Criminal law - Ortega Notes

Published on May 2016 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 64 | Comments: 0 | Views: 485
of 209
Download PDF   Embed   Report

UP RevisedOrtegaLectureNotes20II

Comments

Content


R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 102
TITLE I.
CRIMES
AGAINST
NATIONAL
SECURITY
AND THE
LAW OF
NATIONS
Crimes
against
national
security
1.
Treason (Art.
114);
2.
Conspi
racy
and
propos
al to
commit
treaso
n (Art.
115);
3.
Mispris
ion of
treaso
n (Art.
11);
and
4. !spionage (Art. 11").
Crimes against t#e la$ of nations
1. %nciting to $ar or gi&ing moti&es for reprisals (Art. 11');
2. (iolation of neutrality (Art. 11));
3. Corresponding $it# #ostile country (Art. 12*);
4. +lig#t to enemy,s country (Art. 121); and
5. -iracy in general and mutiny on t#e #ig# seas (Art. 122).
The crimes under this title can be prosecuted even if the criminal act or acts were committed outside the Philippine territorial jurisdiction. However, prosecution can
proceed only if the offender is within Philippine territory or brought to the Philippines pursuant to an extradition treaty. This is one of the instances where the Revised
Penal Code may be given extraterritorial application under !rticle " #$% thereof. &n the case of crimes against the law of nations, the offender can be prosecuted
whenever he may be found because the crimes are regarded as committed against humanity in general.
!lmost all of these are crimes committed in times of war, except the following, which can be committed in times of peace'
#(% )spionage, under !rticle ((* + This is also covered by Commonwealth !ct ,o. -(- which punishes conspiracy to commit espionage. This may be committed both
in times of war and in times of peace.
#"% &nciting to .ar or /iving 0otives for Reprisals, under !rticle ((1 + This can be committed even if the Philippines is not a participant. )xposing the 2ilipinos or their
properties because the offender performed an unauthori3ed act, li4e those who recruit 2ilipinos to participate in the gulf war. &f they involve themselves to the war,
this crime is committed. Relevant in the cases of 2lor Contemplacion or !bner !fuang, the police officer who stepped on a 5ingaporean flag.
#6% 7iolation of ,eutrality, under !rticle ((8 + The Philippines is not a party to a war but there is a war going on. This may be committed in the light of the 0iddle )ast
war.
Article 114. Treaso
!lements
1. .ffender is a +ilipino or resident alien;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 103
2. T#ere
is a
$ar in
$#ic#
t#e
-#ilippi
nes is
in&ol&e
d;
3.
.ffender
eit#er /
a. le&ies
$ar
against
t#e
go&ern
ment;
or
0.
ad#ere
s to
t#e
enemi
es1
gi&ing
t#em
aid or
comfor
t $it#in
t#e
-#ilippi
nes or
else$#
ere
2e3uirements of le&ying $ar
1. Actual assem0ling of men;
2. To e4ecute a treasona0le design 0y force;
3. %ntent is to deli&er t#e country in $#ole or in part to t#e enemy; and
4. Colla0oration $it# foreign enemy or some foreign so&ereign
T$o $ays of pro&ing treason
1. Testimony of at least t$o $itnesses to t#e same o&ert act; or
2. Confession of accused in open court.
Article 11!. Cos"irac# a$ %ro"osal to Co&&it Treaso
!lements of conspiracy to commit treason
1. T#ere is a $ar in $#ic# t#e -#ilippines is in&ol&ed;
2. At least t$o persons come to an agreement to /

a. le&y $ar against t#e go&ernment; or
0. ad#ere to t#e enemies1 gi&ing t#em aid or comfort;
3. T#ey decide to commit it.
!lements of proposal to commit treason
1. T#ere is a $ar in $#ic# t#e -#ilippines is in&ol&ed;
2. At least one person decides to /
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 104

a. le&y
$ar
against
t#e
go&ern
ment;
or
0. ad#ere
to t#e
enemi
es1
gi&ing
t#em
aid or
comfor
t;
3. 5e
propos
es its
e4ecuti
on to
some
ot#er
person
s.
Article 11'.
Mis"risio o(
Treaso
!lements
1. .ffender o$es allegiance to t#e go&ernment1 and not a foreigner;
2. 5e #as 6no$ledge of conspiracy to commit treason against t#e go&ernment;
3. 5e conceals or does not disclose and ma6e 6no$n t#e same as soon as possi0le to t#e go&ernor or fiscal of t#e pro&ince in $#ic# #e resides1 or t#e mayor or fiscal of
t#e city in $#ic# #e resides.
.hile in treason, even aliens can commit said crime because of the amendment to the article, no such amendment was made in misprision of treason. 0isprision of
treason is a crime that may be committed only by citi3ens of the Philippines.
The essence of the crime is that there are persons who conspire to commit treason and the offender 4new this and failed to ma4e the necessary report to the government
within the earliest possible time. .hat is re9uired is to report it as soon as possible. The criminal liability arises if the treasonous activity was still at the conspiratorial
stage. :ecause if the treason already erupted into an overt act, the implication is that the government is already aware of it. There is no need to report the same. This is a
felony by omission although committed with dolo, not with culpa.
The persons mentioned in !rticle ((- are not limited to mayor, fiscal or governor. !ny person in authority having e9uivalent jurisdiction, li4e a provincial commander, will
already negate criminal liability.

.hether the conspirators are parents or children, and the ones who learn the conspiracy is a parent or child, they are re9uired to report the same. The reason is that
although blood is thic4er than water so to spea4, when it comes to security of the state, blood relationship is always subservient to national security. !rticle "; does not
apply here because the persons found liable for this crime are not considered accessories< they are treated as principals.
&n the (88* bar examination, a problem was given with respect to misprision of treason. The text of the provision simply refers to a conspiracy to overthrow the
government. The examiner failed to note that this crime can only be committed in times of war. The conspiracy adverted to must be treasonous in character. &n the
problem given, it was rebellion. ! conspiracy to overthrow the government is a crime of rebellion because there is no war. =nder the Revised Penal Code, there is no
crime of misprision of rebellion.
Article 11). Es"ioa*e
Acts punis#ed
1. 7y entering1 $it#out aut#ority t#erefore1 a $ars#ip1 fort or na&al or military esta0lis#ment or reser&ation to o0tain any information1 plans1 p#otograp# or ot#er data
of a confidential nature relati&e to t#e defense of t#e -#ilippines;
!lements
1. .ffender enters any of t#e places mentioned;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 105
2. 5e #as
no
aut#ori
ty
t#erefo
re;
3. 5is
purpos
e is to
o0tain
inform
ation1
plans1
p#otog
rap#s
or
ot#er
data of
a
confide
ntial
nature
relati&e
to t#e
defens
e of
t#e
-#ilippi
nes.
2. 7y
disclos
ing to
t#e
repres
entati&
e of a
foreign
nation t#e contents of t#e articles1 data or information referred to in paragrap# 1 of Article 11"1 $#ic# #e #ad in #is possession 0y reason of t#e pu0lic office #e
#olds.
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e #as in #is possession t#e articles1 data or information referred to in paragrap# 1 of Article 11"1 0y reason of t#e pu0lic office #e #olds;
3. 5e discloses t#eir contents to a representati&e of a foreign nation.
Co&&o+ealt, Act No. '1' - A Act to %.is, Es"ioa*e a$ Ot,er O((eses a*aist Natioal Sec.rit#
Acts punis#ed
1. 8nla$fully o0taining or permitting to 0e o0tained information affecting national defense;
2. 8nla$ful disclosing of information affecting national defense;
3. 9isloyal acts or $ords in times of peace;
4. 9isloyal acts or $ords in times of $ar;
5. Conspiracy to &iolate preceding sections; and
. 5ar0oring or concealing &iolators of la$.
Article 11/. Iciti* to War or Gi0i* Moti0es (or Re"risals
!lements
1. .ffender performs unla$ful or unaut#ori:ed acts;
2. T#e acts pro&o6e or gi&e occasion for /
a. a $ar in&ol&ing or lia0le to in&ol&e t#e -#ilippines; or
0. e4posure of +ilipino citi:ens to reprisals on t#eir persons or property.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 106
Article 111.
2iolatio o(
Ne.tralit#
!lements
1. T#ere is a
$ar in
$#ic#
t#e
-#ilippi
nes is
not
in&ol&e
d;
2. T#ere is a
regulat
ion
issued
0y a
compe
tent
aut#ori
ty to
enforc
e
neutral
ity;
3.
.ffend
er
&iolate
s t#e
regulat
ion.
.hen we say national security, it should be interpreted as including rebellion, sedition and subversion. The Revised Penal Code does not treat rebellion, sedition and
subversion as crimes against national security, but more of crimes against public order because during the time that the Penal Code was enacted, rebellion was carried
out only with bolos and spears< hence, national security was not really threatened. ,ow, the threat of rebellion or internal wars is serious as a national threat.
Article 134. Corres"o$ece +it, Hostile Co.tr#
!lements
1. %t is in time of $ar in $#ic# t#e -#ilippines is in&ol&ed;
2. .ffender ma6es correspondence $it# an enemy country or territory occupied 0y enemy troops;
3. T#e correspondence is eit#er /
a. pro#i0ited 0y t#e go&ernment;
0. carried on in cip#ers or con&entional signs; or
c. containing notice or information $#ic# mig#t 0e useful to t#e enemy.
Article 131. Fli*,t to Ee&#5s Co.tr#
!lements
1. T#ere is a $ar in $#ic# t#e -#ilippines is in&ol&ed;
2. .ffender must 0e o$ing allegiance to t#e go&ernment;
3. .ffender attempts to flee or go to enemy country;
4. ;oing to t#e enemy country is pro#i0ited 0y competent aut#ority.
&n crimes against the law of nations, the offenders can be prosecuted anywhere in the world because these crimes are considered as against humanity in general, li4e
piracy and mutiny. Crimes against national security can be tried only in the Philippines, as there is a need to bring the offender here before he can be made to suffer the
conse9uences of the law. The acts against national security may be committed abroad and still be punishable under our law, but it can not be tried under foreign law.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 107
Article 133.
%irac# i
*eeral a$
M.ti# o t,e
Hi*, Seas or
i %,ili""ie
Waters
Acts punis#ed
as piracy
1.
Attac6i
ng or
sei:ing
a
&essel
on t#e
#ig#
seas
or in
-#ilippi
ne
$aters;
2.
<ei:ing in t#e &essel $#ile on t#e #ig# seas or in -#ilippine $aters t#e $#ole or part of its cargo1 its e3uipment or personal 0elongings of its complement or
passengers.
!lements of piracy

1. T#e &essel is on t#e #ig# seas or -#ilippine $aters;
2. .ffenders are neit#er mem0ers of its complement nor passengers of t#e &essel;
3. .ffenders eit#er /
a. attac6 or sei:e a &essel on t#e #ig# seas or in -#ilippine $aters; or
0. sei:e in t#e &essel $#ile on t#e #ig# seas or in -#ilippine $aters t#e $#ole or part of its cargo1 its e3uipment or personal 0elongings of its complement or
passengers;
4. T#ere is intent to gain.
>riginally, the crimes of piracy and mutiny can only be committed in the high seas, that is, outside Philippine territorial waters. :ut in !ugust (8?*, Presidential @ecree
,o. $6" #The !ntiPiracy and !ntiHighway Robbery Aaw of (8?*% was issued, punishing piracy, but not mutiny, in Philippine territorial waters. Thus came about two 4inds
of piracy' #(% that which is punished under the Revised Penal Code if committed in the high seas< and #"% that which is punished under Presidential @ecree ,o. $6" if
committed in Philippine territorial waters.
!mending !rticle ("", Republic !ct ,o. ?-$8 included therein piracy in Philippine waters, thus, pro tanto superseding Presidential @ecree ,o. $6". !s amended, the
article now punishes piracy, as well as mutiny, whether committed in the high seas or in Philippine territorial waters, and the penalty has been increased to reclusion
perpetua from reclusion temporal.

:ut while under Presidential @ecree ,o. $6", piracy in Philippine waters could be committed by any person, including a passenger or member of the complement of a
vessel, under the amended article, piracy can only be committed by a person who is not a passenger nor member of the complement of the vessel irrespective of venue.
5o if a passenger or complement of the vessel commits acts of robbery in the high seas, the crime is robbery, not piracy.
,ote, however, that in 5ection * of Presidential @ecree ,o. $6", the act of aiding pirates or abetting piracy is penali3ed as a crime distinct from piracy. 5aid section
penali3es any person who 4nowingly and in any manner aids or protects pirates, such as giving them information about the movement of the police or other peace officers
of the government, or ac9uires or receives property ta4en by such pirates, or in any manner derives any benefit therefrom< or who directly or indirectly abets the
commission of piracy. !lso, it is expressly provided in the same section that the offender shall be considered as an accomplice of the principal offenders and punished in
accordance with the Revised Penal Code. This provision of Presidential @ecree ,o. $6" with respect to piracy in Philippine water has not been incorporated in the
Revised Penal Code. ,either may it be considered repealed by Republic !ct ,o. ?-$8 since there is nothing in the amendatory law is inconsistent with said section.
!pparently, there is still the crime of abetting piracy in Philippine waters under Presidential @ecree ,o. $6".
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 108
Considering
that the
essence of
piracy is one
of robbery,
any ta4ing in a
vessel with
force upon
things or with
violence or
intimidation
against
person is
employed will
always be
piracy. &t
cannot co
exist with the
crime of
robbery.
Robbery,
therefore,
cannot be
committed on
board a
vessel. :ut if
the ta4ing is
without
violence or
intimidation on
persons of
force upon
things, the
crime of
piracy cannot
be committed,
but only theft.
6.estios 7 As+ers
Could t#eft 0e committed on 0oard a &essel=
Bes. The essence of piracy is one of robbery.
!lements of mutiny
1. T#e &essel is on t#e #ig# seas or -#ilippine $aters;
2. .ffenders are eit#er mem0ers of its complement1 or passengers of t#e &essel;
3. .ffenders eit#er /
a. attac6 or sei:e t#e &essel; or
0. sei:e t#e $#ole or part of t#e cargo1 its e3uipment1 or personal 0elongings of t#e cre$ or passengers.
0utiny is the unlawful resistance to a superior officer, or the raising of commotions and disturbances aboard a ship against the authority of its commander.
@istinction between mutiny and piracy
#(% !s to offenders
0utiny is committed by members of the complement or the passengers of the vessel.
Piracy is committed by persons who are not members of the complement or the passengers of the vessel.
#"% !s to criminal intent
&n mutiny, there is no criminal intent.
&n piracy, the criminal intent is for gain.
Article 138. 6.ali(ie$ %irac#
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 109
!lements
1. T#e &essel
is on
t#e
#ig#
seas
or
-#ilippi
ne
$aters>
2. .ffenders
may or
may
not 0e
mem0
ers of
its
comple
ment1
or
passen
gers of
t#e
&essel;
3. .ffenders
eit#er
/
a. attac6
or
sei:e
t#e
&essel;
or
0. sei:e t#e $#ole or part of t#e cargo1 its e3uipment.1 or personal 0elongings of t#e cre$ or passengers;
4. T#e preceding $ere committed under any of t#e follo$ing circumstances>
a. $#ene&er t#ey #a&e sei:ed a &essel 0y 0oarding or firing upon t#e same;
0. $#ene&er t#e pirates #a&e a0andoned t#eir &ictims $it#out means of sa&ing t#emsel&es; or
c. $#ene&er t#e crime is accompanied 0y murder1 #omicide1 p#ysical in?uries or rape.
&f any of the circumstances in !rticle("6 is present, piracy is 9ualified. Ta4e note of the specific crimes involve in number * c #murder, homicide, physical injuries or rape%.
.hen any of these crimes accompany piracy, there is no complex crime. &nstead, there is only one crime committed + 9ualified piracy. 0urder, rape, homicide, physical
injuries are mere circumstances 9ualifying piracy and cannot be punished as separate crimes, nor can they be complexed with piracy.
!lthough in !rticle ("6 merely refers to 9ualified piracy, there is also the crime of 9ualified mutiny. 0utiny is 9ualified under the following circumstances'
#(% .hen the offenders abandoned the victims without means of saving themselves< or
#"% .hen the mutiny is accompanied by rape, murder, homicide, or physical injuries.
,ote that the first circumstance which 9ualifies piracy does not apply to mutiny.
Re".9lic Act No. '38! :T,e Ati Hi;<ac=i* La+>
!nti hijac4ing is another 4ind of piracy which is committed in an aircraft. &n other countries, this crime is 4nown as aircraft piracy.
2our situations governed by anti hijac4ing law'
#(% usurping or sei3ing control of an aircraft of Philippine registry while it is in flight, compelling the pilots thereof to change the course or destination of the aircraft<
#"% usurping or sei3ing control of an aircraft of foreign registry while within Philippine territory, compelling the pilots thereof to land in any part of Philippine territory<
#6% carrying or loading on board an aircraft operating as a public utility passenger aircraft in the Philippines, any flammable, corrosive, explosive, or poisonous
substance< and
#*% loading, shipping, or transporting on board a cargo aircraft operating as a public utility in the Philippines, any flammable, corrosive, explosive, or poisonous
substance if this was done not in accordance with the rules and regulations set and promulgated by the !ir Transportation >ffice on this matter.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 110
:etween
numbers (
and ", the
point of
distinction is
whether the
aircraft is of
Philippine
registry or
foreign
registry. The
common bar
9uestion on
this law
usually
involves
number (.
The important
thing is that
before the anti
hijac4ing law
can apply, the
aircraft must
be in flight. &f
not in flight,
whatever
crimes
committed
shall be
governed by
the Revised
Penal Code.
The law
ma4es a
distinction
between
aircraft of a
foreign
registry and of
Philippine
registry. &f the aircraft subject of the hijac4 is of Philippine registry, it should be in flight at the time of the hijac4ing. >therwise, the anti hijac4ing law will not apply and
the crime is still punished under the Revised Penal Code. The correlative crime may be one of grave coercion or grave threat. &f somebody is 4illed, the crime is
homicide or murder, as the case may be. &f there are some explosives carried there, the crime is destructive arson. )xplosives are by nature pyrotechni9ues.
@estruction of property with the use of pyrotechni9ue is destructive arson. &f there is illegally possessed or carried firearm, other special laws will apply.
>n the other hand, if the aircraft is of foreign registry, the law does not re9uire that it be in flight before the anti hijac4ing law can apply. This is because aircrafts of
foreign registry are considered in transit while they are in foreign countries. !lthough they may have been in a foreign country, technically they are still in flight, because
they have to move out of that foreign country. 5o even if any of the acts mentioned were committed while the exterior doors of the foreign aircraft were still open, the anti
hijac4ing law will already govern.
,ote that under this law, an aircraft is considered in flight from the moment all exterior doors are closed following embar4ation until such time when the same doors are
again opened for disembar4ation. This means that there are passengers that boarded. 5o if the doors are closed to bring the aircraft to the hangar, the aircraft is not
considered as in flight. The aircraft shall be deemed to be already in flight even if its engine has not yet been started.
6.estios 7 As+ers
1. T#e pilots of t#e -an Am aircraft $ere accosted 0y some armed men and $ere told to proceed to t#e aircraft to fly it to a foreign destination. T#e armed
men $al6ed $it# t#e pilots and $ent on 0oard t#e aircraft. 7ut 0efore t#ey could do anyt#ing on t#e aircraft1 alert mars#als arrested t#em. @#at crime $as committed=
The criminal intent definitely is to ta4e control of the aircraft, which is hijac4ing. &t is a 9uestion now of whether the antihijac4ing law shall govern.
The anti hijac4ing law is applicable in this case. )ven if the aircraft is not yet about to fly, the re9uirement that it be in flight does not hold true when in comes to
aircraft of foreign registry. )ven if the problem does not say that all exterior doors are closed, the crime is hijac4ing. 5ince the aircraft is of foreign registry, under the law,
simply usurping or sei3ing control is enough as long as the aircraft is within Philippine territory, without the re9uirement that it be in flight.
,ote, however, that there is no hijac4ing in the attempted stage. This is a special law where the attempted stage is not punishable.
2. A -#ilippine Air Aines aircraft is 0ound for 9a&ao. @#ile t#e pilot and coBpilot are ta6ing t#eir snac6s at t#e airport lounge1 some of t#e armed men $ere
also t#ere. T#e pilots $ere follo$ed 0y t#ese men on t#eir $ay to t#e aircraft. As soon as t#e pilots entered t#e coc6pit1 t#ey pulled out t#eir firearms and ga&e
instructions $#ere to fly t#e aircraft. 9oes t#e anti #iB?ac6ing la$ apply=
,o. The passengers have yet to board the aircraft. &f at that time, the offenders are apprehended, the law will not apply because the aircraft is not yet in flight.
,ote that the aircraft is of Philippine registry.
3. @#ile t#e ste$ardess of a -#ilippine Air Aines plane 0ound for Ce0u $as $aiting for t#e passenger manifest1 t$o of its passengers seated near t#e pilot
surreptitiously entered t#e pilot coc6pit. At gunpoint1 t#ey directed t#e pilot to fly t#e aircraft to t#e Middle !ast. 5o$e&er1 0efore t#e pilot could fly t#e aircraft to$ards t#e
Middle !ast1 t#e offenders $ere su0dued and t#e aircraft landed. @#at crime $as committed=
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 111
The
aircraft was
not yet in
flight.
Considering
that the
stewardess
was still
waiting for the
passenger
manifest, the
doors were
still open.
Hence, the
anti hijac4ing
law is not
applicable.
&nstead, the
Revised Penal
Code shall
govern. The
crime
committed
was grave
coercion or
grave threat,
depending
upon whether
or not any
serious
offense
violence was
inflicted upon
the pilot.

Howev
er, if the
aircraft were
of foreign
registry, the
act would already be subject to the anti hijac4ing law because there is no re9uirement for foreign aircraft to be in flight before such law would apply. The reason for the
distinction is that as long as such aircraft has not returned to its home base, technically, it is still considered in transit or in flight.
!s to numbers 6 and * of Republic !ct ,o. -"6$, the distinction is whether the aircraft is a passenger aircraft or a cargo aircraft. &n both cases, however, the law applies
only to public utility aircraft in the Philippines. Private aircrafts are not subject to the anti hijac4ing law, in so far as transporting prohibited substances are concerned.
&f the aircraft is a passenger aircraft, the prohibition is absolute. Carrying of any prohibited, flammable, corrosive, or explosive substance is a crime under Republic !ct
,o. -"6$. :ut if the aircraft is only a cargo aircraft, the law is violated only when the transporting of the prohibited substance was not done in accordance with the rules
and regulations prescribed by the !ir Transportation >ffice in the matter of shipment of such things. The :oard of Transportation provides the manner of pac4ing of such
4ind of articles, the 9uantity in which they may be loaded at any time, etc. >therwise, the anti hijac4ing law does not apply.
However, under 5ection ?, any physical injury or damage to property which would result from the carrying or loading of the flammable, corrosive, explosive, or poisonous
substance in an aircraft, the offender shall be prosecuted not only for violation of Republic !ct ,o. -"6$, but also for the crime of physical injuries or damage to property,
as the case may be, under the Revised Penal Code. There will be two prosecutions here. >ther than this situation, the crime of physical injuries will be absorbed. &f the
explosives were planted in the aircraft to blow up the aircraft, the circumstance will 9ualify the penalty and that is not punishable as a separate crime for murder. The
penalty is increased under the anti hijac4ing law.
!ll other acts outside of the four are merely 9ualifying circumstances and would bring about higher penalty. 5uch acts would not constitute another crime. 5o the 4illing
or explosion will only 9ualify the penalty to a higher one.
6.estios 7 As+ers
1. %n t#e course of t#e #iB?ac61 a passenger or complement $as s#ot and 6illed. @#at crime or crimes $ere committed=
The crime remains to be a violation of the anti hijac4ing law, but the penalty thereof shall be higher because a passenger or complement of the aircraft had been
4illed. The crime of homicide or murder is not committed.
2. T#e #iB?ac6ers t#reatened to detonate a 0om0 in t#e course of t#e #iB?ac6. @#at crime or crimes $ere committed=
!gain, the crime is violation of the anti hijac4ing law. The separate crime of grave threat is not committed. This is considered as a 9ualifying circumstance that
shall serve to increase the penalty.
TITLE II. CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE STATE
Crimes against t#e fundamental la$s of t#e <tate
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 112
1.
Ar0itrary
detention (Art.
124);
2. 9elay
in t#e
deli&er
y of
detain
ed
person
s to
t#e
proper
?udicial
aut#ori
ties
(Art.
125);
3.
9elaying
release (Art.
12);
4.
!4pulsion (Art.
12");
5.
(iolation of
domicile (Art.
12');
. <earc# $arrants maliciously o0tained and a0use in t#e ser&ice of t#ose legally o0tained (Art. 12));
". <earc#ing domicile $it#out $itnesses (Art. 13*);
'. -ro#i0ition1 interruption1 and dissolution of peaceful meetings (Art. 131);
). %nterruption of religious $ors#ip (Art. 132); and
1*. .ffending t#e religious feelings (Art. 133);
Crimes under this title are those which violate the :ill of Rights accorded to the citi3ens under the Constitution. =nder this title, the offenders are public officers, except as
to the last crime + offending the religious feelings under !rticle (66, which refers to any person. The public officers who may be held liable are only those acting under
supposed exercise of official functions, albeit illegally.
&n its counterpart in Title &C #Crimes !gainst Personal Aiberty and 5ecurity%, the offenders are private persons. :ut private persons may also be liable under this title as
when a private person conspires with a public officer. .hat is re9uired is that the principal offender must be a public officer. Thus, if a private person conspires with a
public officer, or becomes an accessory or accomplice, the private person also becomes liable for the same crime. :ut a private person acting alone cannot commit the
crimes under !rticle ("* to (6" of this title.
Article 134. Ar9itrar# Detetio
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. 5e detains a person;
3. T#e detention is $it#out legal grounds.
Meaning of a0sence of legal grounds
1. Co crime $as committed 0y t#e detained;
2. T#ere is no &iolent insanity of t#e detained person; and
3. T#e person detained #as no ailment $#ic# re3uires compulsory confinement in a #ospital.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 113
The crime of
arbitr
ary
deten
tion
assu
mes
sever
al
forms
'
#(%
@etaini
ng a
person
without
legal
ground
s
under<
#"% Having
arreste
d the
offend
ed
party
for
legal
ground
s but
without
warrant of arrest, and the public officer does not deliver the arrested person to the proper judicial authority within the period of (", (1, or 6- hours, as the case
may be< or
#6% @elaying release by competent authority with the same period mentioned in number ".
@istinction between arbitrary detention and illegal detention
(. &n arbitrary detention
The principal offender must be a public officer. Civilians can commit the crime of arbitrary detention except when they conspire with a public officer committing this
crime, or become an accomplice or accessory to the crime committed by the public officer< and
The offender who is a public officer has a duty which carries with it the authority to detain a person.
". &n illegal detention
The principal offender is a private person. :ut a public officer can commit the crime of illegal detention when he is acting in a private capacity or beyond the scope
of his official duty, or when he becomes an accomplice or accessory to the crime committed by a private person.
The offender, even if he is a public officer, does not include as his function the power to arrest and detain a person, unless he conspires with a public officer
committing arbitrary detention.
,ote that in the crime of arbitrary detention, although the offender is a public officer, not any public officer can commit this crime. >nly those public officers whose official
duties carry with it the authority to ma4e an arrest and detain
persons can be guilty of this crime. 5o, if the offender does not possess such authority, the crime committed by him is illegal detention. ! public officer who is acting
outside the scope of his official duties is no better than a private citi3en.
6.estios 7 As+ers
1. A ?anitor at t#e Due:on City 5all $as assigned in cleaning t#e menEs room. .ne day1 #e noticed a fello$ urinating so carelessly t#at instead of urinating at
t#e 0o$l1 #e $as actually urinating partly on t#e floor. T#e ?anitor resented t#is. 5e stepped out of t#e menEs room and loc6ed t#e same. 5e left. T#e fello$ $as a0le to
come out only after se&eral #ours $#en people from t#e outside forci0ly opened t#e door. %s t#e ?anitor lia0le for ar0itrary detention=
,o. )ven if he is a public officer, he is not permitted by his official function to arrest and detain persons. Therefore, he is guilty only of illegal detention. .hile the
offender is a public officer, his duty does not include the authority to ma4e arrest< hence, the crime committed is illegal detention.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 114
2.
A
municipal
treasurer #as
0een courting
#is secretary.
5o$e&er1 t#e
latter al$ays
turned #im
do$n.
T#ereafter1
s#e tried to
a&oid #im.
.ne
afternoon1 t#e
municipal
treasurer
loc6ed t#e
secretary
inside t#eir
office until s#e
started crying.
T#e treasurer
opened t#e
door and
allo$ed #er to
go #ome.
@#at crime
$as
committed=
&llegal detention. This is because the municipal treasurer has no authority to detain a person although he is a public officer.
&n a case decided by the 5upreme Court a :arangay Chairman who unlawfully detains another was held to be guilty of the crime of arbitrary detention. This is because
he is a person in authority vested with the jurisdiction to maintain peace and order within his barangay. &n the maintenance of such peace and order, he may cause the
arrest and detention of troublema4ers or those who disturb the peace and order within his barangay. :ut if the legal basis for the apprehension and detention does not
exist, then the detention becomes arbitrary.
.hether the crime is arbitrary detention or illegal detention, it is necessary that there must be an actual restraint of liberty of the offended party. &f there is no actual
restraint, as the offended party may still go to the place where he wants to go, even though there have been warnings, the crime of arbitrary detention or illegal detention
is not committed. There is either grave or light threat.
However, if the victim is under guard in his movement such that there is still restraint of liberty, then the crime of either arbitrary or illegal detention is still committed.
6.estio 7 As+er
T#e offended party $as 0roug#t to a place $#ic# #e could not lea&e 0ecause #e does not 6no$ $#ere #e is1 alt#oug# free to mo&e a0out. @as ar0itrary or illegal
detention committed=
)ither arbitrary detention or illegal detention was committed. &f a person is brought to a safe house, blindfolded, even if he is free to move as he pleases, but if he
cannot leave the place, arbitrary detention or illegal detention is committed.
@istinction between arbitrary detention and unlawful arrest
#(% !s to offender
&n arbitrary detention, the offender is a public officer possessed with authority to ma4e arrests.
&n unlawful arrest, the offender may be any person.
#"% !s to criminal intent
&n arbitrary detention, the main reason for detaining the offended party is to deny him of his liberty.
&n unlawful arrest, the purpose is to accuse the offended party of a crime he did not commit, to deliver the person to the proper authority, and to file the necessary
charges in a way trying to incriminate him.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 115
.hen a
person is
unlawfully
arrested, his
subse9uent
detention is
without legal
grounds.
6.estio 7
As+er
A #ad
0een
collecting tong
from dri&ers.
71 a dri&er1 did
not $ant to
contri0ute to
t#e tong. .ne
day1 7 $as
appre#ended
0y A1 telling
#im t#at #e
$as dri&ing
carelessly.
2ec6less
dri&ing carries
$it# it a
penalty of
immediate
detention and
arrest. 7 $as
0roug#t to t#e
Traffic 7ureau and $as detained t#ere until t#e e&ening. @#en A returned1 #e opened t#e cell and told 7 to go #ome. @as t#ere a crime of ar0itrary detention or unla$ful
arrest=
!rbitrary detention. The arrest of : was only incidental to the criminal intent of the offender to detain him. :ut if after putting : inside the cell, he was turned over
to the investigating officer who boo4ed him and filed a charge of rec4less imprudence against him, then the crime would be unlawful arrest. The detention of the driver is
incidental to the supposed crime he did not commit. :ut if there is no supposed crime at all because the driver was not charged at all, he was not given place under
boo4ing sheet or report arrest, then that means that the only purpose of the offender is to stop him from driving his jeepney because he refused to contribute to the tong.
Article 13!. Dela# i t,e Deli0er# o( Detaie$ %ersos to t,e %ro"er <.$icial A.t,orities
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. 5e detains a person for some legal ground;
3. 5e fails to deli&er suc# person to t#e proper ?udicial aut#orities $it#in /
a. 12 #our for lig#t penalties;
0. 1' #ours for correctional penalties; and
c. 3 #ours for afflicti&e or capital penalties.
This is a form of arbitrary detention. !t the beginning, the detention is legal since it is in the pursuance of a lawful arrest. However, the detention becomes arbitrary when
the period thereof exceeds (", (1 or 6- hours, as the case may be, depending on whether the crime is punished by light, correctional or afflictive penalty or their
e9uivalent.
The period of detention is (" hours for light offenses, (1 hours for correctional offences and 6- hours for afflictive offences, where the accused may be detained without
formal charge. :ut he must cause a formal charge or application to be filed with the proper court before (", (1 or 6- hours lapse. >therwise he has to release the person
arrested.
,ote that the period stated herein does not include the nighttime. &t is to be counted only when the prosecutorDs office is ready to receive the complaint or information.
This article does not apply if the arrest is with a warrant. The situation contemplated here is an arrest without a warrant.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 116
6.estio 7
As+er
@it#in
$#at period
s#ould a
police officer
$#o #as
arrested a
person under
a $arrant of
arrest turn
o&er t#e
arrested
person to t#e
?udicial
aut#ority=
There
is no time limit
specified
except that
the return
must be made
within a
reasonable
time. The
period fixed
by law under
!rticle ("$
does not
apply because
the arrest was
made by
virtue of a
warrant of
arrest.
.hen a person is arrested without a warrant, it means that there is no case filed in court yet. &f the arresting officer would hold the arrested person there, he is actually
depriving the arrested of his right to bail. !s long as there is no charge in the court yet, the arrested person cannot obtain bail because bail may only be granted by the
court. The spirit of the law is to have the arrested person delivered to the jurisdiction of the court.
&f the arrest is by virtue of a warrant, it means that there is already a case filed in court. .hen an information is filed in court, the amount of bail recommended is stated.
The accused person is not really denied his right to bail. )ven if he is interrogated in the police precinct, he can already file bail.
,ote that delivery of the arrested person to the proper authorities does not mean physical delivery or turn over of arrested person to the court. &t simply means putting the
arrested person under the jurisdiction of the court. This is done by filing the necessary complaint or information against the person arrested in court within the period
specified in !rticle ("$. The purpose of this is for the court to determine whether the offense is bailable or not and if bailable, to allow him the right to bail.
=nder the Rule ((* of the Revised Rules of Court, the arrested person can demand from the arresting officer to bring him to any judge in the place where he was arrested
and post the bail here. Thereupon, the arresting officer may release him. The judge who granted the bail will just forward the litimus of the case to the court trying his
case. The purpose is in order to deprive the arrested person of his right to post the bail.
=nder the Revised Rules of Court, when the person arrested is arrested for a crime which gives him the right to preliminary investigation and he wants to avail his right to
a preliminary investigation, he would have to waive in writing his rights under !rticle ("$ so that the arresting officer will not immediately file the case with the court that
will exercise jurisdiction over the case. &f he does not want to waive this in writing, the arresting officer will have to comply with !rticle ("$ and file the case immediately in
court without preliminary investigation. &n such case, the arrested person, within five days after learning that the case has been filed in court without preliminary
investigation, may as4 for preliminary investigation. &n this case, the public officer who made the arrest will no longer be liable for violation of !rticle ("$.
6.estio 7 As+er
T#e arrest of t#e suspect $as done in 7aguio City. .n t#e $ay to Manila1 $#ere t#e crime $as committed1 t#ere $as a typ#oon so t#e suspect could not 0e
0roug#t to Manila until t#ree days later. @as t#ere a &iolation of Article 125=
There was a violation of !rticle ("$. The crime committed was arbitrary detention in the form of delay in the delivery of arrested person to the proper judicial
authority. The typhoon or flood is a matter of defense to be proved by the accused, the arresting officer, as to whether he is liable. &n this situation, he may be exempt
under paragraph ? of !rticle (".
:efore !rticle ("$ may be applied, it is necessary that initially, the detention of the arrested person must be lawful because the arrest is based on legal grounds. &f the
arrest is made without a warrant, this constitutes an unlawful arrest. !rticle "-8, not !rticle ("$, will apply. &f the arrest is not based on legal grounds, the arrest is pure
and simple arbitrary detention. !rticle ("$ contemplates a situation where the arrest was made without warrant but based on legal grounds. This is 4nown as citi3enDs
arrest.
Article 13'. Dela#i* Release
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 117
Acts punis#ed
1.
9elayi
ng t#e
perfor
mance
of a
?udicial
or
e4ecuti
&e
order
for t#e
releas
e of a
prison
er;
2. 8nduly
delayin
g t#e
ser&ice
of t#e
notice
of suc#
order
to said
prison
er;
3. 8nduly delaying t#e proceedings upon any petition for t#e li0eration of suc# person.
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. T#ere is a ?udicial or e4ecuti&e order for t#e release of a prisoner or detention prisoner1 or t#at t#ere is a proceeding upon a petition for t#e li0eration of suc#
person;
3. .ffender $it#out good reason delays /
a. t#e ser&ice of t#e notice of suc# order to t#e prisoner;
0. t#e performance of suc# ?udicial or e4ecuti&e order for t#e release of t#e prisoner; or
c. t#e proceedings upon a petition for t#e release of suc# person.
Article 13). E?".lsio
Acts punis#ed
1. !4pelling a person from t#e -#ilippines;
2. Compelling a person to c#ange #is residence.
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. 5e eit#er /
a. e4pels any person from t#e -#ilippines; or
0. compels a person to c#ange residence;
3. .ffender is not aut#ori:ed to do so 0y la$.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 118
The essence
of this crime is
coercion but
the specific
crime is
EexpulsionF
when
committed by
a public
officer. &f
committed by
a private
person, the
crime is grave
coercion.
&n
Villavicencio
v. Lukban, 39
Phil 778, the
mayor of the
City of 0anila
wanted to
ma4e the city
free from
prostitution.
He ordered
certain
prostitutes to be transferred to @avao, without observing due processes since they have not been charged with any crime at all. &t was held that the crime committed was
expulsion.
6.estios 7 As+ers
1. Certain aliens $ere arrested and t#ey $ere ?ust put on t#e first aircraft $#ic# 0roug#t t#em to t#e country so t#at t#ey may 0e out $it#out due process of
la$. @as t#ere a crime committed=
Bes. )xpulsion.
2. %f a +ilipino citi:en is sent out of t#e country1 $#at crime is committed=
/rave coercion, not expulsion, because a 2ilipino cannot be deported. This crime refers only to aliens.
Article 13/. 2iolatio o( Do&icile
Acts punis#ed
1. !ntering any d$elling against t#e $ill of t#e o$ner t#ereof;
2. <earc#ing papers or ot#er effects found t#erein $it#out t#e pre&ious consent of suc# o$ner; or
3. 2efusing to lea&e t#e premises1 after #a&ing surreptitiously entered said d$elling and after #a&ing 0een re3uired to lea&e t#e same
Common elements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. 5e is not aut#ori:ed 0y ?udicial order to enter t#e d$elling or to ma6e a searc# t#erein for papers or ot#er effects.
Circumstances 3ualifying t#e offense
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 119
1. %f
commit
ted at
nig#tti
me; or
2. %f any
papers
or
effects
not
constit
uting
e&iden
ce of a
crime
are not
returne
d
immedi
ately
after
t#e
searc#
made
0y
offend
er.
=nder Title &C
#Crimes
against
Personal
Aiberty and
5ecurity%, the
corresponding
article is
9ualified
trespass to
dwelling under !rticle "1;. !rticle ("1 is limited to public officers. The public officers who may be liable for crimes against the fundamental laws are those who are
possessed of the authority to execute search warrants and warrants of arrests.
=nder Rule ((6 of the Revised Rules of Court, when a person to be arrested enters a premise and closes it thereafter, the public officer, after giving notice of an arrest,
can brea4 into the premise. He shall not be liable for violation of domicile.
There are only three recogni3ed instances when search without a warrant is considered valid, and, therefore, the sei3ure of any evidence done is also valid. >utside of
these, search would be invalid and the objects sei3ed would not be admissible in evidence.
#(% 5earch made incidental to a valid arrest<

