CRIMINAL LAW 2

Book II (Articles 114-365, RPC) and specifically included Special Laws

Crimes Against National Security (Arts. 114-123)

TREASON- committed by a Filipino or an alien residing in the Philippines

-levies war against the Philippine Government or adheres to her
enemies.
-committed in times of war.
Q: How can one be convicted of the crime of Treason?
1. Two Witness Rule
2. Judicial Confession

Q: War is going on where Philippines is involved. X is a participant. X killed a

public officer? Will there be a separate charge for Treason and Murder be
filed against him?
A: No, common crimes are absorbed in the crime of Treason.
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT TREASON
-Two witness does not apply

RA 10591 ( ILLEGAL POSESSION of FIREARMS )

Section 29. Use of Loose Firearm in the Commission of a Crime. – The use of a loose
firearm, when inherent in the commission of a crime punishable under the Revised
Penal Code or other special laws, shall be considered as an aggravating
circumstance: Provided, That if the crime committed with the use of a loose firearm
is penalized by the law with a maximum penalty which is lower than that prescribed
in the preceding section for illegal possession of firearm, the penalty for illegal
possession of firearm shall be imposed in lieu of the penalty for the crime charged:
Provided, further, That if the crime committed with the use of a loose firearm
is penalized by the law with a maximum penalty which is equal to that imposed
under the preceding section for illegal possession of firearms, the penalty of prision
mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed in addition to the penalty for the
crime punishable under the Revised Penal Code or other special laws of which
he/she is found guilty.
If the violation of this Act is in furtherance of, or incident to, or in connection
with the crime of rebellion of insurrection, or attempted coup d’ etat, such
violation shall be absorbed as an element of the crime of rebellion or insurrection,
or attempted coup d’ etat.
If the crime is committed by the person without using the loose firearm, the
violation of this Act shall be considered as a distinct and separate offense.
 ESPIONAGE – crime of spy
-He is presumed to commit this crime if he enters a warship,
military establishment without authority.

VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY – there is war but Phils is not involved.

-not committed if there is no proclamation or regulation issued
by the competent authority

Qualified Piracy –vessel is on high seas or Philippine waters

-Offenders must not be members of the complement or
passengers. Must be a stranger.

was committed when the offenders seized the vessel by firing on or boarding
the same. In the problem, they even went further by divesting the passengers of
their money and jewelry. The vessel was anchored in the harbor of Kaoshiung,
Taiwan and it is submitted that the crime was committed within the territorial
jurisdiction of another country. The Supreme Court has ruled that the high seas
contemplated under Art. 122 of the Revised Penal Code includes the three-mile
limit of any state (People v. Lol-lo, et al., 43 Phil. 1911922]). Moreover, piracy is an
offense that can be tried anywhere because it is a crime against the Law of Nations.
(2008 Bar Question)

Elements:
1. when the offenders seized the vessel by boarding or firing the same
2. when the victims were abandoned without means of saving them
3. when the same is accompanied by murder, rape, homicide of physical
injuries
PD 532- piracy in Philippine waters
-any person including passengers or member of the complement of a vessel
Piracy under Art. 122 –can only be committed by a person who is not a passenger
or complement of the vessel
If committed in high seas by a passenger or member of the complement, the
crime is robbery.
(ART 122 –committed by strangers, PD 532 any person but in Phil. Waters)
HIGH JACKING LAW (RA 6235)
-Usurping or seizing control of an aircraft of Philippine Registry while it is in
flight or compelling the pilot to change the course of destination
_When is an aircraft in flight?
-If not in flight, RPC governs.
 -If the aircraft is of foreign registry, It need not be in flight for High Jacking
Law to apply.

MISPRISION OF TREASON

Because peace negotiations on the Spratlys situation had failed, the People's
Republic of China declared war against the Philippines. Myra, a Filipina who lives
with her Italian expatriate boyfriend, discovered e-mail correspondence between
him and a certain General Tung Kat Su of China. On March 12, 2010, Myra
discovered that on even date her boyfriend had sent an e-mail to General Tung Kat
Su, in which he agreed to provide vital information on the military defense of the
Philippines to the Chinese government in exchange for P1 million and his safe
return to Italy. Two weeks later, Myra decided to report the matter to the proper
authorities. Did Myra commit a crime? Explain. (2010 Bar Question)

A: Yes, Myra committed the crime of Misprision of Treason under Art. 116 of the
Revised Penal Code, for failing to report or make known "as soon as possible" to
the governor or provincial fiscal or to the mayor or fiscal of the City where she
resides, the conspiracy between her Italian boyfriend and the Chinese General to
commit treason against the Philippine Government in time of war. She decided to
report the matter to the proper authorities only after two (2) weeks.

3. Distinguish Highway Robbery under Presidential Decree No. 532 from Robbery
committed on a highway. (2000, 2001 Bar)
A: In Highway Robbery under PD 532, the robbery is committed indiscriminately
against persons who commute in such highways, regardless of the potentiality they
offer; while in ordinary Robbery committed on a highway, the robbery is
committed only against predetermined victims.

TITLE 2 (Articles 124-132) Crimes against the Fundamental Laws of the State

ARBITRARY DETENTION
-Only public officers whose duty is to arrest and detain persons can commit this
crime.
-there must be actual restraint
- Can a private person commit crimes under this title?
YES
-In Arbitrary Detention, the purpose is to deny of his liberty/ committed by a public
officer
In Unlawful Arrest. The purpose is to deliver the person to the proper authorities
for a crim he did not commit./ committed by any person

DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS

-does not apply if the arrest was by virtue of a warrant.

EXPULSION
-By deporting an alien out of the Philippines without authority of law
And by compelling a Filipino to change his place of abode without due process of
law. Ex. Villavicencio vs. Lucban
-If committed by a private person, the crime is Grave Coercion.
VIOLATION OF DOMICILE

VIOLATION OF DOMICILE (Art. 128, RPC). There are three ways by which a public
officer or employee may commit this crime, namely:
1. By entering any dwelling against the will of the owner.
2. By searching papers or other effects found therein without the previous
consent of such owner. Maria had objected to the search for the fighting
cock inside her dwelling, but despite said objection, the policemen
searched the house. This makes them criminally liable for the second way
of committing the crime of VIOLATING OF DOMICILE.
3. By refusing to leave the premises, after having surreptitiously entered said
dwelling and after having been required to leave the same. Although the policemen
were ordered to leave the house, they did not enter it surreptitiously, meaning
clandestinely or secretly.
2.What is the difference between violation of domicile and trespass to dwelling?
(2002 Bar Question)
A: The differences between violation of domicile and trespass to dwelling are:
a. The offender in violation of domicile is a public officer acting under color of
authority; in trespass to dwelling, the offender is a private person or public officer
acting in a private capacity.
b. Violation of domicile is committed in 3 different ways: (1) by entering the
dwelling of another against the will of the latter; (2) searching papers and other
effects inside the dwelling without the previous consent of the owner; or (3)
refusing to leave the premises which he entered surreptitiously, after being
required to leave the premises.
Trespass to dwelling is committed only in one way; that is, by entering the dwelling
of another against the express or implied will of the latter.

3.TRUE or FALSE. . (2009 Bar Question)

A policeman who, without a judicial order, enters a private house over the owner's
opposition is guilty of trespass to dwelling.
A: The crime committed by the policeman in this case is violation of domicile
because the official duties of a policeman carry with it an authority to make
searches and seizure upon judicial order. He is therefore acting under color of his
official authority (Art. 128, RPC).

Crimes against fundamental law of the State - Delay on the Delivery of Detained
Persons to the Proper Judicial Authorities; in relation with Slight disobedience
which is a crime against public order
 Amy was apprehended and arrested by Patrolman Bart for illegal parking. She
was detained at the police precint, underwent investigation, and released only
after 48 hours. a) Patrolman Bart liable for any offense? Explain your answer.) b)
Suppose Amy resisted the arrest and grappled with patrolman Bart, is she
criminally liable thereby? (1990 Bar Question)
A: a) Patrolman Bart is liable for violation of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code
- Delay on the Delivery of Detained Persons to the Proper Judicial Authorities.
b) She is criminally liable for slight disobedience under Article 151 of the Revised
Penal Code - Resistance and disobedience to a person in authority or the agents
of such person.

2. What are the 3 ways of committing arbitrary detention? (2006 Bar Question)
A:
a) by detaining or locking up a person without any legal cause or ground therefor
purposely to restrain his liberty (RPC, Art. 124);
b) by delaying delivery to the proper judicial authority of a person lawfully arrested
without a warrant (RPC, Art. 125); and
c) by delaying release of a prisoner whose release has been ordered by competent
authority (RPC, Art. 126).

When is an arrest by a peace officer or by a private person considered lawful? (2006

Bar Question)

A: Arrest by a peace officer or by a private person is lawful –

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 believe
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 penal
establishment or place where he is serving sentence or is temporarily confined
while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one
confinement to another (Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 113, Sec. 5).

TITLE 3
Crimes against public order - Direct assault upon a person in authority; direct
assault with serious physical injuries (1989, 2001, 2002, 2009 Bar)
 Pablo, disobeying a judicial order, was punished by an RTC Judge of Manila
for contempt. He waited for the judge to go out into the street. Upon seeing the
judge, Pablo hurriedly approached him, and without saying a word struck him with
his fist causing a slight contusion on the face of the Judge. Rex came to the rescue
of the Judge but because he was taller and bigger than Pablo, the latter used a knife
in attacking Rex. Pablo limited his assault to the arms of Rex inflicting lesions graves
which incapacitated Rex from labor for forty five (45) days.
If you were the prosecutor called to institute a criminal action against Pablo, with
what crime or crimes would you charge him? (1993 Bar Question)

A: The crime of direct assault upon a person in authority with respect to the slight
contusion on the face of the Judge. Direct assault with serious physical injuries with
respect to the assault on Rex.
2. Persons in authority are persons directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an
individual or as a member of some court or government corporation, board, or
commission. Barrio captains and barangay chairmen are also deemed persons in
authority. (Article 152, RPC)
Agents of persons in authority are persons who by direct provision of law or by
election or by appointment by competent authority, are charged with maintenance
of public order, the protection and security of life and property, such as barrio
councilman, barrio policeman, barangay leader and any person who comes to the
aid of persons in authority (Art.. 152, RPC). (2002 Bar)

Rebellion
**Vs. Treason vs. Coup d etat
Rebellion was committed by public uprising because their purpose was to
overthrow the government and all other acts committed in the further of this
purpose are absorbed by rebellion. (1988, 1990. 1998, 2004 Bar Question)
The crime of coup d'etat is committed by a swift attack, accompanied by violence,
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth against the duly constituted authorities of
the Republic of the Philippines, military camps and installations, communication
networks, public utilities and facilities needed for the exercise and continued
possession of power, carried out singly or simultaneously anywhere in the
Philippines by persons belonging to the military or police or holding public office,
with or without civilian support or participation, for the purpose of seizing or
diminishing state power. DESTABILIZE (Art. 134-A, RPC). (1991, 1998, 2002, 2004
Bar)
**R.A. 10591 – if the unlicensed firearm was not used in the commission of
another crime.
ART. 155 ALARM AND SCANDAL
-Illegal Discharge
-Homicide or Murder
-Grave Threats
ART. 156DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAIL
ART. 157 EVASION OF SENTENCE
-in case of calamity 1/5 is deducted to the ORIGINAL term of sentence if returned
after 48 hours, if he fails to return, addition of 1/5 to the remaining sentence but
in no case shall it exceeds 6 months.
What about those who did not leave?
A:
What if the sentence is Destierro? (25kms. Prohibition)
A:

EVASION THRU NEGLIGENCE; in relation with crimes against public order -

DELIVERING PRISONERS FROM JAILS; EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE
Daniel, a policeman detailed in the city jail, escorted Ernani to the city hall for the
trial. Daniel removed the handcuffs of Ernani and allowed him to sit on one of the
chairs inside the courtroom. As Daniel was talking to a lawyer inside the
courtroom, Ernani, with the help of a cigarette vendor, Meynardo, who used his
cigarette container as cover, surreptitiously moved out of the room and escaped.
Ernani and Meynardo went to the comfort room for a while, then went down the
stairs and lost themselves in the crowd.
What crime or crimes were committed by Ernani, Daniel and Meynardo? Give
your reasons. (1989, 1999, 2009 Bar Question)
A: Daniel, the policeman, committed the crime of EVASION THRU NEGLIGENCE,
one of the forms of Infidelity in the custody of Prisoner (Art. 224), the essential
elements of which offense are: (1) That the offender is a public officer. (2) That
he has in his custody or charge a prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoners
by final judgement. (3) That such prisoner escaped from his custody thru his
negligence.
All of these elements are present, Daniel, a policeman detailed in the city jail, is a
public officer. As the escort for Ernani in the latter’s trial, he had custody of
charge of a detention prisoner. Ernani’s escape was thru his negligence because
after removing Eraani’s handcuffs and allowing him to sit in one of the chairs
inside the courtroom, he should have taken the necessary precautions to prevent
Ernani’s escape by keeping an eye on him. Instead, he provided the opportunity
for the escape by talking with a lawyer and not keeping watch over his prisoner.
2. Meynardo, not being a public officer, is guilty of the crime of DELIVERING
PRISONERS FROM JAILS (Art. 156), which is committed by any person who either
removes from any jail or penal establishment any person confined therein, or
WHO HELPS the escape of such person by means of violence, intimidation, bribery
of OTHER MEANS.
3. Ernani, the escaped prisoner himself is not criminally liable for any offense.
The detention prisoner who escapes from detention does not commit any crime.
If he were a convict by final judgment who is serving a sentence which consists of
deprivation of liberty and he escapes during term of his sentence, he would be
liable for EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE (Art. 157).
2. What is the crime of qualified bribery? (2010 Bar Question)
Qualified bribery is a crime committed by a public officer who is entrusted with
law enforcement and who, in consideration of any offer, promise, gift of offer,
refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime
punishable by reclusion perpetua and/ or death (art. 211-A, RPC)

TITLE 4 Crimes against public interest

Forgery and falsification (1999 Bar Question)
(a) Forging or forgery is committed by giving to a treasury or bank note or any
instrument payable to bearer or to order the appearance of a true and genuine
document; or by erasing, substituting, counterfeiting, or altering by any means the
figures, letters, words or signs contained therein.
Falsification, on the other hand, is committed by:
1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric;
2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding
when they did not in fact so participate;
3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements
other than those in fact made by them;
4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;
5. Altering true dates;
6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its
meaning;
7. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an
original document when no such original exists, or including in such copy a
statement contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original; or 8.
Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol,
registry, or official book.
FALSIFICATION OF A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE DOCUMENT
-with damage
-use of a falsified document
USURPATION OF AUTHORITY OR
USURPATION OF OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS
-PERJURY
2. The accused was caught in possession of 100 counterfeit P20 bills. He could not
explain how and why he possessed the said bills. Neither could he explain what he
intended to do with the fake bills. Can he be held criminally liable for such
possession? (1999 Bar Question)
A: No. Possession of false treasury or bank note alone without an intent to use it,
is not punishable. But the circumstances of such possession may indicate intent to
utter, sufficient to consummate the crime of illegal possession of false notes.
2. Define Money laundering. What are the three (3) stages in money laundering?
(2010 Bar Question)
1) Money laundering under Rep. Act 9160 (Anti- Money Laundering Act of 2001),
as amended by Rep. Act 9194, since the money proceeds from an unlawful activity,
i.e., jueteng are transacted as though coming from a legitimate source;
A: The three (3) stages in money laundering are: a. Placement/ infusion or the
physical disposal of criminal proceeds
b. Layering or the separation of the criminal proceeds from their source by creating
layers of financial transactions to disguise such proceeds as legitimate and avoid
audit trail; and
c. Integration or the provision of apparent legitimacy to the criminal proceeds.

TITLE 5
Special law – RA 9165 – punishable acts and penalties thereof
*Plea bargaining

*Chain of Custody, Compliance with Sec 21, People. Vs. Romy Lim
*Minors

TITLE 6 Crimes against Public Morals

GRAVE SCANDAL
-Art 202 is decriminalized
TITLE 7 CRIMES COMMITTED BY PUBLIC OFFICERS
Breach of Oath of Office in 3 forms:
1. MALFEASANCE- an act prohibited by law
2. MISFEASANCE- not in accordance with the law
3. NONFEASANCE- refrain or refuse to perform an official duty
Crimes committed by public officers – Malversation of public funds or
property(1994,1988, 1987,1999, 1996, 1990, 2006, 2008 Bar)
Malversation of public funds or property is committed by any public officer
who, by reason of the duties of his office, is accountable for public funds or
property, shall take or misappropriate or shall consent, or through abandonment
or negligence, shall permit any other person to take such public funds or property,
wholly or partially, or shall otherwise be guilty of the misappropriation or
malversation of such funds or property.

