2006-2008 Questions that Most Likely will Appear

Giving Assistance to Suicide 1Time

Francis and Joan were sweethearts, but their parents had objected to their
relationship because they were first cousins. They forged a pact in writing to commit
suicide. The agreement was to shoot each other in the head which they did. Joan died.
Due to medical assistance, Francis survived. Is Francis criminally liable for the death
of Joan? Explain. (5%)

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Yes, Francis is criminally liable for Joan's death. His act of shooting her, although
done pursuant to a solemn pact, is nevertheless felonious and is the proximate
cause of Joan's death (Art. 4, par. 1, RPC). Moreover, the mere act of giving
assistance to a suicide is a crime (Art. 253, RPC).

(2008 Bar Exam)

Penalties that may be served simultaneously 1Time

What are the penalties that may be served simultaneously?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:
The penalties that may be served simultaneously are imprisonment/ destierro and:
1. Perpetual absolute disqualification;
2. Perpetual special disqualification;
3. Temporary absolute disqualification;
4. Temporary special disqualification;
5. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted for, and the
right to follow a profession or calling;
6. Fine; and any principal penalty with its accessory penalties.

(2007 Bar Exam)

Light Coercion/Unjust Vexation 1 Time

Pinky was a lessee of a market stall owned by Giovanni. When Pinky refused to pay
her rental, Giovanni nailed some wooden barricades on one of the sides of the
market stall and posted this warning: "We have closed this portion of the door. Do
not open it or else something may happen to you."

What crime/ s did Giovanni commit, if any? Explain your answer?

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The crime committed by Giovanni is light coercion under Art. 287 of the
Rev. Penal Code, commonly referred to as unjust vexation. Although what was
done by Giovanni could reasonably be assumed as a retaliation to the lessee's
refusal to pay rent, absent any clear violence in the premises, such would not bring
about a case of grave coercion. The situation should be interpreted liberally in
favor of the offender. The rule of pro reo precludes any finding for grave coercion,
because it would be against the offender.
 The written warning which states "or else something may happen to you"
is so equivocal that it may not be interpreted as felonious. A crime is never
presumed; it is the contrary that is presumed.

(2007 Bar Exam)

Suspension of Sentence 1Time

There are at least 7 instances or situations in criminal cases wherein the accused,
either as an adult or as a minor, can apply for and/or be granted a suspended
sentence.

Enumerate at least 5 of them. 5%

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Instances when sentence may be suspended are: (at least 7 instances)

a) where the accused became insane before sentence could be promulgated (Art.
79, RPC);
b) where the offender, upon conviction by the trial court, filed an application
for probation which has been granted (Baclayon v. Mutia, 129 SCRA
148119841);
c) where the offender needs to be confined in a rehabilitation center because of
drug-dependency although convicted of the crime charged;
d) where the offender is a youthful offender under Art. 192, PD 603, otherwise
referred to as the Child and Youth Welfare Code; and
e) where the, crime was committed when the offender is under 18 years of age
and he is found guilty thereof in accordance with Rep. Act 9344, otherwise
known as the "Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006", but the trial court
subjects him to appropriate disposition measures as prescribed by the Supreme
Court in the Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law.
f) the death sentence shall be suspended upon a woman while she is pregnant
or within one year after delivery. (Art. 83, Revised Penal Code)
g) Section 66 of RA 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002)

SECTION 66. Suspension of Sentence of a First-Time Minor Offender. - An

accused who is over fifteen (15) years of age at the time of the commission of the
offense mentioned in Section 11 of this Act, but not more than eighteen (18) years
of age at the time when judgment should have been promulgated after having
been found guilty of said offense, may be given the benefits of a suspended
sentence, subject to the following conditions:
(a) He/she has not been previously convicted of violating any provision of
this
Act, or of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972, as amended; or of the Revised
Penal Code; or of any special penal laws;
(b) He/she has not been previously committed to a Center or to the care of a
DOH-accredited physician; and
(c) The, Board favorably recommends that his/her sentence be suspended xxx"

"SECTION 66. Suspension of Sentence of a First-Time Minor Offender. - An

accused:
h) When the sentence is death, its execution may be suspended or
postponed by the Supreme Court, through the issuance of a RO upon the
 ground of supervening events (Echegaray v. Secretary of Justice, 301 SCRA
96 [19991).

