Professional Documents
Culture Documents
General Principles
Crime is the commission or omission by a person having capacity, of any
act, which is either prohibited or compelled by law and the commission or
omission of which is punishable by a proceeding brought in the name of the
government whose law has been violated. (Whartons Criminal Law, Vol. 1,
p.11)
If the crime is punished by the Revised Penal Code (RPC), it is called a
felony; if by a special law, it is called an offense; and if by an ordinance, it
is called an infraction of an ordinance.
Distinction:
Felonies (RPC)
Offense (Special Law)
1. Criminal liability is based on 1. It is enough that the prohibited
mens rea or in dolo (deceit) or act was voluntary perpetrated.
culpa (fault).
2. Good faith or lack of criminal 2. Good faith or lack of criminal
intent is a valid defense.
intent is not a defense.
3. Degree of accomplishment are 3. Acts give rise to crime only
considered, i.e., frustrated, etc.
when consummated.
4. Mitigating and aggravating 4.Mitigating
and
aggravating
circumstances
are
taken
into circumstances are not considered.
account in imposing the penalty.
5. Degree of participation is 5. All who perpetrated prohibited
considered, i.e., accomplice, etc.
act are penalized to the same
extent.
1. Generality
The statutes must apply to all persons within the country, whether they
reside or sojourn or are merely transients, regardless of nationality, color,
sex, age, social position, and other personal circumstances, except as
provided (a) in public international law, (b) treaty stipulations, and (c) laws of
preferential application.
2. Territoriality
3. Irretrospectivity or Prospectivity
The law does not have any retroactivity effect, except if it favors the offender
unless if he is a habitual delinquent (Art. 22) or the law otherwise provides.
A judicial decision, although by its nature is prospective in operation may be
given retroactive effect in favor of the offender, since it forms part of the
legal system. (Gumabon v. Dir. of Prisons, 37 SCRA 420)
If a penal law is expressly repealed by another law, the crime is obliterated,
and if there is a pending criminal action at the time of repeal, the same is to
be dismissed. (Ang Beng v. Comm. of Immigration, 9621, Jan. 30, 1957) If
there is merely an implied repeal, the pending criminal action at the time of
the effectivity of the second law impliedly repealing the first law is not
dismissed because the act punished in the first law is still punished in the
second law which impliedly repeal the former. Hence, implied repeals are
also called repeals by re-enactment. (People v. Purisima, 75 OG 4175) When
the law which expressly repeals a prior law is itself repealed, the law first
repealed shall not be thereby revived unless expressly so provided. But
when a law which repeals by implication a prior law is itself repealed, the
repeal of the repealing law revives the prior law unless the repealing law
provides otherwise.
Theories of Criminal Law: (Q1, 1996 Bar)
Classical Theory
Positivist Theory
1. Man is essentially a moral 1. Man is subdued occasionally by
creature with an absolutely free will a
strange
and
morbid
to choose between good and evil. phenomenon which conditions him
to do wrong contrary to his
volition.
2. Basic criminal liability is human 2. Crime is essentially a social and
free will and the purpose of the moral phenomenon and penalty is
penalty is retribution.
imposed for self-defense.
3. Crime is a juridical entity and the 3. Basis of criminal responsibility is
penalty is an evil and a means of his dreadfulness or dangerous
juridical tutelage.
state.
CRIMINAL LAW 1Criminal Law- is that branch of law which defines crimes,
treats of their nature and provides for their punishment. (12 CYC 129
&Lacson vs. Executive Secretary, 102 SCAD, l999). It is a branch of public law
because it treats of acts or omissions of the citizenswhich are deemed
primarily as wrongs against the State more than against the offended
party.Different branches of laws: Political Law, Mercantile Law, Commercial
Law, Constitutional Law, Civil Law & others.Crimes: Theft (Article 308)committed by any person who, with intent of gain but without violence
against, or intimidation of persons nor force upon things, shall take the
personal property of another without the latters consent. Rape (Article 266-A
( asamended by RA 8353) is committed by a man who shall have carnal
knowledge with a woman : through force, threat or intimidation, x x x .
