Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Whether or not accused is liable only for an The case at bar belongs to this category.
impossible crime. Petitioner shoots the place where he
thought his victim would be, although in
RULING: reality, the victim was not present in said
place and thus, the petitioner failed to
Under Article 4(2) of the RPC, the act accomplish his end.
performed by the offender cannot produce
an offense against person or property The factual situation in the case at bar
because: 1) the commission of the offense is presents a physical impossibility which
inherently impossible of accomplishment; or render the intended crime impossible of
2) the means employed is either a) accomplishment. And under Article 4,
inadequate or b) ineffectual. paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code, such
is sufficient to make the act an impossible
To be impossible under this clause, the act crime.
intended by the offender must be by its
nature one impossible of accomplishment. JACINTO VS CA
There must be either 1) legal impossibility, or
2) physical impossibility of accomplishing the FACTS:
intended act in order to qualify the act as an
impossible crime. n June 1997, Baby Aquino, handed petitioner
-collector of Mega Foam, a post dated
Legal impossibility occurs where the checked worth P10,000 as payment for
intended act, even if complete would not Baby’s purchases from Mega Foam
amount to a crime. Thus: legal impossibility International, Inc. The said check was
would apply to those circumstances where deposited to the account of Jacqueline
1) the motive, desire and expectation is to Capitle’s husband-Generoso. Rowena
perform an act in violation of the law; 2) Recablanca, another employee of Mega
Foam, received a phone call from an Petitioner’s evil intent cannot be denied, as
employee of Land Bank, who was looking for the mere act of unlawfully taking the check
Generoso to inform Capitle that the BDO meant for Mega Foam showed her intent to
check deposited had been dishonored. gain or be unjustly enriched. Were it not for
Thereafter, Joseph Dyhenga talked to Baby the fact that the check bounced, she would
to tell that the BDO Check bounced. have received the face value thereof, which
However, Baby said that she had already was not rightfully hers. Therefore, it was only
paid Mega Foam P10,000 cash in August due to the extraneous circumstance of the
1997 as replacement for the dishonored check being unfunded, a fact unknown to
check. petitioner at the time, that prevented the
crime from being produced. The thing
Dyhengco filed a compliant with the National unlawfully taken by petitioner turned out to
Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and worked be absolutely worthless, because the check
out an entrapment operation with its agents. was eventually dishonored, and Mega Foam
Thereafter, petitioner and Valencia were had received the cash to replace the value of
arrested. The NBI filed a criminal case for said dishonored check.
qualified theft against the two (2) and
Jacqueline Capitle. Petition granted. Decision is MODIFIED.
Petitioner Gemma T. Jacinto is found GUILTY
RTC rendered a decision that Gemma, Anita of an IMPOSSIBLE CRIME and is sentenced to
and Jacqueline GUILTY beyond reasonable suffer the penalty of six (6) months of
doubt of the crime of QUALIFIED THEFT and arrresto mayor, and to pay the costs.
each of the sentenced to suffer
imprisonment of Five (5) years, Five (5) VALENZUELA VS PEOPLE
months and Eleven (11) days to Six (6) years,
Eight (8) months and Twenty (20) days. FACTS:
ISSUE:
RULING: