Criminal Law is that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats of their

nature, and provides for their punishment.

Crime is defined as an act committed or violated in violation of a public law

forbidding or commanding it.

The Sources of Philippine Criminal Law

1. The Revised Penal Code Act No. 3815 and its amendments
2. Special Penal Laws passed by the Philippine Commission, Philippine
Assembly, Philippine Legislature, National Assembly, the Congress of the
Philippines, and the Batasang Pambansa.
3. Penal Presidential Decrees issued during Martial Law.

NOTE:

Court decisions are not sources of criminal law, because they merely explain the
meaning of, and apply, the law was enacted by the legislature branch of the
government.

The power of the State to define and punish Crimes:

The State has the authority under its police power, to define and punish crimes
and to lay down the rules of criminal procedure.
Have a large measure of discretion in creating and defining criminal offenses.

The limitations on the power of the lawmaking body to enact penal legislation.

(Bill of Rights of the 1987 Constitutions)

1. No export facts law or bill of attainder shall be enacted. (Article III, Sec. 22)
2. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of
law.
NOTE:

Export Facts Law is one which

1. Makes criminal an act done before the passage of the law and which was
innocent when done, and punishes such as 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. Acters the legal rules of evidence, and authorizes conviction upon less or
different testimony than the law required at the time of the commission of the
offense;
5. Assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only, in effect – imposes penalty or
deprivation of a right for something which done was lawful; and
6. Deprives a person accused of a crime some lawful protection to which he has
become entitled; such as the protection of a former conviction or acquittal or a
proclamation of amnesty.

NOTE:

Congress is prohibited also from passing an act which would inflict punishment
without judicial trial, for that would constitute a bill of attainder.

Bill of Attainder

Is a legislative act which inflicts punishment without trial

Its essence is the substitution of a legislative act for a judicial determination of
guilt. (People vs. Ferrer, 48 SCRA 382 395)

PONDER ON THIS!

To give a law a retroactive application to the prejudice of the accused is to make

it an Ex Port Facts Law.

What are the Constitutional Rights of the Accused?

 (Article III, Bill of Rights)

1. All persons shall have the right to a speedy disposition of their cases before all
judicial, quasi – judicial, or administrative bodies.
2. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense without due process of
law.
3. All persons except those charged with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua
when evidence of guilt is strong, shall before conviction, be boilable by sufficient
sureties, or be released on recognizance as may be provided by law.
4. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent until the
contrary is proved, and shall enjoy the – right to be heard by himself and council,
to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him, to have a
speedy, impartial, and public trial, to meet the witness face to face, and to have a
compulsory process to secure the attendance of witnesses and the production of
evidence in his behalf.
5. No person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself.
6. Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading on inhuman
punishment inflicted.
7. No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for the same person.
8. Free access to the courts and quasi – judicial bodies and adequate legal
assistance shall not be denied to any person by – reason of poverty.

Statutory Rights of the Accused:

(Section 1, Rule 115, Rules on Criminal Procedure)

1. To be presumed innocent until the contrary is proved beyond reasonable doubt;

2. To be informed of the nature and the cause of the accusation against him;
3. To be present and defend in person and by council at every stage of the
proceedings, from arraignment to promulgation of the judgement;
4. To testify as a witness in his own behalf but subject to cross – examination on
matters covered by direct examination;
5. To be exempt from being compelled to be a witness against himself;
6. To confront and cross – examine the witnesses against him at the trial;
7. To have compulsory process issued to secure the attendance of witnesses and
productions of other evidence in his behalf.
 A right which may be waived is the right of the accused to confrontation and cross –
examination.

A right which may not be waived is the right of the accused to be informed of the
nature and cause of the accusation against him.

NOTE: Characteristics of Criminal Law:

1. General
2. Territorial
3. Prospective

Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815)

 An Act Revising the Penal Code and other Penal Laws

January 1, 1932

 date of effectivity

Two Theories in Criminal Law:

1. The Classical
2. The Positivist

 This code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including
its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its
jurisdiction.
 The crimes punishable in the Philippine under Art. 2 are – Cognizable by the
Regional Trial Court in which the charge is filed.
 Crimes committed on board foreign merchant ship or airship is considered an
extension of the territory of the country to which it belongs, thus not triable in our
courts.
 FRENCH RULE
  Not triable in the courts of that country, unless their commission affects
the peace and security of the territory or the safety of the state is
endangered.

 ENGLISH RULE

 Such crimes are triable in that country, unless they merely affect things
within the vessel or they refer to the internal management thereof.

Art. 3 FELONIES

 Defined as an acts and omissions punishable by law.

 Are committed not only by means of deceit (DOLO) – FAULT (culpa)

ELEMENTS OF FELONIES:

1. There must be an act or omission

2. Act or omission must be punishable by the RTC
3. That the act is performed or the omission incurred by means of dolo or culpa

ACT – any bodily movement tending to procedure some effect in the external world.

– only act that is external is Punished.

Omission is meant inaction, the failure to perform a positive duty which one is bound to
do.

A person who caused an injury without intension to cause an evil, may be held liable for
culpable felony.

Imprudence indicates a deficiency of action – lack of skill

Negligence indicates a deficiency of perception – lack of foresight

Requisites of DOLO or malice

1. Freedom
2. Intelligence
3. Intent

NOTE:

Criminal intent is presumed from the commission of an unlawful act.

MALA IN SE

 Crimes so serious in their effects on society as to care for almost unanimous

condensation of its member (RPC)

VS.

MALA PROHIBITA (It is prohibited)

 Crimes which are mere violations of mere rules of convenience designed to

secure a more orderly regulation of the affairs of the society.

(Special Laws)

INTENT versus MOTIVE

 Intent is the purpose to use a particular means to effect such result.

 Motive is the moving power which impels one to action for a definite result.
 Is important in ascertaining the truth between two antagonistic theories or
versions of the killing.
 Motive is established by the testimony of witnesses on the acts or statement of
the accused before or immediately after the commission of the offense.
 Disclosure of the motive is an aid in completing the proof of the commission of
the crime.
 But proof of motive is not sufficient to support a conviction.
 Lack of motive may be an aid in showing the innocence of the accused.

Article 4

CRIMINAL LIABILITY

 Shall be incurred

1. By any person committing a felony although the wrongful act done be

different from that which be intended.
2. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against
persons or property were not for the inherent impossibility of its
accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate of
ineffectual means.

 One who commits an intentional felony is responsible for all the

consequences which may naturally and logically result therefrom, whether
foreseen or intended or not.
 Doctrine: el que es causa, de la causa es causa del mal causado
(he who is the cause is the cause of the evil caused)

The Rationale of Article 4

 (People vs. Ural, No. L – 30801)

 When a person has not committed a felony, he is not criminally liable for
the result which is not intended.
  Any person who creates in another’s mind an immediate sense of danger,
which causes the latter to do something resulting in the latter’s injuries, is
liable for the resulting injuries.
 Wrong done must be the direct, natural and logical consequences of
felonies act.
 The felony committed must be the proximate cause of the resulting injury.

NOTE:

The felony committed is not the proximate cause of the resulting injury when:

1. There is an active force that intervened between the felony committed and the
resulting injury, and the active force is a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign
from the felonies act of the accused for;
2. The resulting injury is due to the intentional act of the victim.

Impossible Crimes is indicative of criminal propensity or criminal tendency on the

part of the actor.

 A potential criminal
 Called socially dangerous person
 Penalty: Article 59 of RPC
 Act done against person/property

Felonies against Persons are:

a. Parricide
b. Murder
c. Homicide
d. Duel
e. Infanticide
f. Abortion
g. Physical injuries
h. Rape
 Felonies against Property are:

a. Robbery
b. Brigandage
c. Theft
d. Usurpation
e. Culpable insolvency
f. Swindling
g. Chatted mortgage
h. Arson
i. Malicious mischief

NOTE:

If the act performed would be an offense other than a felony against person or
against property, there is no Impossible Crime.

Purpose of the law in punishing the impossible crime

 To suppress criminal liability/propensity or criminal tendencies.

 Objectively, the offender has not committed a felony, but subjectively he is a
criminal.

ARTICLE 5

Whenever a court has knowledge of any act which it may deem proper to repress
and which is not punishable by law, it shall render the proper decision and shall report
to the chief executive, through the Department of Justice, the reason which induce the
court to believe that said act should be made the subject of penal legislation.

A trial of criminal care requires the following:

1. The act committed by the accused appears not punishable by any law;
2. But the court deems it proper to repress such act;
 3. In that case, the court must render the proper decision by dismissing the case
and acquitting the accused;
4. The judge must then make a report to the Chief Executive.

NOTE:

 The penalties are not excessive when intended to enforce a public policy.
 Courts have the duty to apply the penalty provided by law.
 Judge has the duty to apply the law as interpreted by the Supreme Court.
 Courts are not the forum to plead for sympathy.

 DURA LEX SED LEX.

ARTICLE 6

A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and
accomplishment are present.

FRUSTRATED FELONY

 When the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the
felony as a consequence but which – nevertheless, do not produce it by reason
of causes independent of the will of the perpetuator.

ATTEMPTED FELONY

 There is an attempt when the offender commence the commission of a felony

directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should
produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own
spontaneous desistance.

Development of crime has two stages:

 1. INTERNAL ACTS

o Mere ideas in the mind of a person – are not punishable even if – if carried
out, would constitute a crime.

2. EXTERNAL ACTS

a. A preparatory acts
b. Acts of execution – punishable under the RPC

Must have a direct connection with the crime intended to the committed by the
offender.

What is an Indeterminate Offense?

 It is one where the purpose of the offender in performing an act is not certain.
 The intension of the accused must be viewed from the nature of the acts
executed by him, and not from his admission.
 The desistance should be made before all the acts of execution are performed.
 The desistance which exempts from criminal liability has reference to the crime
intended to be committed, and has no reference to the crime actually committed
by the offender before his desistance.

Subjective phase of the offense:

 In attempted felony, the offender never passes the subjective phase of the
offender.
 It is that portion of the acts constituting a crime, starting from the point where the
offender begins the commission of the crime to that point where he has still
control over his acts, including their natural course.

Elements of Frustrated Felony

1. That the offender performs all the acts of execution;

2. All the acts performed would produce the felony as a consequence;
 3. But the felony is not produced;
4. By reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetuator.

Frustrated Felony distinguished from Attempted Felony

1. In bath, the offender has not accomplished his criminal purpose.

2. While in frustrated felony the offender has performed all the acts of execution
which would produce the felony as a consequence in attempted felony, the
offender merely commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts
and does not perform all the acts of execution.

How to determine whether the crime is only Attempted or Frustrated or it is

Consummated:

 In determining whether the felony is only attempted or frustrated or it is

consummated, (1) the nature of the offense, (2) the elements constituting the
felony, as well as (3) the manner of committing the same, must be considered.

ARSON (Arts. 320 – 326)

 In arson, it is not necessary that the property is totally destroyed by fire.

 The crime of arson is consummated even if only 1 portion of the wall or any other
part of the house is burned.

The consummation of the crime of arson does not depend upon the extent of the
damaged caused. (People vs. Hemandy)

THEFT

 The crime is consummated when the theft is able to take or get hold of the thing
belonging to another, even if he is not able to carry it away.
 In Estafa, the crime is consummated when the offended party is actually damaged or
prejudiced.

Manner of Committing the Crime

1. FORMAL CRIMES – consummated in one instant, no attempt.

2. Crimes consummated by mere attempt or proposed or by overt act.
3. Felony by Omission.
4. Crimes requiring the intervention of two persons to commit them are
consummated by mere agreement.
5. Material Crimes

a. Consummated rape
b. Frustrated rape
c. Attempted rape
d. Frustrated murder
e. Attempted homicide

ARTICLE 7

When light felonies are punishable?

Light felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated, with the
exception of those committed against persons or property.

Light felonies are those infractions of laws for the commission of which the
penalty of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos or hath is provided. (Art. 3,
par. 9)

Light felonies punished by RPC

1. Slight physical inquiries

2. Theft
3. Alteration of boundary marks
4. Malicious mischief
5. Intriguing against honor.
GENERAL RULE:

Light felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated.

Article 266 – Slight physical injuries and maltreatment.

Examples of light felonies against property:

1. Art. 309, No. 7

2. Art. 309, No. 8
3. Art. 313
4. Art. 328

ARTICLE 8

Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony

 A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement

concerning the commissions of a felony and decide to commit it.
 There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony
purposed its execution to some other person or persons.

GENERAL RULE:

Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are not punishable.

REASON:

Conspiracy and proposal to commit a crime are only preparatory acts, and the
law regards them as innocent or at least permissible except in rare and exceptional
cases.
Requisites of Conspiracy:

1. That two or more persons came to an agreement.

2. That the agreement concerned the commission of a felony; and
3. That the execution of the felony he decided upon

Treason or rebellion should not be actually committed.