#"% .here the search was made on a moving vehicle or vessel such that the exigency of he situation prevents the searching officer from securing a search warrant<
#6% .hen the article sei3ed is within plain view of the officer ma4ing the sei3ure without ma4ing a search therefore.
There are three ways of committing the violation of !rticle ("1'
#(% :y simply entering the dwelling of another if such entering is done against the will of the occupant. &n the plain view doctrine, public officer should be legally
entitled to be in the place where the effects were found. &f he entered the place illegally and he saw the effects, doctrine inapplicable< thus, he is liable for violation
of domicile.
#"% Public officer who enters with consent searches for paper and effects without the consent of the owner. )ven if he is welcome in the dwelling, it does not mean he
has permission to search.
#6% Refusing to leave premises after surreptitious entry and being told to leave the same. The act punished is not the entry but the refusal to leave. &f the offender
upon being directed to eave, followed and left, there is no crime of violation of domicile. )ntry must be done surreptitiously< without this, crime may be unjust
vexation. :ut if entering was done against the will of the occupant of the house, meaning there was express or implied prohibition from entering the same, even if
the occupant does not direct him to leave, the crime of is already committed because it would fall in number (.
6.estios 7 As+ers
1. %t $as raining #ea&ily. A policeman too6 s#elter in one personEs #ouse. T#e o$ner o0liged and #ad #is daug#ter ser&e t#e police some coffee. T#e
policeman made a pass at t#e daug#ter. T#e o$ner of t#e #ouse as6ed #im to lea&e. 9oes t#is fall under Article 12'=
,o. &t was the owner of the house who let the policeman in. The entering is not surreptitious.
2. A person surreptitiously enters t#e d$elling of anot#er. @#at crime or crimes $ere possi0ly committed=
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 120
The
crimes
committed are
#(% 9ualified
trespass to
dwelling under
!rticle "1;, if
there was an
express or
implied
prohibition
against
entering. This
is tantamount
to entering
against the
will of the
owner< and #"%
violation of
domicile in the
third form if he
refuses to
leave after
being told to.
Article 131.
Searc,
Warrats
Malicio.sl#
O9taie$@
a$ A9.se i
t,e Ser0ice
o( T,ose
Le*all#
O9taie$
Acts punis#ed
1. -rocuring a searc# $arrant $it#out ?ust cause;
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. 5e procures a searc# $arrant;
3. T#ere is no ?ust cause.
2. !4ceeding #is aut#ority or 0y using unnecessary se&erity in e4ecuting a searc# $arrant legally procured.
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. 5e #as legally procured a searc# $arrant;
3. 5e e4ceeds #is aut#ority or uses unnecessary se&erity in e4ecuting t#e same.
Article 184. Searc,i* Do&icile +it,o.t Witesses
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. 5e is armed $it# searc# $arrant legally procured;
3. 5e searc#es t#e domicile1 papers or ot#er 0elongings of any person;
4. T#e o$ner1 or any mem0ers of #is family1 or t$o $itnesses residing in t#e same locality are not present.
Crimes under Articles 12) and 13* are referred to as &iolation of domicile. %n t#ese articles1 t#e searc# is made 0y &irtue of a &alid $arrant1 0ut t#e $arrant
not$it#standing1 t#e lia0ility for t#e crime is still incurred t#roug# t#e follo$ing situations>
(1) <earc# $arrant $as irregularly o0tained / T#is means t#ere $as no pro0a0le cause determined in o0taining t#e searc# $arrant. Alt#oug# &oid1 t#e searc# $arrant
is entitled to respect 0ecause of presumption of regularity. .ne remedy is a motion to 3uas# t#e searc# $arrant1 not refusal to a0ide 0y it. T#e pu0lic officer may
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 121
also 0e
prosec
uted
for
per?ury1
0ecaus
e for
#im to
succee
d in
o0taini
ng a
searc#
$arran
t
$it#out
a
pro0a0
le
cause1
#e
must
#a&e
per?ure
d
#imself
or
induce
d
someo
ne to
commit
per?ury
to
con&in
ce t#e
court.
(2) T#e
officer
e4ceeded #is aut#ority under t#e $arrant / To illustrate1 let us say t#at there was a pusher in a condo unit. The P,P ,arcotics /roup obtained a search warrant
but the name of person in the search warrant did not tally with the address stated. )ventually, the person with the same name was found but in a different
address. The occupant resisted but the public officer insisted on the search. @rugs were found and sei3ed and occupant was prosecuted and convicted by the
trial court. The 5upreme Court ac9uitted him because the public officers are re9uired to follow the search warrant to the letter. They have no discretion on the
matter. Plain view doctrine is inapplicable since it presupposes that the officer was legally entitled to be in the place where the effects where found. 5ince the
entry was illegal, plain view doctrine does not apply.
(3) @#en t#e pu0lic officer employs unnecessary or e4cessi&e se&erity in t#e implementation of t#e searc# $arrant. T#e searc# $arrant is not a license to commit
destruction.
(4) .$ner of d$elling or any mem0er of t#e family $as a0sent1 or t$o $itnesses residing $it#in t#e same locality $ere not present during t#e searc#.
Article 181. %ro,i9itio@ Iterr."tio@ a$ Dissol.tio o( %eace(.l Meeti*s
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. 5e performs any of t#e follo$ing acts>
a. pro#i0iting or 0y interrupting1 $it#out legal ground1 t#e #olding of a peaceful meeting1 or 0y dissol&ing t#e same;
0. #indering any person from ?oining any la$ful association1 or attending any of its meetings;
c. pro#i0iting or #indering any person from addressing1 eit#er alone or toget#er $it# ot#ers1 any petition to t#e aut#orities for t#e correction of a0uses or
redress of grie&ances.
The government has a right to re9uire a permit before any gathering could be made. !ny meeting without a permit is a proceeding in violation of the law. That being true,
a meeting may be prohibited, interrupted, or dissolved without violating !rticle (6( of the Revised Penal Code.
:ut the re9uiring of the permit shall be in exercise only of the governmentDs regulatory powers and not really to prevent peaceful assemblies as the public may desire.
Permit is only necessary to regulate the peace so as not to inconvenience the public. The permit should state the day, time and the place where the gathering may be
held. This re9uirement is, therefore, legal as long as it is not being exercised in as a prohibitory power.
&f the permit is denied arbitrarily, !rticle (6( is violated. &f the officer would not give the permit unless the meeting is held in a particular place which he dictates defeats
the exercise of the right to peaceably assemble, !rticle (6( is violated.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 122
!t the
beginning, it
may happen
that the
assembly is
lawful and
peaceful. &f in
the course of
the assembly
the
participants
commit illegal
acts li4e oral
defamation or
inciting to
sedition, a
public officer
or law
enforcer can
stop or
dissolve the
meeting. The
permit given is
not a license
to commit a
crime.
There are two
criteria to
determine
whether
!rticle (6(
would be
violated'
#(% @angerous tendency rule + applicable in times of national unrest such as to prevent coup dDetat.
#"% Clear and present danger rule + applied in times of peace. 5tricter rule.
@istinctions between prohibition, interruption, or dissolution of peaceful meetings under !rticle (6(, and tumults and other disturbances, under !rticle ($6