(Art. 217, RPC) Direct bribery; indirect bribery;

Special law - RA. 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (1999, 2001,
2009,2010 Bar)
Section 3(e) of RA. 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as
amended: “x x x giving any private party any unwarranted benefits".
**Direct Bribery and Indirect Bribery
**Corruption of Public Officials
*Direct Bribery and R.A. 3019 –no Double Jeopardy
-In Direct Bribery, Differentiate whether the act is a crime or not.
-In Direct Bribery can only be committed in the attempted or consummated
stage.
_In Direct Bribery, since it has no frustrated stage, it takes two to tango. 2
crime here are committed.
Ex. If the P.O. accepted the consideration and surrendered it to his superior,
attempted corruption is committed.
IF P.O accepted it. Consummated Corruption and Consummated Bribery.
-Differentiate to Robbery with Extortion
INDIRECT BRIBERY
-by reason of his office
-always in the consummated stage
ANTI GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES (R.A. 3019)
The mere act of a P.O. demanding a taxpayer to whom he is to render public service
is liable for violation of R.A. 3019
PLUNDER (R.A. 7080)
-acquires or accumulates ill-gotten wealth amounting to a total valie of P50M
above.
-less than that amount, R.A. 3019 is committed.

*ILLEGAL EXACTION- demanding different amount

*FALSIFICATION – alteration of official document
*MALVERSATION- misappropriating a public fund or property. Damage is not
necessary
*ESTAFA- deceit
Can a private person commit the crime of Malversation?
YES

What is Techinical Malversation?

-already appropriated or earmarked for a certain purpose

ABUSE OF CHASTITY
-making of immoral or indecent solicitation or advances
-upon a woman prisoner, or prisoner’s wife, sister, daughter or relatives by affinity
of the prisoner involved.
-Can a woman be charged with this crime?
-Can a male prisoner be a victim?

TITLE 8
PARRICIDE
-must be in the direct line, not collateral line
-must be legitimate except parents and child.
-In killing the wife, there must be a valid subsisting marriage
-must be alleged in the information
Q: Killing of a father to an illegitimate child? Not parricide
Killing of an adopted child to a father? Not parricide
Stepfather to a stepson? Not Parricide
Husband wanted to kill the wife but hired a killer because he could not do it alone. Husband is
guilty of Parricide as principal by inducement, Killer is liable for Murder, there is an aggravating
circumstance.

INFANTICIDE
-less than 3 day old
-Differentiate Abortion and Parricide

DEATH UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES

-Purpose of the Penalty of Destierro
-If only slight or less serious injuries were sustained
DISCHARGE OF A FIREARM
-Alarm and Scandal
-Grave Threats
ABORTION
-Fetus, not yet a person
-Unintentional Abortion

Crimes against persons - Death caused in a tumultuous affray

During a town fiesta, a free-for-all fight erupted in the public plaza. As a result
of the tumultuous affray, A sustained one fatal and three superficial stab wounds.
He died a day after. B. C. D and E were proven to be participants in the "rumble",
each using a knife against A, but it could not be ascertained who among them,
inflicted the mortal injury.
Who shall be held criminally liable for the death of A and for what? (1997 Bar
Question)
A: B, C, D, and E being participants in the tumultuous affray and having been
proven to have inflicted serious physical injuries, or at least, employed violence
upon A, are criminally liable for the latter's death. And because it cannot be
ascertained who among them inflicted the mortal injury on A, there being a free-
for-all fight or tumultuous affray, B, C, D. and E are all liable for the crime of death
caused in a tumultuous affray under Article 251 of the Revised Penal Code.

Crimes against persons – Parricide; murder; homicide, Infanticide

Who may be guilty of the crime of parricide? (3%) (1999 Bar Question)
A killed:
(1) a woman with whom he lived without benefit of clergy, (2) their child who was
only two days old,
(3) their daughter, and (
4) their adopted son. What crime or crimes did A commit? (1999 Bar Question)
(a) Any person who kills his father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or
illegitimate, or his ascendants or descendants, or spouse, shall be guilty of
parricide. (Art. 246, RPC)
(b) A committed the following crimes: 1. Homicide or murder as the case may be,
for the killing of his common-law wife who is not legally considered a “spouse”

2. Infanticide for the killing of the child as said child is less than three (3) days old.
(Art. 255, RPC) However, the penalty corresponding to parricide shall be imposed
since A is related to the child within the degree defined in the crime of parricide.
3. Parricide for the killing of their daughter, whether legitimate or illegitimate, as
long as she is not less than three (3) days old at the time of the killing.
4. Murder for the killing of their adopted son as the relationship between A and
the said son must be by blood in order for parricide to arise. Special law - Anti-Rape
Law of 1997 – Rape as crime against person; extinguishment of criminal liability by
subsequent marriage