(2006 Bar Exam)

Indirect Bribery 1 Item

Commissioner Marian Torres of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) wrote

solicitation letters addressed to the Filipino-Chinese Chamber of Commerce and
Industry and to certain CEOs of various multinational corporations requesting
donations of gifts for her office Christmas party. She used the Bureau's official
stationery. The response was prompt and overwhelming so much so that
Commissioner Torres' office was overcrowded with rice cookers, radio sets, freezers,
electric stoves and toasters. Her staff also received several envelopes containing cash
money for the employees' Christmas luncheon.

Has Commissioner Torres committed any impropriety or irregularity? What laws or

decrees did she violate? 5%

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Yes, Commissioner Torres committed an impropriety. She violated Sec. 7(d) of

Rep. Act 6713 otherwise known as the “Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards
for Public Officials and Employees”. Sec. 7(d) mandates that public officials and
employees shall not solicit or accept directly or indirectly any gift, favor,
entertainment, loan or anything of monetary value from any person in the course
of her official duties or any transaction which may be affected by the functions of
their office.

ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:

The solicitation for her office Christmas Party violates Pres. Decree 46
which makes it punishable for any public official or employee to receive, directly
or indirectly, any gift, present or other valuable thing on any occasion, including
Christmas when such gift or present is given by reason of her official position.

ANOTHER SUGGESTED ANSWER:

Yes, Commissioner Torres committed an impropriety and violated Art. 211
of the Revised Penal Code on indirect bribery. She accepted gifts by reason of her
office.

(2006 Bar Exam)

Exploitation of Child Labor & Services rendered under Compulsion 1 Time

(Art. 273 & 274 of RPC)

Aling Maria received an urgent telephone call from Junior, her eldest son,
asking for P2,000.00 to complete his semestral tuition fees preparatory to his final
exams in Commerce. Distressed and disturbed, she borrowed money from her
compadre Mang Juan with the assurance to pay him within 2 months. Two months
lapsed but Aling Maria failed to settle her obligation. Mang Juan told Aling Maria
that she does not have to pay the loan if she will allow her youngest 10-year old
daughter Annie to work as a housemaid in his house for 2 months at PI,000.00 a
month. Despite Aling Maria’s objection, Mang Juan insisted and brought Annie to
his house to work as a maid.

1. Was a crime committed by Mang Juan when he brought Annie to his

house as maid for the purpose of repaying her mother's loan? 2.5%
2. If Aling Maria herself was made to work as a housemaid in Mang Juan’s
household to pay her loan, did he commit a crime? 2.5%

SUGGESTED ANSWER:

1. Yes, Mang Jnan violated of Rep. Act No. 7610 on child abuse and exploitation,
as
amended by Rep. Act 7658 prohibiting employment of children below 15 years of
age, in relation to the crime of Exploitation of Child Labor under Art. 273, Revised
Penal Code. Annie is only 10 years old and under the pretext of reimbursing
himself of a debt owed by Annie’s mother, Mang Juan took Annie to his house to
work as a maid despite her mother's objection. Annie could not have given consent
to the exploitation since she was only ten (10) year’s old and thus could not give
any valid consent.

2. If it was against her will that Aling Maria was made to work as a housemaid in
Mang Juan’s household to pay her debt to him, the latter would be committing a
crime under Art. 274 of the Revised Penal Code, which punishes any person who
shall compel a debtor to work for him as a household servant against her will just
to enforce payment of a debt.

(2006 Bar Exam)