although not so taken, it would be
admissible in evidence, it may be used in any action
involving the same subject matter subsequently brought
in accordance with the provision of Sections 4 and 5 of
Rule 24. (Sec. 6)

When a motion is based on facts not appearing

of record the court may hear the matter on affidavits or
depositions presented by the respective parties, but the
court may direct that the matter be heard wholly or
partly on oral testimony or depositions. (Sec. 7)

119

www.rkmfiles.net

16)

IN SUCH A CASE, HOW AND WHERE SHALL THE

PETITION BE FILED?
If an appeal has been taken from a judgment of
the Regional Trial Court or before the taking of an appeal
if the time therefore has not expired, the Regional Trial
Court in which the judgment was rendered may allow the
taking of depositions of witnesses to perpetuate their
testimony for use in the event of further proceedings in
the said court. In such case the party who desires to
perpetuate the testimony may make a motion in the said
Regional Trial Court for leave to take the depositions,
upon the same notice and service thereof as if the action
was pending therein. (Sec. 7)
WHAT SHALL THE MOTION SHOW?
The motion shall show (a) the names and
addresses of the persons to be examined and the
substance of the testimony which he expects to elicit
from each; and (b) the reason for perpetuating their
testimony. (Sec. 7)
WHAT SHALL BE ORDERED BY THE COURT?
If the court finds that the perpetuation of the
testimony is proper to avoid a failure or delay of justice,
it may make an order allowing is proper to avoid a failure
or delay of justice, it may make an order allowing the
depositions to be taken, and thereupon the depositions
may be taken and used in the same manner and under
the same conditions as are prescribed in these rules for
depositions taken in actions pending in the Regional Trial
Court. (Sec. 7)

17. Plunder
18. Violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972
as amended when the quantity of drugs involved
in the violation is equal to or more than that
provided under Section 20.
19. Carnapping where the owner, driver or occupant
of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed or raped
in the course of the commission of carnapping or
on the occasion thereof.

SPECIAL LAWS
Republic Act No. 7659 - Heinous Crimes Act

Nota Bene:

What are HEINOUS CRIMES?

The Death Penalty Law

Republic Act # 9346.

Heinous crimes are grievous, odious and hateful

offenses, which by reason of their inherent or manifest
wickedness, viciousness atrocity and perversity are
repugnant and outrageous to the common standards and
norms of decency and morality in a just, civilized and
ordered society.

8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
13)
14)
15)

has

been

superseded

by

Republic Act No. 7080 - (Anti-Plunder Law)

What is PLUNDER?
Plunder is the crime committed by any PUBLIC
OFFICER who by himself or in connivance with members
of his family, relative by consanguinity, business
associates, subordinate or other persons amasses,
accumulates or acquires ill-gotten wealth through a
COMBINATION or SERIES of overt or criminal acts in
the aggregate amount or total value of at least P50,
000,000.00 (as amended by R.A. No. 7659).

The heinous crimes are:

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)

Rape attended by any of the following

circumstances:

The victim thereby

became insane;

The victim is less

than 18 years old and the offender is
an ascendant, a step-parent, guardian,
relative by consanguinity or affinity
within the 3rd civil degree, or the
common law spouse of the victims
parent;

The victim is under

custody of police or military authorities;

The
victim
is
a
religious or a child less than 7 years
old;

The
rape
was
committed in full view of the husband,
parent, children or relative within the
3rd civil degree of consanguinity;

The
offender
is
afflicted with AIDS and is aware of it;

The offender is a
member of the AFP or PNP or any law
enforcement agency; or

The victim thereby

suffered
permanent
physical
mutilation.

Treason;
Qualified Piracy/Mutiny
Qualified Bribery
Parricide
Murder
Infanticide
Kidnapping
and
Serious
Illegal
Detention
Robbery with Homicide
Robbery with Rape
Robbery with Intentional Mutilation
Robbery with Arson
Destructive Arson
Rape committed by two or more
persons
Rape committed with the use of deadly
weapon
Rape with Homicide or attempted Rape
with Homicide

Who is a PUBLIC OFFICER under R.A. No. 7080?

Any person holding any PUBLIC OFFICE in the
Government of the Republic of the Philippines by virtue
of
(a)
(b)
(c)

an appointment;
election; or
contract

Government of the Republic of the Philippines

includes the National Government, and Any of its

120

www.rkmfiles.net

subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities, including

GOCCs and their subsidiaries.

acquired by public officers from them or from their

nominees or transferees is not barred by prescription,
laches, or estoppel (does not prescribe).

