WHAT IS CRIMINAL LAW

- CRIMINAL LAW is that branch or division clave

a. Defines crimes,
b. Treats of their nature: and
c. Provides for their punishment

criminal law - a branch of municipal law which defines crimes, treats of their nature and
provides for their punishment. Philippines.

Who has the power to punish crimes?

legislature!!!

*court only impose penalty

3 branches
executive
legislative
judiciary

THUS: A law that does not define an act or omission as a crime nor provides for a penalty is
not a criminal law

POWER TO LEGISLATE CRIMINAL LAWS

- The STATE has the authority, under its police power, to define and punish crimes through its
Legislative Department.

CONSTITUTIONAL LIMITATIONS ON THE RIGHT OF THE LEGISLATURE TO ENACT

PENAL LAWS
1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor shall
any person be denied the equal protection of the laws. (Section 1, Art. lll, 1987 Constitution)
2. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of law. (Sec.
14, (1). Art. lll, 1987 Constitution)
3. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment
inflicted. (Section 19, (1). Art. Ill, 1987 Constitution)
4. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted Section 22 Art. lll, 1987
Constitution)

"Ex post facto law"

1. Makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was innocent
when done, and punishes such an act.
2. Aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed.
3. Changes the punishment and inflicts a greater punishment than the law annexed to
the crime when committed.
4. Alters the legal rules on evidence, and authorizes conviction upon less or different
testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the offense.
5. Assuming to regulate civil rights and remedies only in effect imposes penalty or
deprivation of a right for something which when done was lawful.
6. Deprives a person accused of a crime some lawful protection to which he has
become entitled, such as the protection of a proclamation of amnesty.

"Bill of Attainder"- is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without trial

Ex post facto law; When applicable.
Lacson vs. Executive Secretary (G.R. No. 128096, January 20, 1999)
Ex post facto law, generally, prohibits retrospectivity of penal laws. RA No. 8249 is not a
penal law. It is a substantive law on Jurisdiction which is not penal in character. Penal laws
are those acts of the Legislature which prohibit certain acts and establish penalties for
their violations, or those that define crimes, treat of their nature, and provide for their
punishment. RA No. 7975, which amended PD 1606 as regards the Sandiganbayan's
jurisdiction, its mode of appeal and other procedural matters, has been declared by the Court
as not a penal law, but clearly a procedural statute, l.e. one which prescribed rules of
procedure by which courts applying laws of all kinds can properly administer justice. Not
being a penal law, the retroactive application of RA No. 8249 cannot be challenged as
unconstitutional.

SOURCES OF PENAL LAWS IN THE PHILIPPINES

1. THE REVISED PENAL CODE (Act No. 3815)
2. SPECIAL PENAL LAWS
a. National Application
i. Passed by Congress Acts
- Commonwealth Acts (1936-46)
- Republic Acts (since 1946)
- Batas Pambansa (during the Martial law)
i. Presidential Decrees - passed by the President during Martial Law.
ii. Executive orders issued by President Corazon Aquino (during the Freedom
Constitution before the ratification of 1987 Constitution):

b. Local Application
-ordinances

CHARACTERISTICS OF PHILIPPINE CRIMINAL LAW

A. GENERALITY (Who are covered? - person)

Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or
sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international law and to
treaty stipulations (Ar. 14, Civil Code)

EXCEPTIONS TO THE PRINCIPLE OF GENERALITY

1. TREATY STIPULATIONS - agreement between states exempting certain nationals from
criminal jurisdiction.

2. PRINCIPLE OF PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW

- Sovereigns and other chiefs of state
- Diplomatic heads such as ambassadors, nuncios, envoys, minister plenipotentiary, minister
resident, and changes d'affaires.