#(% !s to the participation of the public officer

&n !rticle (6(, the public officer is not a participant. !s far as the gathering is concerned, the public officer is a third party.
&f the public officer is a participant of the assembly and he prohibits, interrupts, or dissolves the same, !rticle ($6 is violated if the same is conducted in a public
place.
#"% !s to the essence of the crime
&n !rticle (6(, the offender must be a public officer and, without any legal ground, he prohibits, interrupts, or dissolves a peaceful meeting or assembly to prevent
the offended party from exercising his freedom of speech and that of the assembly to petition a grievance against the government.
&n !rticle ($6, the offender need not be a public officer. The essence of the crime is that of creating a serious disturbance of any sort in a public office, public
building or even a private place where a public function is being held.
Article 183. Iterr."tio o( Reli*io.s Wors,i"
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. 2eligious ceremonies or manifestations of any religious are a0out to ta6e place or are going on;
3. .ffender pre&ents or distur0s t#e same.
Dualified if committed 0y &iolence or t#reat.
Article 188. O((e$i* t,e Reli*io.s Feeli*s
!lements
1. Acts complained of $ere performed in a place de&oted to religious $ors#ip1 or during t#e cele0ration of any religious ceremony;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 123
2. T#e
acts
must
0e
notorio
usly
offensi
&e to
t#e
feeling
s of
t#e
fait#ful.
T#ere must 0e
deli0erate
intent to #urt
t#e feelings of
t#e fait#ful.
TITLE III.
CRIMES
AGAINST
%UALIC
ORDER
Crimes
against pu0lic
order
1. 2e0ellion or insurrection (Art. 134);
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit re0ellion (Art. 13);
3. 9isloyalty to pu0lic officers or employees (Art. 13");
4. %nciting to re0ellion (Art. 13');
5. <edition (Art. 13));
. Conspiracy to commit sedition (Art. 141);
". %nciting to sedition (Art. 142);
'. Acts tending to pre&ent t#e meeting of Congress and similar 0odies (Art. 143);
). 9istur0ance of proceedings of Congress or similar 0odies (Art. 144);
1*. (iolation of parliamentary immunity (Art. 145);
11. %llegal assem0lies (Art. 14);
12. %llegal associations (Art. 14");
13. 9irect assaults (Art. 14');
14. %ndirect assaults (Art. 14));
15. 9iso0edience to summons issued 0y Congress1 its committees1 etc.1 0y t#e constitutional commissions1 its committees1 etc. (Art. 15*);
1. 2esistance and diso0edience to a person in aut#ority or t#e agents of suc# person (Art. 151);
1". Tumults and ot#er distur0ances of pu0lic order (Art. 153);
1'. 8nla$ful use of means of pu0lication and unla$ful utterances (Art. 154);
1). Alarms and scandals (Art. 155);
2*. 9eli&ering prisoners from ?ails (Art. 15);
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 124
21.
!&asio
n of
ser&ice
of
senten
ce (Art.
15");
22.
!&asio
n on
occasi
on of
disord
ers
(Art.
15');
23.
(iolatio
n of
conditi
onal
pardon
(Art.
15));
and
24. Commission of anot#er crime during ser&ice of penalty imposed for anot#er pre&ious offense (Art. 1*).
Article 184. Re9ellio or Is.rrectio
!lements
1. T#ere is a pu0lic uprising and ta6ing arms against t#e go&ernment;
2. T#e purpose of t#e uprising or mo&ement is /
a. to remo&e from t#e allegiance to t#e go&ernment or its la$s -#ilippine territory or any part t#ereof1 or any 0ody of land1 na&al1 or ot#er armed forces;
or
0. to depri&e t#e C#ief !4ecuti&e or Congress1 $#olly or partially1 of any of t#eir po$ers or prerogati&es.
The essence of this crime is a public uprising with the ta4ing up of arms. &t re9uires a multitude of people. &t aims to overthrow the duly constituted government. &t does
not re9uire the participation of any member of the military or national police organi3ation or public officers and generally carried out by civilians. Aastly, the crime can only
be committed through force and violence.
2e0ellion and insurrection are not synonymous. 2e0ellion is more fre3uently used $#ere t#e o0?ect of t#e mo&ement is completely to o&ert#ro$ and supersede t#e
e4isting go&ernment; $#ile insurrection is more commonly employed in reference to a mo&ement $#ic# see6s merely to effect some c#ange of minor importance1 or to
pre&ent t#e e4ercise of go&ernmental aut#ority $it# respect to particular matters of su0?ects (2eyes1 citing 3* Am. Fr. 1).
Rebellion can now be complexed with common crimes. ,ot long ago, the 5upreme Court, in Enrile v. Salazar, 186 SCRA 17, reiterated and affirmed the rule laid down
in Peo!le v. "ernan#ez, 99 Phil $1$, that rebellion may not be complexed with common crimes which are committed in furtherance thereof because they are
absorbed in rebellion. &n view of said reaffirmation, some believe that it has been a settled doctrine that rebellion cannot be complexed with common crimes, such
as 4illing and destruction of property, committed on the occasion and in furtherance thereof.
This thin4ing is no longer correct< there is no legal basis for such rule now.
The statement in People v. Hernande3 that common crimes committed in furtherance of rebellion are absorbed by the crime of rebellion, was dictated by the provision of
!rticle (6$ of the Revised Penal Code prior to its amendment by the Republic !ct ,o. -8-1 #!n !ct Punishing the Crime of Coup @Detat%, which became effective on
>ctober (88;. Prior to its amendment by Republic !ct ,o. -8-1, !rticle (6$ punished those Ewho while holding any public office or employment, ta4e part thereinF by any
of these acts' engaging in war against the forces of /overnment< destroying property< committing serious violence< exacting contributions, diverting funds for the lawful
purpose for which they have been appropriated.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 125