Who is a PERSON as defined under R.A. No. 7080?

PERSON includes any NATURAL or JURIDICAL

7659

person.

What amendments did R.A. 7659 introduce to R.A.

7080?

NATURAL PERSON a human being

JURIDICAL PERSON organizations, or entities
recognized by law as a person such as LGUs, Registered
Corporations and Partnerships.

R.A. 7659

What is an ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH?

ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH means any asset, property,
business, and enterprise or material possession of any
person, acquired by him directly or indirectly through
dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or
business associates.

ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH can be acquired through the

following means and similar schemes:
Misappropriation,
conversion,
misuse
or
malversation of public funds or raids on the
public treasury;

2)

Receiving,
directly
or
indirectly,
any
commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks
or any other form of pecuniary benefit from any
person and/or entity in connection with any
government contract or project or by reason of
the office or position of the public officer
concerned;

3)

Illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition

of assets belonging to the Government;

4)

Obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or

indirectly any share of stock, equity or any other
form of interest or participation including the
promise of future employment in any business
enterprise or undertaking;

5)

Establishing
agricultural,
industrial
or
commercial monopolies or other combinations
and/or implementation of decrees and orders
intended to benefit particular persons or special
interests; or

6)

By taking undue advantage of official position,

authority, relationship, connection or influence
to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the
expense and to the damage and prejudice of
the Filipino people and the R.P.

1)

AMOUNT - Lowered the amount from at least

P75 million (R.A. 7080) to at least P50 million.

2)

IMPOSABLE
PENALTY
Changed
the
imposable penalty of life imprisonment with
reclusion perpetua to death.

Will the acquisition or accumulation of ill-gotten

wealth by a public official totalling to at least 50
million pesos made through a single act constitute
plunder?

What are the means of acquiring ILL-GOTTEN

WEALTH? (Overt or Criminal Acts)

1)

Amendments to R.A. 7080 Introduced by R.A.

Suggested Answer:
This has not been decided. In our opinion,
however, a single act does not constitute plunder
because the Anti-Plunder Law provides that the
acquisition of ill-gotten wealth by a public official must
be made through a COMBINATION or SERIES of acts.
Republic Act No. 9160 - Anti-Money Laundering
Act of 2001
What is MONEY LAUNDERING?
Money laundering is a crime whereby the
proceeds of an UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY are transacted;
thereby making them appear to have originated from
legitimate sources.
What constitutes an UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY?
Sec. 3 (i) - unlawful activity refers to any act or
omission or series or combination thereof involving or
having relation to the following:
1) Kidnapping for ransom;
2) Plunder;
3) Robbery and Extortion;
4) Jueteng and Masiao punished as illegal
gambling under P.D. 1602;
5) Piracy;
6) Qualified Theft;
7) Swindling or Estafa;
8) Smuggling;
9) Hijacking; and
10) many others.

What COURT has the JURISDICTION to hear and try

PLUNDER CASES?
MONEY LAUNDERING is committed by the following:

All PLUNDER CASES are within the original

jurisdiction of the SANDIGANBAYAN.

a)

What is the PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD of the crime of

PLUNDER?
A plunder case prescribes in 20 years. However,
the right of the State to recover properties unlawfully

121

Any person knowing that any monetary

instrument or property represents, involves, or
relates to, the proceeds of any unlawful activity,
transacts or attempts to transact said monetary
instrument or property;

www.rkmfiles.net

a)

Any person knowing that any monetary

instrument or property represents or involves
the proceeds of any unlawful activity, performs
or fails to perform any act as a result of which
he facilitates the offense of money laundering;

a)

Any person knowing that any monetary

instrument or property is required under this Act
to be disclosed and filed with the Anti-Money
laundering Council (AMLC), fails to do so.

or indirectly, from any person interested in the

matter some pecuniary or material benefit or
advantage, or for the purpose of favoring his
own interest or giving undue advantage in favor
of or discriminating against any other interested
party.

Which has jurisdiction over Money Laundering

cases?

7)

Entering on behalf of the Government, into any

contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same, whether or not
the public officer profited or will profit thereby.

8)

Directly or indirectly having financial or

pecuniary interest in any business, contract or
transaction in connection with which he
intervenes or takes part in his official capacity,
or in which he is prohibited by the Constitution
or by any law from having any interest.