3. LAW OF PREFERENTIAL APPLICATION

Example: Members of Congress are not liable for libel or slander for any speech in Congress
or in any committee thereof. (Sec. 11, Art. VI, 1987 Constitution) muslims have their own law

B. TERRITORIALITY (Where applicable? - place/situs)

The penal laws of the country have force and effect only within its territory. (Terrestrial, Aerial,
Fluvial domains)

exception - principle of extraterritoriality

There are crimes which are called transitory or continuing offenses because some acts
material and essential to the crime occur in one province and some in another, in
which case, the rule is settled that the court of either province where any of the
essential ingredients of the crime took place has jurisdiction to try

AAA vs. BBB (G.R. No. 212448, January 11, 2018)

As correctly pointed out by AAA, Section 7 of RA No. 9262 provides that the case may be
filed where the crime or any of its elements was committed at the option of the complainant.
While the psychological violence as the means employed by the perpetrator is certainly an
indispensable element of the offense, equally essential also is the element of mental or
emotional anguish which is personal to the complainant.

xxx the law contemplates that acts of violence against women and their children may manifest
as transitory or continuing crimes; meaning that some acts material and essential thereto
and requisite in their consummation occur in one municipality or territory, while some occur in
another. In such cases, the court wherein any of the crime's essential and material acts have
been committed maintains jurisdiction to try the case; it being understood that the first court
taking cognizance of the same excludes the other. Thus, a person charged with a continuing
or transitory crime may be validly tried in any municipality or territory where the offense was in
part committed.

C. PROSPECTIVITY / IRRETROSPECTIVITY (When? - time)

Acts or omissions will only be subject to a penal law if they are committed after a penal law
had already taken effect.

EXCEPTION TO THE PRINCIPLE OF PROSPECTIVITY

Whenever a new statute dealing with the crime establishes conditions MORE LENIENT OR
FAVORABLE to the accused.
XPN to the XPN:
1. If the new law is expressly made inapplicable in pending actions or existing cause of action;
or
2. If the offender is a habitual delinquent.

FELONY vs. OFFENSE VS. INFRACTION VS. CRIME

FELONY - refers only to violations of the Revised Penal Code. or statutory offense
OFFENSE - A crime punished under a special penal law
INFRACTIONS - punished by local legislation (ordinances); violation of ordinances
MISDEMEANORS - A minor infraction of the law ;
CRIME - A crime is an act committed or omitted in violation of a public law forbidding or
commanding it is a generic term. generic term
Are all crimes punishable under special laws considered crime mala prohibita?
Not all crimes punishable under special laws are mala prohibita. There are special
laws but are crimes mala in se.
Examples:
a. Violation of the Anti-Plunder Law (Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560,
November 19, 2001)
b. Violation of the Omnibus Election Code
Crimes mala prohibita under the Revised Penal Code
Mayor Arnold Ysidoro vs. People (G.R. No. 192330, November 14, 2012)
"x x x criminal-intent is not an element of technical malversation. The law punishes the act of
diverting public properly earmarked by law or ordinance for a particular purpose to another
public purpose. The offense Is mala prohibita, meaning that the prohibited act is not inherently
Immoral but becomes a criminal offense because positive law forbids its commission based
on considerations of public policy, order, and convenience. It is the commission of an act as
declined by the law, and not the character or effect thereof, that determines whether or not
the provision has been violated. Hence, malice or criminal intent is completely irrelevant.

Intent to perpetrate the act vs. Intent to commit the crime

Elenita Fajardo v. PP (G.R. No. 190889, January 10, 2011)
When the crime is punished by a special law, as a rule, intent to commit the crime is not
necessary. It is sufficient that the offender has the intent to perpetrate the act prohibited by
the special law. Intent to commit the crime and intent to perpetrate the act must be
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. animus
possidendi ("intent to possess"

Intent to perpetrate the act vs. intent to commit the crime

P.P. vs. Dela Rosa et al. (G.R. No. 84857, January 16, 1998); PP vs. Leon Lian, (G.R. No.
115988, March 29, 1996)
The kind of possession punishable under PD No. 1866 is one where the accused
possessed a firearm either physically or constructively with animus possidendi or
intention to possess the same. enough that the firearm was found in the person of the
accused who held the same temporarily and casually or for the purpose of surrendering
the It is not same. Admittedly, animus possidendi is a state of mind. As such, what goes
on into the mind of an accused, as his real intent, could be determined solely based on
his prior and coetaneous acts and the surrounding circumstances explaining how the
subject firearm came to his possession.

Suppletory application of the RPC provisions to SPL

People vs. Martin Simon (G.R. No. 93028, July 29, 1994)
The provisions of the Code on the graduation of penalties by degrees could not be given
supplementary application to special laws, since the penalties in the SPL were not
components of or contemplated in the scale of penalties provided by Article 71 of the
RPC. The suppletory effect of the Revised Penal Code to special laws, as provided in
Article 10 of the former, cannot be invoked where there is a legal or physical
impossibility of, or a prohibition in the special law against, such supplementary
application.
The situation, however, is different where although the offense is defined in and
ostensibly punished under a special law, the penalty therefor is actually taken from the
Revised Penal Code in its technical nomenclature and, necessarily, with its duration,
correlation and legal effects under the system of penalties native to said Code. When,
as in this case, the law involved speaks of prision correctional, in its technical sense
under the Code, it would consequently be both illogical and absurd to posit otherwise.

Penalties adopted from the RPC

Leonilo Sanchez vs. PP (G.R. No. 179090, June 5, 2009)
The penalty for Other Acts of Child Abuse is prision mayor in its minimum period. This
penalty is derived from, and defined in, the Revised Penal Code. Although R.A. No. 7610
is a special law, the rules in the Revised Penal Code for graduating penalties by degrees
for determining the proper period should be applied. Thus, where the special law
adopted penalties from the Revised Penal Code, the Indeterminate Sentence Law will
apply just as it would in felonies.

Life Imprisonment vs. Reclusion Perpetua

People vs. Rodolfo Baguio (G.R. No. 76585, April 30, 1991)
The crime of murder is defined and punished by the RPC, and within the range of the
penalty prescribed therefor, Le., reclusion temporal maximum to death, is the penalty of
reclusion perpetua. The RPC does not prescribe the penalty of life imprisonment for any
of the felonies therein defined, that penalty being Invariably imposed for serious
offenses penalized not by the Revised Penal Code but by special laws. Reclusion
perpetua entails imprisonment for at least thirty (30) years after which the convict
becomes eligible for pardon, it also carries with it accessory penalties, namely: perpetual
special disqualification, etc. It is not the same as life imprisonment which, for one thing.
does not carry with it any accessory penalty, and for another, does not appear to have
any definite extent or duration. The felony committed by Baguio being one punished
under the Revised Penal Code, the proper penalty that should be imposed on him,
therefore, is that prescribed by the same Code, reclusion perpetua, not "life
imprisonment.

Principle of conspiracy in Special Penal laws

Ladonga vs. People (G.R. No. 141066, Feb. 17, 2005)
B.P. Blg. 22 does not expressly proscribe the suppletory application of the provisions of
the RPC. Thus, in the absence of contrary provision in B.P. Blg. 22, the general provisions
of the RPC which, by their nature, are necessarily applicable, may be applied suppletorily.

Suppletory application of the RPC provisions to SPL

Art. 10 Revised Penal Code - Offenses which are or in the future may be punished under
special laws are not subjected to the provisions of this Code. This Code shall be
SUPPLEMENTARY to such law, unless the latter should specifically provide the contrary.
Complexing violations of the RPC and SPL
People vs. Bienvinido Udang Sr. (G.R. No. 210161, Jan. 10, 2018)

A single act may give rise to multiple offenses. A single criminal act may give rise to a
multiplicity of offenses and where there is variance or differences between the elements
of an offense in one law and another law as in the case at bar there will be no double
jeopardy because what the rule on double jeopardy prohibits refers to identity of
elements in the two (2) offenses. Otherwise stated, prosecution for the same act is not
prohibited. What is forbidden is prosecution for the same offense. Hence, the mere filing
of the two (2) sets of information does not itself give rise to double jeopardy. Thus,
charging an accused with rape, under the Revised Penal Code, and with sexual abuse,
under Republic Act No. 7610, in case the offended party is a child 12 years old and above,
will not violate the right of the accused against double jeopardy.
DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN CRIMES PUNISHED UNDER REVISED PENAL CODE
AND CRIME PUNISHED UNDER SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