 Should not be actually committed by reason of the proposal.

Requisites of Proposal

1. That a person has decided to commit a felony; and

2. That he proposes its execution to some other person or persons.

There is no criminal proposal when the person who proposes is not determined
to commit the felony.
There is no decided, concrete and formal proposal.
It is not the execution of a felony that is proposed.
It is not necessary that the person to whom the proposal is made agrees to
commit treason or rebellion
Proposal as an overt act of corruption of public officer.
The crimes in which conspiracy and proposal are punishable are against the
security of the state or economic security.

ARTICLE 9

Grave Felonies and Light Felonies

  Grave felonies are those to which the law attaches the capital punishment or
penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive, in accordance with Article 25
of this Code.
 Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with, penalties which in
their maximum period are correctional in accordance with the above-mentioned
article.
 Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty
of arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 persons, or hath is provided.

Article 9 Classifies Felonies – according to their gravity.

Important Words and Phrases

1. To which the law attaches the capital punishment.

(Capital punishment is death penalty)

2. Or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive.

The afflictive penalties in accordance with Art. 25 of this code are:

 Reclusion Perpetua
 Reclusion Temporal
 Perpetual or Temporary absolute disqualification
 Perpetual or Temporary special disqualification

ARTICLE 10

Offenses not subject to the provisions of this Code.

Offenses which are or in the future may be punishable under special laws are not
subject to the provisions of their Code.
This Code shall be supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should specially
provide the contrary.
Are offenses punishable under special laws subject to the provisions of the
Revised Penal Code?

Article 10 is compared of two clauses. In the first, it is provided that offenses

under special laws are not subject to the provisions of the code. The second
makes the code supplementary to such laws.

Special Laws is defined in US vs. Serapice, 23 Phil. 584, as a penal law which
punishes acts not defined and penalized by the Penal Code.
Special Law is a statute enacted by the Legislative branch, penal in character,
which is not an amendment to the RPC.
Offenses under special laws, not subject to the provisions of this Code relating to
attempted and frustrated crimes.
The Special Law has to fix penalties for attempted and frustrated crime.
When a special law covers the mere attempt to commit the crime defined by it,
the attempted stage is punishable by the same penalty provided by that law.
Art. 10, R.P.C. is not applicable to punish an accomplice under the special law.
Plea of guilty is not mitigating in illegal possession of firearms by Special Law.
No accessory penalty, unless the special law provides therefor.
Special laws amending the Revised Penal Code are subject to its provisions.

CHAPTER TWO
 Justifying Circumstances and Circumstances which exempt

from Criminal Liability

The circumstances affecting criminal liability are:

1. Justifying
2. Exempting
3. Mitigating
4. Aggravating
5. Alternative

Immutability is the quality by which an act may be ascribed to a person as its author or
owner.

 It implies that the act committed has been freely and consciously done and may,
therefore, be put down to the down as his very own.

Responsibility is the obligation of suffering the consequences of crime.

 It is the obligation of taking the penal and civil consequences of the crime.

Guilt is an element of responsibility, for a man cannot be made to answer for the
consequences of a crime unless he is guilty.

JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES

 Are those where the act of a person is said to be in accordance with law, so that
such person is deemed not to have transgressed the law and is free from both
criminal and civil liability.
 There is no civil liability, except in par. 4 of Art. II where the civil liability is borne
by the persons benefited by the act.
BASIS:

The law recognizes the non-existence of a crime by expressly stating in the

opening sentence of Article II that the persons therein mentioned “do not incur any
criminal liability”.

The following do not incur criminal liability:

1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided:

1.1 Unlawful aggression
1.2 Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel
1.3 Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person depending himself.
2. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of his own, a. d, or legitimate
or natural etc.
3. Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stranger, provided that
the first and second requisites mentioned in the first circumstance of this article
are present and that the person defending not be induced by revenge,
resentment or other evil motive.
4. Any person who in order to avoid an evil or injury, does an act which causes
damage to another, provided that the following requisites are present:
4.1 That the evil injury sought to be avoided actually exists;
4.2 That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it
4.3 That there be no other practical and less harmful to avoid it or means of
preventing it.
5. Any person who acts in the fulfilment of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right
or office.
6. Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a superior for some
lawful purpose.