9)

Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for

personal gain, or having a material interest in
any transaction or act requiring the approval of
a board, panel or group of which he is a
member, and which exercises discretion in such
approval, even if he votes against the same or
does not participate in the action of the board,
committee, panel or group.

10)

Knowingly approving or granting any license,

permit, privilege or benefit in favor of any
person not qualified for or not legally entitled to
such license, permit, privilege or advantage, or
of a mere representative or dummy of one who
is not so qualified or entitled.

11)

Divulging valuable information of a confidential

character, acquired by his office or by him on
account of his official position to unauthorized
persons, or releasing such information in
advance of its authorized release date.

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT (RTC): If the accused is

a PRIVATE PERSON.
SANDIGANBAYAN: When committed by PUBLIC
OFFICERS and PRIVATE PERSONS in conspiracy with such
public officers.
Republic Act No. 3019 - Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act
What are the CORRUPT PRACTICES of a PUBLIC
OFFICER?
1)

2)

3)

4)

Persuading, inducing or influencing another

public officer to perform an act constituting a
violation of rules and regulations duly
promulgated by competent authority or an
offense in connection with the official duties of
the latter, or allowing himself to be persuaded,
induced, or influenced to commit such violation
or offense.
Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any
gift, present, share, percentage, or benefit for
himself or for any other person, in connection
with any contract or transaction between the
Government and any other party, wherein the
public officer in his official capacity has to
intervene under the law.

Is a Christmas or birthday gift received by a public

officer considered a corrupt practice?

Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any

gift, present or other pecuniary or material
benefit, for himself or for another, from any
person for whom the public officer, in any
manner or capacity, has secured or obtained, or
will secure or obtain, any Government permit or
license, in consideration for the help given or to
be given.

ANSWER:
No if the gift was
(a) unsolicited (given by the giver voluntarily
and not demanded by the public officer), and
(b) of small or insignificant value, and
(C) was given as a mere token of gratitude or
friendship according to local customs or usage (Sec. 14).

Accepting or having any member of his family

accept employment in a private enterprise
which has pending official business with him
during the pendency thereof or within one year
after its termination.

5)

Causing any undue injury to any party,

including the Government, or giving any private
party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or
preference in the discharge of his official,
administrative or judicial functions through
manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross
inexcusable negligence.

6)

Neglecting or refusing, after due demand or

request, without sufficient justification, to act
within a reasonable time on any matter pending
before him for the purpose of obtaining directly

Prohibition on PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS:

It is unlawful for ANY PERSON having family or
close personal relation with any public official to
capitalize or exploit or take advantage of such family or
close personal relation by directly or indirectly requesting
or receiving any present, gift or material or pecuniary
advantage from any other person having some business,
transaction, application, request or contract with the
Government, in which such public official has to
intervene.
FAMILY RELATION includes the SPOUSE or
RELATIVES by consanguinity or affinity in the 3rd CIVIL
DEGREE.

122

www.rkmfiles.net

CLOSE PERSONAL RELATION includes close

personal relationship, social and fraternal connections,
and professional employment all giving rise to intimacy
which assures free access to such public officer.

The public officer who is under investigation or

is being tried for graft and corruption should be
SUSPENDED FROM OFFICE pending the investigation or
trial of his case.

It is unlawful for any person knowingly to induce

or cause any public official to commit any of the
CORRUPT PRACTICES.

Is a public officer who was found guilty of the

charges entitled to his retirement or gratuity
benefits?

Prohibition on CERTAIN RELATIVES:

No. Should the public officer be convicted by

final judgment, he loses all retirement or gratuity
benefits under the law.

It is unlawful for the SPOUSE or for ANY

RELATIVE, by consanguinity or affinity, within the 3rd
civil degree, of the
1) President of the Philippines,
2) Vice President of the Philippines,
3) Senate President, and
4) House Speaker

What about if the public officer has already

received his retirement or gratuity benefits and he
was convicted of the charges?
The said convicted public officer who was found
guilty of the charges must return or restitute the amount
received as retirement or gratuity benefit to the
Government.

to INTERVENE directly or indirectly, in any

business, transaction, contract or application with the
Government (subject to the exceptions provided for
under Sec. 5).

What about if the public officer was found

INNOCENT of the charges against him?

Prohibition on MEMBERS OF CONGRESS:

It is unlawful for any member of the Congress,
during his/her term of office to ACQUIRE or RECEIVE any
personal pecuniary interest in any specific business
enterprise which will be directly and particularly favored
or benefited by any law or resolution AUTHORED by
him/her previously approved or adopted by the Congress
during his/her term.