5ince a higher
penalty is
prescribed for
the crime of
rebellion when
any of the
specified acts
are committed
in furtherance
thereof, said
acts are
punished as
components
of rebellion
and,
therefore, are
not to be
treated as
distinct
crimes. The
same acts
constitute
distinct crimes
when
committed on
a different
occasion and
not in
furtherance of
rebellion. &n
short, it was
because
!rticle (6$
then punished
said acts as
components
of the crime of
rebellion that
precludes the
application of !rticle *1 of the Revised Penal Code thereto. &n the eyes of the law then, said acts constitute only one crime and that is rebellion. The Hernande3 doctrine
was reaffirmed in )nrile v. 5ala3ar because the text of !rticle (6$ has remained the same as it was when the 5upreme Court resolved the same issue in the People v.
Hernande3. 5o the 5upreme Court invited attention to this fact and thus stated'
EThere is a an apparent need to restructure the law on rebellion, either to raise the penalty therefore or to clearly define and delimit the other offenses to be considered
absorbed thereby, so that it cannot be conveniently utili3ed as the umbrella for every sort of illegal activity underta4en in its name. The court has no power to effect such
change, for it can only interpret the law as it stands at any given time, and what is needed lies beyond interpretation. Hopefully, Congress will perceive the need for
promptly sei3ing the initiative in this matter, which is purely within its province.F
>bviously, Congress too4 notice of this pronouncement and, thus, in enacting Republic !ct ,o. -8-1, it did not only provide for the crime of coup dDetat in the Revised
Penal Code but moreover, deleted from the provision of !rticle (6$ that portion referring to those +
EGwho, while holding any public office or employment ta4es part therein Hrebellion or insurrectionI, engaging in war against the forces of government, destroying property
or committing serious violence, exacting contributions or diverting public funds from the lawful purpose for which they have been appropriated GF
Hence, overt acts which used to be punished as components of the crime of rebellion have been severed therefrom by Republic !ct ,o. -8-1. The legal impediment to
the application of !rticle *1 to rebellion has been removed. !fter the amendment, common crimes involving 4illings, andJor destructions of property, even though
committed by rebels in furtherance of rebellion, shall bring about complex crimes of rebellion with murderJhomicide, or rebellion with robbery, or rebellion with arson as the
case may be.
To reiterate, before !rticle (6$ was amended, a higher penalty is imposed when the offender engages in war against the government. K.arK connotes anything which
may be carried out in pursuance of war. This implies that all acts of war or hostilities li4e serious violence and destruction of property committed on occasion and in
pursuance of rebellion are component crimes of rebellion which is why !rticle *1 on complex crimes is inapplicable. &n amending !rticle(6$, the acts which used to be
component crimes of rebellion, li4e serious acts of violence, have been deleted. These are now distinct crimes. The legal obstacle for the application of !rticle *1,
therefore, has been removed. >rtega says legislators want to punish these common crimes independently of rebellion. >rtega cites no case overturning )nrile v.
5ala3ar.
&n Peo!le v. Ro#ri%uez, 1&7 Phil. $69, it was held that an accused already convicted of rebellion may not be prosecuted further for illegal possession of firearm and
ammunition, a violation of Presidential @ecree ,o. (1--, because this is a necessary element or ingredient of the crime of rebellion with which the accused was already
convicted.
However, in Peo!le v. 'iozon, 198 SCRA 368, it was held that charging one of illegal possession of firearms in furtherance of rebellion is proper because this is not a
charge of a complex crime. ! crime under the Revised Penal Code cannot be absorbed by a statutory offense.
&n Peo!le v. #e (racia, it was ruled that illegal possession of firearm in furtherance of rebellion under Presidential @ecree ,o. (1-- is distinct from the crime of rebellion
under the Revised Penal Code and, therefore, !rticle (6$ #"% of the Revised Penal Code should not apply. The offense of illegal possession of firearm is a malum
prohibitum, in which case, good faith and absence of criminal intent are not valid defenses.
&n Peo!le v. Lobe#ioro, an ,P! cadre 4illed a policeman and was convicted for murder. He appealed invo4ing rebellion. The 5upreme Court found that there was no
evidence shown to further the end of the ,P! movement. &t held that there must be evidence shown that the act furthered the cause of the ,P!< it is not enough to say it.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 126
Rebellion may
be committed
even without a
single shot
being fired.
,o encounter
needed.
0ere public
uprising with
arms enough.
!rticle (6$, as
amended, has
two penalties'
a higher
penalty for the
promoters,
heads and
maintainers of
the rebellion<
and a lower
penalty for
those who are
only followers
of the
rebellion.
@istinctions
between
rebellion
and
sedition
#(% !s to
nature
&n rebellion, there must be ta4ing up or arms against the government.
&n sedition, it is sufficient that the public uprising be tumultuous.
#"% !s to purpose
&n rebellion, the purpose is always political.
&n sedition, the purpose may be political or social. )xample' the uprising of s9uatters against 2orbes par4 residents. The purpose in sedition is to go against
established government, not to overthrow it.
.hen any of the objectives of rebellion is pursued but there is no public uprising in the legal sense, the crime is direct assault of the first form. :ut if there is rebellion,
with public uprising, direct assault cannot be committed.
Article 184;A. Co." $5 etat
!lements
1. .ffender is a person or persons 0elonging to t#e military or police or #olding any pu0lic office or employment;
2. %t is committed 0y means of a s$ift attac6 accompanied 0y &iolence1 intimidation1 t#reat1 strategy or stealt#;
3. T#e attac6 is directed against t#e duly constituted aut#orities of t#e 2epu0lic of t#e -#ilippines1 or any military camp or installation1 communication net$or6s1
pu0lic utilities or ot#er facilities needed for t#e e4ercise and continued possession of po$er;
4. T#e purpose of t#e attac6 is to sei:e or diminis# state po$er.
The essence of the crime is a swift attac4 upon the facilities of the Philippine government, military camps and installations, communication networ4s, public utilities and
facilities essential to the continued possession of governmental powers. &t may be committed singly or collectively and does not re9uire a multitude of people. The
objective may not be to overthrow the government but only to destabili3e or paraly3e the government through the sei3ure of facilities and utilities essential to the
continued possession and exercise of governmental powers. &t re9uires as principal offender a member of the !2P or of the P,P organi3ation or a public officer with or
without civilian support. 2inally, it may be carried out not only by force or violence but also through stealth, threat or strategy.
-ersons lia0le for re0ellion1 insurrection or coup d, etat under Article 18!
1. T#e leaders /
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 127
a. Any
person
$#o
promot
es1
maintai
ns or
#eads
a
re0ellio
n or
insurre
ction;
or
0. Any
person
$#o
leads1
directs
or
comm
ands
ot#ers
to
undert
a6e a
coup d,
etat;
2. T#e
participants /
a. Any person $#o participates or e4ecutes t#e commands of ot#ers in re0ellion1 insurrection or coup d, etat;
0. Any person not in t#e go&ernment ser&ice $#o participates1 supports1 finances1 a0ets or aids in underta6ing a coup d, etat.
Article 18'. Cos"irac# a$ %ro"osal to Co&&it Co." $5 etat@ Re9ellio or Is.rrectio