SELF – DEFENSE

 Bound to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he indeed acted in

defense of himself.
 Requisites of Self – Defense:

1. Unlawful aggression
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the personal defending himself.

UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION

 Is equivalent to assault or at least threatened assault of an immediate and

imminent kind.
 There must be an actual physical assault upon a person, or at least a threat to
inflict real injury.
 Presupposes an actual, sudden and unexpected attack, or imminent danger
thereof, and not merely a threatening or intimidating – attitude.
 Refers to an attach that has actually broken out or materialized or at the very
least is clearly imminent.
 When there is no peril to one’s life; limb or right, there is no unlawful aggression.

PERIL TO ONE’S LIFE

1. Actual – that the danger must be present, that is actually in existence.

e.g V.S vs. Jose Laurel (22 Phil. 252)

2. Imminent – that the danger is on the point of happening.

– it is not required that the attack already begins, for it may be too late.

PERIL TO ONE’S LIMB

 When the person is attacked, he is in imminent danger of death or bodily

harm.
 May be actual or only imminent.
  May includes peril to the safety of one’s person from physical injuries.

(People vs. Montalbo, 56 Phil. 443)

 There must be actual physical force or actual use of weapon.

NOTE:

A light push on the head with the hand does not constitute unlawful aggression.

 A strong retaliation for an injury or threat may amount to an unlawful

aggression.

NOTE:

Retaliation is not Self – Defense.

 The attack made by the deceased and the killing of the deceased should
succeed each other without appreciable interval of time.
 The unlawful aggression must come from the person who was affected of
attacked by the accused.
 A public officer exceeding his authority may become an unlawful
aggression.
 Improbability of the deceased being the aggressor belies the claim of self
– defense.
 The fact that the accused declined to give any statement when he
surrendered to a police man is inconsistent with the plea of self – defense.
 Physical fact may determine whether or not the accused acted in self –
defense.
 When the aggressor flees, unlawful aggression no longer exist.
Retreat to take more advantageous position

 Unlawful aggression is considered still continuing and the one making a defense
has a right to pursue him in this retreat and to disable him.
 No unlawful aggression when there is agreement to fight.

1. In concerted fight
2. There is an agreement
3. The challenge to a fight must be accepted

Reason for the rule:

 There are the fight is agreed upon each of the protagonist is at once assailant
and assaulted and neither can invoke the right of self-defense because
aggression which is an incident in the fight is bound to arise from one or the other
of the combatants.

(People vs. Quinto)

Note:

Stands ground when in the right

 The new rule on aggression

Unlawful aggression in defense of other rights

 1. Attempt to rape a woman

 defense of right to chastity

2. Defense of property

 Only when it is coupled with an attack on the person of one entrusted with
raid property

(People vs. Apaliman)

3. Defense of home

Example of threats to inflict real injury:

1. When one aims a revolver at another with the intention of shooting him
2. The act of a person in retreating two steps and placing his hand in his packet
with a motion indicating his purpose to commit an assault with a weapon.
3. The act of opening a knife and making a motion as if to make an attack

 Offensive and positively strong threatening attitude to cause injury

Picking up a weapon is sufficient to the unlawful aggression

 Aggression must be real not merely imaginary

SECOND REQUISITE OF DEFENSE OR RIGHT: REASONABLE NECESSITY OF

MEANS EMPLOYED TO PREVENT OR REPEL IT

How to determine the sufficiency of provocation:

1. When one challenges the declared to come out of the house and engage in a
first fight with him and prove who is the better man.
2. When one hurts insults on imputes to another the utterance of vulgar
language
 3. When the accused tried to ferably kiss the sister of the deceased. The
accused thereby gave sufficient provocation to the deceased to attack him.

Light – incompatible with self-defense

 Highly evidentiary of guilt

Relatives that can be defended:

1. Spouse
2. Ascendants
3. Descendants
4. Legitimate natural or adopted brothers/sisters
5. Relatives by consanguinity refers to blood relations within the fourth civil degree

Requisites of defense relatives:

1. Unlawful aggression
2. Reasonable in necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and
3. In care the provocation was given by the person attacked the one making the
defense had no part therein.

 Defense of relative also requires that there be unlawful aggression

 Most unlawful aggression exist as a matter of fact, or can it be made to depend
upon an honest belief of the one making a defense.
 The part that the relative depended gave provocation is immaterial.

Defense of stranger
Anyone who acts in defense of the person or rights of a stran