The public officer is acquitted; he is entitled to

reinstatement and to the salaries and benefits which he
failed to receive during suspension.
Republic Act No. 7610 - (Anti-Child Abuse Law)
Who are children under the Act?

Statement of Assets and Liabilities

Children refers to persons:

Every public officer MUST file-

a) Below 18 years of age, or

b) Over 18 years of age but are unable to fully
take care of themselves or protect themselves from
abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination
because of a physical or mental disability or condition
(Sec. 3).

WHAT? A detailed and sworn statement of

assets and liabilities, amounts and sources of his/her
income, amounts of his/her personal and family
expenses and the amount of income taxes paid.
WHEN? 1) within 30 days after assuming office,
2) on or before April 15 of every year,
3) upon the expiration of his/her term
of office, or
4) upon his/her resignation or
separation from office.

What is CHILD ABUSE?

CHILD ABUSE refers to the maltreatment,
whether habitual or not, of the child which includes any
of the following acts:
a) Psychological and physical abuse, neglect,
cruelty, sexual abuse and emotional maltreatment;
b) Any act by deeds or words which debases,
degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and dignity of a
child as a human being;
c) Unreasonable deprivation of his basic needs
for survival, such as food and shelter; or
d) Failure to immediately give medical
treatment to an injured child resulting in serious
impairment of his growth and development or his
permanent incapacity or death.

What COURT has the jurisdiction to try complaints

for violations of R.A. 3019?
SANDIGANBAYAN - has the original jurisdiction
to hear and decide complaints for Graft and Corruption.
Is a public officer who is being investigated or is
facing charges of graft and corruption allowed to
resign or retire during the pendency of the
investigation or the case against him?
No public officer is allowed to resign or retire
pending an investigation, criminal or administrative or
pending a prosecution against him, for any offense under
R.A. No. 3019 or under the provisions of the RPC on
bribery (Sec. 12).

Offenses under this Act

1) CHILD PROSTITUTION and OTHER CHILD ABUSE
Who are considered children exploited in
prostitution and other sexual abuse?

What should be done to the public officer accused

of violation of R.A. No. 3019 during the pendency
of the investigation or during the trial of his case?

Children, whether male or female, who for

money, profit or any other consideration or due to the

123

www.rkmfiles.net

coercion or influence of any adult, syndicate or group,

indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, are
deemed to be children exploited in prostitution and other
sexual abuse (Sec. 5).

Attempt to Commit CHILD TRAFFICKING:

There is an attempt to commit Child Trafficking:

Who are liable for Child Prostitution and other

Child Abuse?

- When a child travels alone to a foreign country

without valid reason therefor and without
clearance issued by the DSWD or written
permission or justification from the childs
parents or legal guardian;

The following are punished with reclusion temporal

in its medium period to reclusion perpetua:
1) Those who engage in or promote, facilitate or
induce child prostitution which include, but are not
limited to the following:

- When a pregnant mother executes an affidavit

of consent for adoption for a consideration;
- When a person, agency, establishment or
child-caring institution recruits women or
couples to bear children for the purpose of child
trafficking;

- Acting as procurer of a child prostitute;

- Inducing a person to be a client of a child
prostitute by means of written or oral
advertisements or other similar means;
- Taking advantage of influence or relationship
to procure a child as a prostitute;
- Threatening or using violence towards a child
to engage him as a prostitute; or
- Giving monetary consideration, goods or other
pecuniary to a child with the intent to engage such
child in prostitution.

- When a doctor, hospital, or child clinic official

or employee, nurse, midwife, local civil registrar
or any other person simulates birth for the
purpose of child trafficking; or
- When a person engages in the act of finding
children among low-income families, hospitals,
clinics, nurseries, day-care centers, or other
child-caring institutions who can be offered for
the purpose of child trafficking.

2) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse

or lascivious conduct with a child exploited in
prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse;

3) OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND INDECENT SHOWS

3) Those who derive profit or advantage there from,

whether as a manager or owner of the
establishment where the prostitution takes place, or
of the sauna, disco, bar, resort, place of
entertainment or establishment serving as a cover
or which engages in prostitution in addition to the
activity for which the license has been issued to said
establishment.

Who are liable?

a) Any person who hires, employs, uses, persuades,
induces, or coerces a child:
1) to perform in obscene exhibitions and
indecent shows, whether live or in video;
2) to pose or model in obscene publications or
pornographic materials.

ACTS PUNISHABLE AS AN ATTEMPT TO COMMIT CHILD

PROSTITUTION

b) Any ascendant, guardian, or person entrusted in any

capacity with the care of the child who causes and/or
allows a child to be employed or to participate in an
obscene play, scene, act, movie or show or in any other
acts covered by Sec. 9 of R.A. 7610.

Who are guilty of attempt to commit child

prostitution?
Any person who, not being a relative of the child
is found ALONE with the child inside the room or cubicle
of a house, an inn, hotel, motel, pension house, apartelle
or other similar establishments, vessel, vehicle or any
other hidden or secluded area under circumstances
which would lead a reasonable person to believe that the
child is about to be exploited in prostitution and other
sexual abuse; and

Other ACTS of NEGLECT, ABUSE, CRUELTY or

EXPLOITATION and other Conditions Prejudicial to the
Childs Development:
1) Committing any other act of child abuse,
cruelty or exploitation or be responsible for other
conditions prejudicial to the childs development;

Any person who receives services from a child

in a sauna parlor, massage clinic, health club and other
similar establishments.

2) Keeping or having in his company a minor, 12

years or under or who is 10 years or more younger than
his junior in any public place or private place, hotel,
motel, beer joint, discothque, cabaret, pension house,
sauna or massage parlor, beach and/or other tourist
resort or similar places;

2) CHILD TRAFFICKING
Consummated Act of CHILD TRAFFICKING
Who are liable for consummated act of child
trafficking?

3) Inducing, delivering or offering a minor to

anyone prohibited to keep or have in his company a
minor as provided in the preceding paragraph;

Any person who engages in trading and dealing

with children including, but not limited to, the act of
buying and selling of a child for money, or for any other
consideration, or barter.

4) Allowing by any person, owner, manager or

one entrusted with the operation of any public or private

124

www.rkmfiles.net

place or accommodation, whether for occupancy, food,

drink, or otherwise, including residential places any
minor;

or
3) ESTAFA under Art. 315 paragraph 1 (b) of the
RPC.

5) Using, coercing, forcing or intimidating a

street child or any other child to:
a) Beg or use begging as a means of
living;
b) Act as conduit or middleman in drug
trafficking or pushing; or
c) Conduct any illegal activities.
Who may FILE a COMPLAINT for a VIOLATION of
R.A. 7610?
The complaint may be filed by any of the
following:
1) Offended party;
2) Parents or guardians;
3) Ascendant or collateral relative within the
third degree of consanguinity;
4) Officer, social worker or representative of a
licensed child-caring institution;
5) Officer, social worker of the DSWD;
6) Barangay Chairman;
7) At least 3 concerned responsible citizens
where the violation occurred.

CARNAPPING vs. QUALIFIED THEFT vs. ESTAFA

Republic Act No. 6539 - Anti-Carnapping Act of

1972
What is CARNAPPING?
It is the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor
vehicle belonging to another without the latters consent,
or by means of violence against or intimidation of
persons, or by using force upon things.
DEFINITION OF TERMS:
MOTOR VEHICLE is any vehicle propelled by any
power other than muscular power using the public
highways
EXCEPT the following:
Road rollers; Bulldozers; Trolley cars; Graders;
Street-Sweepers; Fork-lifts; Sprinklers; Amphibian Trucks,
and Lawn mowers; Cranes
NOT USED ON PUBLIC HIGHWAYS,
Vehicles, which run only on rails or tracks, and
Tractors, trailers and traction engines of all
kinds used exclusively for agricultural purposes.
What constitutes unlawful taking in the crime of
CARNAPPING?
UNLAWFUL TAKING in CARNAPPING takes place
when the owner or juridical possessor does not give his
consent to the taking, or, if consent was given, it was
vitiated (People vs. Tan, 323 SCRA 30).

CARNAPPING

QUALIFIED
THEFT

ESTAFA

1) Taking
2) with intent
to gain,
3) of a motor
vehicle
4)
belonging
to another 5)
(a) without the
latters
consent,
or
(b) by
means of
violence
against
or
intimidation of
person,
or
(c) by using
force
upon
things.

A] Art. 310,
RPC
1)Taking
2) with intent
to gain
3) of a motor
vehicle
4) belonging
to another
5)
Without
the
latters
consent
6) But without
violence
against
or
intimidation
of persons or
force
upon
things.

1)
Physical
and Juridical
possession of
the
motor
vehicle
was
transferred to
the accused;
(e.g. agency
to sale)
2)
He
misappropriat
ed the same.