Punishment Theft depends on the amount of the thing stolen ex. Amt. is
over 200 pesos but does not exceed6,000 penalty is Prision Correccional in
its minimum and medium periods ( 6 mos. and 1 day to 4 yrs.& 2 mos.
Penalty for Rape committed with the use of deadly weapon or by two or
more persons, the penalty is Reclusion Perpetua to Death.What is crime
law. When a doctrine of the court is overruled and a different view isadopted,
the new doctrine should be applied prospectively and should not apply to
parties who relied on the old doctrine on the faiththereof. This is especially
true in the construction and application of criminal laws, where it is
necessary that the punishability of anact be reasonably foreseen for the
guidance of society ( Co vs. CA- Ibid).Effect of the repeal of penal laws on the
accused:The effect depends upon the nature of the repeal of the penal
laws:a) In absolute or total repeal or express repeal, the act or omission is
decriminalized so that if a case is pending, it shall bedismissed whether the
accused is a habitual delinquent or not because there is no more crime for
which he should be tried. If he wasalready convicted and /or serving
sentence, he shall be released if he is not a habitual delinquent or unless the
law provides thatdetention is to continue. b) In partial or relative repeal or
implied repeal or repeal by re-enactment, the first law will govern if the
accused is a habitualdelinquent or if the favorable second law prohibits
retroactivity. While the second law will govern if favorable to the offender
who isnot a habitual delinquent or the law is silent as to its retroactivity. Ex.
Pp. vs. Velasco 67 SCAD or 252 SCRA the beneficent provisions of RA
7659 can be applied retroactively to judgments which have become final and
executory prior to December 31, l993and even to those who are already
serving sentences.
General Rule: Mental acts such as thoughts, ideas, opinions and beliefs, are not subject of penal
legislations. One may express an idea which is contrary to law, morals or is unconventional, but as
long as he does not act on them or induce others to act on them, such mental matters are outside the
realm of penal law and the person may not be subjected to criminal prosecution.
B. The Second: The External Stage which is where the accused performs acts which are observable
1). The Preparatory acts: Acts which may or may not lead to the commission of a concrete crime.
Being equivocal they are not as rule punishable except when there is an express provision of law
punishing specific preparatory acts.
Example: (i) the general rule: buying of a gun, bolo or poison, even if the purpose is to use these to kill
a person; so also with conspiracies and proposals. (ii) the exception: possession of picklocks and false
keys is punished; as with conspiracies to commit treason, rebellion, sedition and coup detat
A).(1). The attempt which the Penal Code punishes is that which has a connection to a particular,
concrete offense, that which is the beginning of the execution of the offense by overt acts of the
perpetrator, leading directly to the its realization and commission (2) The act must not be equivocal but
indicates a clear intention to commit a particular and specific felony. Thus the act of a notorious
criminal in following a woman can not be the attempted stage of any felony.
B). Overt or external act is some physical deed or activity, indicating the intention to commit a
particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to is complete
termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the
voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense
C). Examples:
1. The accused pressed a chemically -soaked cloth on the mouth of the woman to induce her to
sleep, while he lay on top of her and pressed his body to her. The act is not the overt act that will
logically and necessarily ripen into rape. They constitute unjust vexation. ( Note: it would be
attempted rape if he tried to undress the victim or touch her private parts) ( Balleros vs. People,
Feb, 22, 2006)
2. One found inside a house but no article was found on him, is liable for trespass and not for
attempted theft or robbery even if he is a notorious robber
3. One found removing the glass window panes or making a hole in the wall is not liable for
attempted robbery but for attempted trespass
D) The accused has not yet passed the subjective phase or that phase encompassed from the time an
act is executed which begins the commission of the crime until the time of the performance of the last
act necessary to produce the crime, but where the accused has still control over his actions and their
results.
.