MALA IN SE MALA PROHIBITA

Generally, Revised Penal Code Generally, Special Penal Laws

Intent is an element Criminal intent is not required
Good faith is a valid defense, C unless the Good faith is not a defense
crime is the result of culpa
Mitigating and aggravating Mitigating and aggravating
circumstances are taken into account c in circumstances are generally not taken
imposing the penalty. into account
Penalty is computed on the basis of The penalty on the offenders is the same.
whether there is a principal offender, or whether they are merely accomplices or
merely an accomplice or accessory accessones.
Has three stages: attempted, frustrated, No such stages of execution.
consummated
There are three persons criminally liable: Generally, only the principal is liable
principal/accomplice, and accessory.
 RECLUSION PERPETUA LIFE IMPRISONMENT
Imposed for violation of the RPC Imposed for violation of special laws
It has fixed duration It has no fixed duration
It carries with it accessory penalties. It does not carry accessory penalties.

Are all crimes punishable under special laws considered crime mala prohibita?
Not all crimes punishable under special laws are mala prohibita. There are special laws
but are crimes mala in se.
Examples:
a. Violation of the Anti-Plunder Law (Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560,
November 19, 2001)
b. Violation of the Omnibus Election Code

PRESCRIPTION OF SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(Sec. 1. Act 3326) As a general rule, the prescriptions of violations of special laws are
governed by the provisions of the said laws. In the absence of such provisions, Act No.
3326 as amended by Acts No. 3585 and 3763, provides for the following rules.

CRIMES PERIOD

Death, Reclusion perpetua, or Reclusion 20 years

temporal

Other affictive penalties 15 years

Correctional penalties 10 years

Arresto mayor 5 years

Libel and similar offenses 1 year

Oral defamation of slander by deed 6 months

Light offenses 2 months

PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES
It is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute the offender after the lapse
of a certain time. The periods for the prescription of crimes in the RPC are: (Art. 90, RPC
as amended by R.A. No. 4661)

OFFENSE PERIOD

Fine only, or Imprisonment for not more 1 year Imprisonment

than one (1) month or both

Imprisonment for more than one (1) 4 years Imprisonment

month, but less than two (2) years

Imprisonment for two (2) years or more, 8 years Imprisonment

but less than six (6) years

Imprisonment for six (6) years or more 12 years

Violation of a municipal ordinance. 2 months

When prescription begins to run

Q: When do the periods of prescription of violations of special laws begin to run?
A: Prescription shall begin to run from:
a. The day of the commission of the violation of the law, if known;
b. If the same be not known at the time, from the discovery thereof and the institution of
judicial proceedings. (Sec. 2, Act No. 3326)

When prescription is interrupted

Q: When is the running of the periods of prescription of violations of special laws interrupted?
A: The prescription shall be interrupted when the proceedings are instituted against the guilty
person and shall begin to run again if the proceedings are dismissed for reasons not
constituting jeopardy. (Sec. 2, Act No. 3326)

ieexam to!!!!!
When is prescription of municipal ordinances interrupted?
Jadewell Parking Corporation vs. Judge Lidua Sr (G.R. No. 169588, October 7, 2013)
For an offense covered by the Rules on Summary Procedure, the period of prescription is
interrupted only by the filing of the complaint or information in court.
***prescription starts to run the moment you file the case in the court not in the
prosecutor

*****di ko alam san to isisingit

Penalties adopted from the RPC

Marvin Mercado vs. PP (G.R. No. 149375, Nov. 26, 2002)
While a penalty in a special penal law may have a duration that falls within the range of
those penalties in the RPC, It is error to designate it with terms provided for in The
Revised Penal Code since those terms apply only to the penalties imposed by the Penal
Code, and not to the penalty in special penal laws. This is because generally, special laws
provide their own specific penalties for the offenses they punish, which penalties are not
taken from nor refer to those in The Revised Penal Code.

Intent to perpetrate the act vs. intent to commit the crime

U.S. vs. Go Chico (G.R. No. 4963, September 15, 1904)
The legislature did not intend that a criminal Intent should be a necessary element of the
crime. The statutory definition of the offense embraces no word implying that the
prohibited act shall be done knowingly or willfully. The wording is plain. The Act means
what it says. Nothing is left to the Interpretation.