B]
Jurisprudenc
e
1) Material or
physical
possession of
the
motor
vehicle
was
transferred to
the accused;
(e.g.
borrowed)
2)
He
misappropriat
ed the same.

Republic Act No. 6235 - ANTI-HIJACKING LAW

How is the crime of HIJACKING committed?

TAKING OF A MOTOR VEHICLE can be:

Hijacking is committed by:

1) Compelling the pilot to change
destination of a DOMESTIC AIRCARFT;

1) CARNAPPING under R.A. 6538, or

2) QUALIFIED THEFT under Art. 310 of the RPC,

125

in

course

www.rkmfiles.net

or

2) Seizing or usurping the control of a DOMESTIC

AIRCAFT while it is in flight;
3) Compelling a FOREIGN AIRCRAFT to land in the
Philippine territory; and
4) Seizing or usurping the control of the FOREIGN
AIRCRAFT while it is within Philippine territory.

WHO is considered as an OWNER/RAISER of a

Large Cattle?
OWNER/RAISER - includes the herdsman, caretaker,
employee or tenant of any firm or entity engaged in the
raising of large cattle or other persons in lawful
possession of such large cattle.

When is an aircraft considered in flight?

Duty of OWNER/RAISER to Register the LARGE CATTLE The owner/raiser is duty-bound to register the large
cattle belonging to him

An aircraft is considered in flight from the

moment all its external doors are closed following
embarkation until any of such doors is opened for
disembarkation.

WHEN? Before the large cattle attains the age of 6

months.
WHERE? With the office of the City/Municipality where
the owner/raiser resides.

Other acts punished by R.A. No. 6235:

Shipping,
loading,
or
carrying
in
any
PASSENGER AIRCRAFT operating as a public utility within
the Philippines any explosive, flammable, corrosive or
poisonous substance or material.

After registration, a CERTIFICATE of OWNERSHIP is issued

to the owner/raiser.
Permit to BUY and SELL Large Cattle:

Republic Act No. 4200 - Anti-Wire Tapping Law

Any
person,
partnership,
association,
corporation or entity engaged in the business of buying
and selling large cattles MUST first secure a permit from
(a) the Provincial Commander, and (b) the City/Municipal
Treasurer of the place of residence of such person,
partnership, association, corporation or entity.

What are the acts punished as wire-tapping?

1) Tapping any wire or cable, or
2) Using any other device or arrangement,
3) To secretly overhear, intercept, or record a
4) Private communication/conversation or
spoken word
5) Without the knowledge or consent of all the
parties.
Note: Private
SHOUTING

Communications

Presidential Decree No.

533
Anti-Cattle
Rustling Law of 1974
What is a
RUSTLING?

CATTLE

Can

Be

Waived

P.D. No. 532

1) Piracy can only be
committed
on
Philippine
territorial
waters.

Clearance for SHIPMENT of LARGE CATTLE

Any
person,
partnership,
association,
corporation or entity desiring to ship or transport large
by
cattle, its hides, or meat, from one province to another
MUST secure a PERMIT from
the Provincial Commander.
ARTICLE 122, RPC
1) Piracy can be committed both
on the high seas and on Philippine
territorial waters.

PRESUMPTION
Rustling:

of

Cattle

FAILURE to exhibit
or show the required PERMIT
or CLEARANCE by any
person
having
in
his
possession,
control
or
custody of large cattle is a
PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE that
the large cattle in his
possession,
control,
or
custody is the fruit of the

2) Can only be committed by a

CATTLE RUSTLING is the 2) Can be committed person who is neither a passenger
1.
Taking
by
ANY
PERSON nor member of the complement of
away
by
any
including a passenger the vessel.
means, methods
or member of the
or
scheme,
complement of the
without
the
vessel.
consent of the
owner/raiser, of a LARGE CATTLE whether or not
crime of cattle rustling.
for profit or gain, or whether committed with or
without violence against or intimidation of any
Presidential Decree No. 1612 - Anti-Fencing Law of
person or force upon things;
1979
2.

Killing of a large cattle, or taking its

meat or hide without the consent of the
owner/raiser.

What is fencing?
Fencing is the act of any person who,

What is a LARGE CATTLE?

a) with intent to gain for himself or for another,

b) BUY, RECEIVE, POSSESS, KEEP, ACQUIRE,
CONCEAL,
SELL, or DISPOSE of, or BUYS and SELLS, or
in any other manner deal in
c) any article, item, object or anything of value
d) which HE KNOWS, or SHOULD BE KNOWN TO
HIM,
e) to have been derived from the proceeds of
the crime of robbery or theft.