E).The accused was not able to continue performing the acts to produce the crime. He was prevented
by external forces and not because he himself chose not to continue. Such as when his weap0n was
snatched, or his intended victim managed to escape, or he was overpowered or arrested.
F). If the accused voluntarily desisted i.e he himself decided not to continue with his criminal purpose,
then he is not liable.
1. Reason: This is an absolutory cause by way of reward to those who, having set one foot on the
verge of crimes, heed the call of their conscience and return to the path of righteousness. .
2. The reason for the desistance is immaterial
3. Exceptions: when the accused is liable despite his desistance
a). when the act performed prior to the desistance already constituted the attempted stage of
the intended felony. For example: the accused, with intent to kill, shot at the victim but missed
after which he desisted, his acts already constituted attempted homicide
b). When the acts performed already gave rise to the intended felony. The decision not to
continue is not a legal but factual desistance. As in the case of a thief who returned what he
stole.
c). When the acts performed constitute a separate offense. Pointing a gun at another and
threatening to kill, and then desisting gives rise to grave threats.
A. The accused has passed the subjective phase and is now in the objective phase, or that portion in
the commission of the crime where the accused has performed the last act necessary to produce the
intended crime and where he has no more control over the results of his acts.
B. The non-production of the crime should not be due to the acts of the accused himself, for if it were
he would be liable not for the frustrated stage of the intended crime, but possibly for another offense.
Thus: where the accused shot the victim mortally wounding him, but he himself saved the life of his
victim, his liability is that for serious physical injuries as the intent to kill is absent.
C. Attempted vs. Frustrated Homicide/murder. Where the accused, with intent to kill, injured the victim
but the latter did not die, when is the crime attempted or frustrated?
1. First View: The subjective phase doctrine. If at that point where the accused has still control
over the results of his actions but is stopped by reason outside of his own desistance and the
subjective phase has not been passed, the offense is attempted
2. Second View: The Mortal Wound or Life Threatening Injury Doctrine: If a mortal wound or life
threatening injury had been inflicted, the offense is frustrated, else it is attempted ( Palaganas vs.
PP., Sept. 12, 2006)
3. Third View: The belief of the accused should be considered in that if the accused believed he
has done all which is necessary to produce death, then it is frustrated.
V. Consummated.
When all the elements of the crime are present whether it be the intended crime or a different crime
A. The manner of the commission of the crime and how it is defined by the RPC. Some crimes have
only the consumated stage (Formal crimes) such as threats, coercion, alarms and scandal, slander,
acts of lasciviousness. In rape the gravamen is whether there is penetration or not, no matter how
slight, hence rape is either attempted or consummated.
1. Theft: it is consummated once the article is in the material physical possession of the accused,
whether actual or constructive. His ability to dispose off the thing his immaterial and does not
constitute an element.
N.B. Decisions of the CA as to bulky items where the accused must have the opportunity dispose
off or appropriate the articles have already been reversed. The doctrine now is that theft has no
frustrated stage ( Valenzuela vs. PP. June 21, 2007)
2. Estafa: It is not the material possession but the existence of damage which consumates the
crime.
3. Robbery with Force Upon Things: The thing must be brought out of the building to consumate
the crime.
1. Crimes which require the participation of two persons have no frustrated stage. Examples:
Adultery and concubinage; corruption of a public official.
2. There are crimes which are punished according to their results and not the intention of the
accused such as physical injuries.
3. As to Arson: it is consumated once a part of the building is burned. It has been ruled that if the
accused lit certain materials but no part of the building as burned, the crime is in its frustrated stage
and if there was no material which was as yet lit, then arson is still in its attempted. Thus one who
places sacks soaked in gasoline near the post and lit it but no part of the building was burned,
committed frustrated arson.
(Personal Opinion: there can be no frustrated stage, but only attempted stage if the fire was not yet
applied to the building. But if fire was applied to the building or a part thereof but no part of the
building was burned, then it is attempted. The only consideration is whether or not the accused
succeeded in burning a part of the building. If no part of the building was burned, it is still
attempted arson no matter how far gone were the acts of the accused).