Special law - Anti-Rape Law of 1997 – Rape as crime against person;

extinguishment of criminal liability by subsequent marriage
A. What other acts are considered rape under the Anti-Rape Law of 1997,
amending the Revised Penal Code? (2002 Bar Question)

A: The other acts considered rape under the Anti-Rape Law of 1997 are
1. having carnal knowledge of a woman by a man by means of fraudulent
machination or grave abuse of authority;
2. having carnal knowledge of a demented woman by a man even if none of the
circumstances required in rape be present; and
3. committing an act of sexual assault by inserting a person’s penis into the victim’s
mouth or anal orifice, or by inserting any instrument or object, into the genital or
anal orifice of another person. B. The Anti-Rape Law of 1997 reclassified rape from
a crime against honor, a private offense, to that of a crime against persons.

B. Will the subsequent marriage of the offender and the offended party extinguish
the criminal action or the penalty imposed? Explain. (2%) (2002 Bar Question)
A: Yes. By express provision of Article 266-C of the Revised Penal Code, as amended,
the subsequent valid marriage between the offender and offended party shall
extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed, although rape has been
reclassified from a crime against chastity, to that of a crime against persons.

2. A, a male, takes B, another male, to a motel and there, through threat and
intimidation, succeeds in inserting his penis into the anus of B. What, if any, is A’s
criminal liability? Why? (2002 Bar Question)
A: A shall be criminally liable for rape by committing an act of sexual assault against
B, by inserting his penis into the anus of the latter. Even a man may be a victim of
rape by sexual assault under par. 2 of Article 268-Aof the Revised Penal Code, as
amended, “when the offender’s penis is inserted into his mouth or anal orifice.”

Crimes against persons - Death under exceptional circumstances (2001,2005 Bar)

** Destierro is one of the principal penalties under Article 25 of the Revised Penal
Code, but under the exceptional circumstances provided for in Article 247 of the
Code, destierro is not intended as a penalty but a means to remove the accused
from the vicinity, for his protection against possible reprisal from the family or
relatives of the other spouse or those of the paramour or mistress. (People v.
Coricort 79 Phil 672 [1947]).
**the legal consequence of the exceptional circumstance in Article 247 of the Code
is that of an exempting circumstance where generally there is civil liability although
there may be no criminal liability. Special penal law - Child abuse;
Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination (RA 7610, as amended)

Special law - Rep. Act No. 8049 (Anti-Hazing Law) – Hazing; initiation rites
What does the law require before initiation rites may be performed? (3%) (2002
Bar Question)
A: Section 2 of Rep. Act No. 8049 (Anti-Hazing Law) requires that before hazing or
initiation rites may be performed, notice to the school authorities or head of
organizations shall be given seven (7) days before the conduct of such rites. The
written notice shall indicate
(a) the period of the initiation activities, not exceeding three (3) days;
(b) the names of those to be subjected to such activities, and
(c) an undertaking that no physical violence shall be employed by anybody during
such initiation rites.
TITLE 9
Crimes against personal liberty and security
**Kidnapping
**illegal Detention
**Grave Coercion
LIGHT COERCIONS (Unjust Vexation)
TITLE 10
Crimes against Property
ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE
ROBBERY WITH RAPE
ROBBERY WITH Physical Injuries
2 Kinds of Robbery
1. Robbery with violence and Intimidation
2. Robbery with FUT
-Violation of BP 22
-Malicious Mischief
-Fencing (P.D. 1612)
Special law - Anti-Fencing Law .
What are the elements of fencing? (1995 Bar Question)
2. a) What is the difference between a fence and an accessory to theft or robbery?
Explain. (1995 Bar Question)
A:The elements of fencing are:
(a) a crime of robbery or theft has been committed:
(b) accused, who is not a principal or accomplice in the crime, buys, receives,
possesses, keeps, acquires, conceals, or disposes, or buys and sells, or in any
manner deals in any article, item , object or anything of value, which has been
derived from the proceeds of said crime;
c) the accused knows or should have known that said article, item, object or
anything of value has been derived from the from the proceeds of the crime of
robbery or theft; and
d) there is, on the part of the accused, intent to gain for himself or for another.
**“Fencing” is committed when a person, with intent to gain for himself or for
another, deals in any manner with an article of value which he knows or should be
known to him to have been derived from proceeds of theft or robbery (Sec. 2. PD
1612). Thus, for a charge of fencing to prosper, it must first be established that a
theft or robbery of the article subject of the alleged “fencing” has been committed.