LARGE CATTLE includes the following:

family.

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)

Cow;
Carabao;
Horse;
Mule;
Ass; or
Other domesticated member of the bovine

126

www.rkmfiles.net

Who is a FENCE? FENCE includes any

is only Robbery or Robbery in band if there are at least 4

armed participants.

person,
firm,
association,
corporation or partnership, or
other organizations
who/which commits the act of fencing.

Is the number of perpetrators an essential

element of Highway Robbery or Brigandage?
No. The perpetrator could be a single person or
a group of persons not necessarily at least four (4)
armed persons.

Presumption of FENCING:

Is the fact that Robbery was committed on

Philippine Highway makes it Highway Robbery or
Brigandage?

Mere possession of any goods, article, item,

object, or anything of value which has been the subject
of robbery or theft is a PRIMA FACIE evidence of fencing.

No. The mere fact that robbery was committed

on Philippine Highway does not give rise to Highway
Robbery or Brigandage. The intent of indiscriminate
highway robbery must be present.

Presidential Decree No. 532 - Anti-Piracy and AntiHighway Robbery Law

What is PIRACY?

Republic Act No. 8049 - Anti-Hazing Act

Any attack upon or seizure of any vessel, or the

taking away of the whole or part thereof, or its cargo,
equipment, or the personal belonging of its complement
or passengers, irrespective of the value thereof, by
means of violence against or intimidation of persons or
force upon things.

What is HAZING?
It is an initiation rite or practice as a
prerequisite for admission into membership in a
fraternity, sorority or organization by placing the recruit,
neophyte or applicant in some EMBARRASSING or
HUMILIATING situations such as forcing him to do menial,
silly, foolish and similar tasks or activities or otherwise
subjecting him to physical or psychological suffering or
injury.

Who may commit PIRACY?

Any person, including a passenger or member
of the crew/complement of the vessel.
Where may PIRACY be committed?

Take NOTE: The term ORGANIZATION include

any club, or the AFP, PNP, PMA, or officer and cadet
corps of the Citizens Military Academy (CMT), or
Citizens Army Training (CAT).

Only in Philippine waters.

PIRACY: P.D. 532 VERSUS Art. 122 of the RPC

Requirements before hazing or initiation rites may be

conducted:
1) Prior written notice to the school authorities
or head of organization (seven (7) days before the
conduct of the said initiation rite.

What is HIGHWAY ROBBERY or BRIGANDAGE?

1) The seizure of any person for ransom,
extortion or other unlawful purposes, or

2) The written notice shall

2) Taking away of the property of another by

means of violence against or intimidation of persons or
force upon things or other unlawful means.

a) indicate the period of the initiation activities

which shall not exceed three (3) days;
b) include the names of those to be initiated;
c) contain an undertaking that no physical
violence be employed by anybody during such initiation
rites.

WHERE? On any PHILIPPINE HIGHWAY

What is a PHILIPPINE HIGHWAY?

Republic Act No. 7832 - Anti-Electricity Pilferage

Act

Any road, street, passage, highway and bridges

or other parts thereof, or railways or railroad within the
Philippines used by persons, or vehicles, or locomotives
or trains for the movement or circulation of persons or
transportation of goods, articles, or property or both.

Punishes: 1) Illegal use of electricity (- e.g. illegal

connection, tampering, use of jumpers)
2) Theft of electric power transmission lines
and materials.

What is the purpose of the accused in Highway

Robbery or Brigandage?

What is MURO-AMI?

The purpose of brigandage is INDISCRIMINATE

HIGHWAY ROBBERY (i.e. victim could be any person or
persons that passes through a Philippine Highway).

It is the act of fishing with gear method or other

physical or mechanical acts that destroy coral reefs, sea
grass beds and other fishery marine life habitat

If the purpose is only a particular robbery (i.e.

there is a predetermined or particular victim), the crime

It is punishable under The Philippine Fisheries

Code of 1998 and R.A. 8550.

127

www.rkmfiles.net

R.A. 7438 - Act Defining Certain Rights of Persons

Arrested,
Detained
or
Under
Custodial
Investigation

1)

Any arresting public officer or employee, or any

investigating officer who fails to inform any
person arrested, detained or under custodial
investigation of his right to remain silent and to
have a competent and independent counsel
preferably of his own choice;

2)

Any pubic officer or employee or anyone acting

upon orders of such investigating officer or in
his place, who fails to provide a competent and
independent counsel to a person arrested,
detained or under custodial investigation for the
commission of an offense if the latter cannot
afford the services of his own counsel;

3)

Any person who obstructs, prevents or prohibits

any lawyer, any member of the immediate
family of a person arrested, detained or under
custodial investigation, or any medical doctor or
priest or religious minister chosen by him or by
any member of his immediate family or by his
counsel, from visiting and conferring privately
with him, or from examining and treating him,
or from ministering to his spiritual needs, at any
hour of the day, or in urgent cases, of the night.

Rights of Persons Arrested, Detained or Under Custodial

Investigation:
1)
2)
3)
4)

Right to be assisted by counsel at all times.

Right to remain silent.
Right to have a competent and independent
counsel, preferably of his own choice.
Right to be visited by any member of his
immediate family, or any medical doctor or
priest or religious minister chosen by him or by
any NGO duly accredited by the CHR or by any
international NGO duly accredited by the Office
of the President.

In what form shall the investigation report be?

It shall be in written form to be signed or thumb
marked by the person arrested, detained or under
custodial
investigation.

What should be done if the person arrested or

detained does not know how to read and write?

Batas Pambansa Bilang. 22 - Anti-Bouncing Check

Law

The contents of the investigation report shall be

read and adequately explained to him by his counsel or
by the assisting counsel in a language or dialect known
to such arrested or detained person.

Who is liable for violation of B.P. 22?

1. Any person who makes or draws and issues
any check to apply on account or value, knowing at the
time of issue that he does not have sufficient funds in or
credit with the drawee bank for the payment of such
checks in full upon its presentment, which check is
subsequently dishonored by the drawee bank.

Form of Extrajudicial Confession

It shall be in
(1) writing and
(2) signed by the person
(3) in the presence of his counsel or in the
latters absence, upon a valid waiver, and in the
presence of any of the parents, older brothers and
sisters, his spouse, the municipal mayor, the municipal
judge, district school supervisor, or priest or minister of
the gospel as chosen by him.

For what reason?

For insufficiency of funds or credit or it would
have been dishonored for the same reason had not the
drawer, without any valid reason, ordered the bank to
stop payment.
2. Any person who made or drew and issued a
check who failed to keep sufficient funds or to maintain a
credit to cover the full amount of the check if said check
was presented within a period of 90 days from the date
appearing thereon, for which reason it is dishonored by
the bank.

Effect of non-compliance with the requirements of a valid

extrajudicial confession:
The extrajudicial confession made by the person
arrested, detained or under custodial investigation will
be INADMISSIBLE as evidence in any proceeding.

ELEMENTS OF THE CRIME

Form of waiver by the person arrested, detained or under

custodial investigation of Article 125 of the RPC:

1.

Any waiver under the provisions of Art. 125 of

the RPC should be in WRITING and SIGNED by such
person in the PRESENCE of his counsel, otherwise, such
waiver shall be null and void and of no effect.

2.

What is CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION?

3.

Includes the practice of issuing an invitation

to a person who is being investigated in connection with
an offense he is suspected to have committed.
Republic Act No. 7438 imposes penalties to the following:

128

The accused makes, draws or issues any

check to apply on account or value.
The check is subsequently dishonored by
the drawee bank for insufficiency of funds
or credit or it would have been dishonored
for the same reason had not the drawer,
without any valid reason, ordered the bank
to stop payment.
The accused KNOWS at the time of
issuance that he or she does not have
sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee
bank for the payment of the check in full
upon its presentment.

www.rkmfiles.net

Republic Act No. 7877 - Anti-Sexual Harassment

Act

INFLUENCE OR MORAL ASCENDANCY OVER ANOTHER in a

work or training or education environment.

WHOM? By an

IN WHAT WAY?

1) EMPLOYER,
2) EMPLOYEE,
3) MANAGER,
4) SUPERVISOR,
5) AGENT OF THE EMPLOYER,
6) TEACHER,
7) INSTRUCTOR,
8) PROFESSOR,
9) COACH,
10) TRAINER, or
11) ANY OTHER PERSON HAVING AUHTORITY,

By demanding, requesting or otherwise

requiring any SEXUAL FAVOR from the other, regardless
of whether the demand, request or requirement for
submission is accepted by the victim.

oo

129

www.rkmfiles.net