**PRESUMPTION?
2. a) One difference between a fence and an accessory to theft or robbery is the
penalty involved; a fence is punished as a principal under P.D. No. 1612 and the
penalty is higher, whereas an accessory to robbery or theft under the Revised Penal
Code is punished two degrees lower than the principal, unless he bought or profited
from the proceeds of theft
Also, fencing is a malum prohibitum and therefore there is no need to prove
criminal intent of the accused; this is not so in violations of Revised Penal Code.
Estafa
A sold a washing machine to 6 on credit, with the understanding that B could
return the appliance within two weeks if, after testing the same, B decided not to
buy it. Two weeks lapsed without B returning the appliance. A found out that B had
sold the washing machine to a third party. Is B liable for estafa? Why? (5%) (2002
Bar Question)
A: No, B is not liable for estafa because he is not just an entrustee of the washing
machine which he sold; he is the owner thereof by virtue of the sale of the washing
machine to him. The sale being on credit, B as buyer is only liable for the unpaid
price of the washing machine; his obligation is only a civil obligation. There is no
felonious misappropriation that could constitute estafa.
Qualified Theft

TITLE 11
Crimes against chastity
Adultery
-committed by any married woman who shall have sexual intercourse with a man
not her husband.”
-heavier penalty. Why?
-Pardon
-Liability if one of the accused dies

Concubinage
3 ways of commiting Concubinage
1.Keeping a Mistress in the conjugal dwelling
2. Having sexual intercourse with a woman not his wife under scandalous manner
3. Cohabiting with her in any other place
Acts of Lasciviousness
-Victim may be a man or woman
-R.A. 7610
-Rape vs. Acts of Lasciviousness vs. Unjust Vexation
Qualified Seduction
-victim woman must be over 12 but below 18
-there must be sexual intercourse
-victim must be virgin-does not mean physical virginity
Simple Seduction
-over 12 but not more than 18, may be a widow, unmarried
-there is deceit-breach of promise to marry that sexual intercourse was
consummated
-need not be a virgin, it is enough that she is of good repute
*Adultery, Concubinage. Seduction and Acts of Lasciviousness- are private
crimes.
Forcible Abduction
Consented Abduction

TITLE 12
Crimes against the civil status of persons

Simulation of birth
A childless couple, A and B, wanted to have a child they could call their own. C, an
unwed mother, sold her newborn baby to them. Thereafter, A and B caused their
names to be stated in the birth certificate of the child as his parents. This was done
in connivance with the doctor who assisted in the delivery of C. What are the
criminal liabilities, if any, of the couple A and B, C and the doctor? (2002 Bar
Question)
A: The couple A and B, and the doctor shall be liable for the crime of simulation of
birth, penalized under Article 347 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. The act
of making it appear in the birth certificate of a child that the persons named therein
are the parents of the child when they are not really the biological parents of said
child constitutes the crime of simulation of birth.
BIGAMY
-this is a PUBLIC CRIME
-Good faith is a defense
-may be convicted of Bigamy and Concubinage
-Prejudicial Question

TITLE 13
Crimes against honor (2009 Bar)
-ORAL DEFAMATION/ SLANDER
-SLANDER BY DEED
-INTRINGUING AGAINST HONOR
-LIBEL
-CYBER CRIME LAW-on-line libel
-Malice
-with good motives or justifiable ends
In the crime of libel, truth is an absolute defense.
A: False. Article 361 of the RPC provides that proof of truth shall be admissible in
libel cases only if the same imputes a crime or is made against a public officer with
respect to facts related to the discharge of their official duties, and moreover must
have been published with good motives and for justifiable ends. Hence, "truth" as
a defense, on its own, is not enough.

Criminal negligence - Simple Negligence Resulting in Less Serious Physical Injuries;

Simple Imprudence Resulting in Less Serious Physical Injuries; Reckless
imprudence resulting in less serious physical injuries

ANTI PHOTO and VIDEO VOYEURISM ACT (ACT R.A. 9995)

-it is necessary for the offense to arise that there must be No consent on the part
of the offended party. There must be expectancy of privacy.
-To copy or reproduce with or without consideration
-To sell or distribute
-To publish or broadcast
Case of Hayden Kho
GOOD LUCK AND GOD BLESS!!!