Conspiracy and proposal to commit re0ellion are t$o different crimes1 namely>
1. Conspiracy to commit re0ellion; and
2. -roposal to commit re0ellion.
T#ere is conspiracy to commit re0ellion $#en t$o or more persons come to an agreement to rise pu0licly and ta6e arms against go&ernment for any of t#e purposes of
re0ellion and decide to commit it.
T#ere is proposal to commit re0ellion $#en t#e person $#o #as decided to rise pu0licly and ta6e arms against t#e go&ernment for any of t#e purposes of re0ellion
proposes its e4ecution to some ot#er person or persons.
Article 18). Dislo#alt# o( %.9lic O((icers or E&"lo#ees
Acts punis#ed
1. 7y failing to resist a re0ellion 0y all t#e means in t#eir po$er;
2. 7y continuing to disc#arge t#e duties of t#eir offices under t#e control of t#e re0els; or
3. 7y accepting appointment to office under t#em.
.ffender must 0e a pu0lic officer or employee.
Article 18/. Iciti* to Re9ellio or Is.rrectio
!lements
1. .ffender does not ta6e arms or is not in open #ostility against t#e go&ernment;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 128
2. 5e
incites
ot#ers
to t#e
e4ecuti
on of
any of
t#e
acts of
re0ellio
n;
3. T#e
inciting
is done
0y
means
of
speec#
es1
procla
mation
s1
$riting
s1
em0le
ms1
0anner
s or
ot#er
repres
entatio
ns
tendin
g to
t#e
same
end.
9istinction 0et$een inciting to re0ellion and proposal to commit re0ellion
1. %n 0ot# crimes1 offender induces anot#er to commit re0ellion.
2. %n proposal1 t#e person $#o proposes #as decided to commit re0ellion; in inciting to re0ellion1 it is not re3uired t#at t#e offender #as decided to commit re0ellion.
3. %n proposal1 t#e person $#o proposes t#e e4ecution of t#e crime uses secret means; in inciting to re0ellion1 t#e act of inciting is done pu0licly.
Article 181. Se$itio
!lements
1. .ffenders rise pu0licly and tumultuously;
2. .ffenders employ force1 intimidation1 or ot#er means outside of legal met#ods;
3. -urpose is to attain any of t#e follo$ing o0?ects>
a. To pre&ent t#e promulgation or e4ecution of any la$ or t#e #olding of any popular election;
0. To pre&ent t#e national go&ernment or any pro&incial or municipal go&ernment1 or any pu0lic officer from e4ercising its or #is functions or pre&ent t#e
e4ecution of an administrati&e order;
c. To inflict any act of #ate or re&enge upon t#e person or property of any pu0lic officer or employee;
d. To commit1 for any political or social end1 any act of #ate or re&enge against pri&ate persons or any social classes;
e. To despoil for any political or social end1 any person1 municipality or pro&ince1 or t#e national go&ernment of all its property or any part t#ereof.
The crime of sedition does not contemplate the ta4ing up of arms against the government because the purpose of this crime is not the overthrow of the government.
,otice from the purpose of the crime of sedition that the offenders rise publicly and create commotion ad disturbance by way of protest to express their dissent and
obedience to the government or to the authorities concerned. This is li4e the socalled civil disobedience except that the means employed, which is violence, is illegal.
-ersons lia0le for sedition under Article 144
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 129
1. T#e
leader of t#e
sedition; and
2. .t#er
person
particip
ating in
t#e
seditio
n.
Article 141.
Cos"irac#
to Co&&it
Se$itio
%n t#is crime1
t#ere must 0e
an agreement
and a decision
to rise pu0licly
and
tumultuously
to attain any
of t#e o0?ects
of sedition.
T#ere is no
proposal to
commit
sedition.
Article 143. Iciti* to Se$itio
Acts punis#ed
1. %nciting ot#ers to t#e accomplis#ment of any of t#e acts $#ic# constitute sedition 0y means of speec#es1 proclamations1 $ritings1 em0lems1 etc.;
2. 8ttering seditious $ords or speec#es $#ic# tend to distur0 t#e pu0lic peace;
3. @riting1 pu0lis#ing1 or circulating scurrilous li0els against t#e go&ernment or any of t#e duly constituted aut#orities t#ereof1 $#ic# tend to distur0 t#e pu0lic peace.
!lements
1. .ffender does not ta6e direct part in t#e crime of sedition;
2. 5e incites ot#ers to t#e accomplis#ment of any of t#e acts $#ic# constitute sedition; and
3. %nciting is done 0y means of speec#es1 proclamations1 $ritings1 em0lems1 cartoons1 0anners1 or ot#er representations tending to$ards t#e same end.
>nly nonparticipant in sedition may be liable.
Considering that the objective of sedition is to express protest against the government and in the process creating hate against public officers, any act that will generate
hatred against the government or a public officer concerned or a social class may amount to &nciting to sedition. !rticle (*" is, therefore, 9uite broad.
The mere meeting for the purpose of discussing hatred against the government is inciting to sedition. Aambasting government officials to discredit the government is
&nciting to sedition. :ut if the objective of such preparatory actions is the overthrow of the government, the crime is inciting to rebellion.
Article 148. Acts Te$i* to %re0et t,e Meeti* o( t,e Co*ress o( t,e %,ili""ies a$ Si&ilar Ao$ies
!lements
1. T#ere is a pro?ected or actual meeting of Congress or any of its committees or su0committees1 constitutional committees or di&isions t#ereof1 or of any pro&incial
0oard or city or municipal council or 0oard;
2. .ffender1 $#o may 0e any person1 pre&ents suc# meetings 0y force or fraud.
Article 144. Dist.r9ace o( %rocee$i*s
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 130
!lements
1. T#ere
is a
meetin
g of
Congr
ess or
any of
its
commit
tees or
su0co
mmitte
es1
constit
utional
commi
ssions
or
commit
tees or
di&isio
ns
t#ereof
1 or of
any
pro&inc
ial
0oard
or city
or
munici
pal
council
or
0oard;
2. .ffender does any of t#e follo$ing acts>
a. 5e distur0s any of suc# meetings;
0. 5e 0e#a&es $#ile in t#e presence of any suc# 0odies in suc# a manner as to interrupt its proceedings or to impair t#e respect due it.
Article 14!. 2iolatio o( %arlia&etar# I&&.it#
Acts punis#ed
1. 8sing force1 intimidation1 t#reats1 or frauds to pre&ent any mem0er of Congress from attending t#e meetings of Congress or of any of its committees or
su0committees1 constitutional commissions or committees or di&isions t#ereof1 or from e4pressing #is opinion or casting #is &ote;
!lements
1. .ffender uses force1 intimidation1 t#reats or fraud;
2. T#e purpose of t#e offender is to pre&ent any mem0er of Congress from /
a. attending t#e meetings of t#e Congress or of any of its committees or constitutional commissions1 etc.;
0. e4pressing #is opinion; or
c. casting #is &ote.
2. Arresting or searc#ing any mem0er t#ereof $#ile Congress is in regular or special session1 e4cept in case suc# mem0er #as committed a crime punis#a0le under
t#e Code 0y a penalty #ig#er t#an prision mayor.
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer of employee;
2. 5e arrests or searc#es any mem0er of Congress;
3. Congress1 at t#e time of arrest or searc#1 is in regular or special session;
4. T#e mem0er arrested or searc#ed #as not committed a crime punis#a0le under t#e Code 0y a penalty #ig#er t#an prision mayor.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 131
8nder <ection
111 Article (%
of t#e
Constitution1 a
pu0lic officer
$#o arrests a
mem0er of
Congress $#o
#as committed
a crime
punis#a0le 0y
prision mayor
(si4 years and
one day1 to 12
years) is not
lia0le Article
145.
According to
2eyes1 to 0e
consistent
$it# t#e
Constitution1
t#e p#rase G0y
a penalty
#ig#er t#an
prision mayorG
in Article 145
s#ould 0e
amended to
read> G0y t#e
penalty of
prision mayor
or #ig#er.G
Article 14'.
Ille*al
Asse&9lies
Acts punis#ed
1. Any meeting attended 0y armed persons for t#e purpose of committing any of t#e crimes punis#a0le under t#e Code;
!lements
1. T#ere is a meeting1 a gat#ering or group of persons1 $#et#er in fi4ed place or mo&ing;
2. T#e meeting is attended 0y armed persons;
3. T#e purpose of t#e meeting is to commit any of t#e crimes punis#a0le under t#e Code.
2. Any meeting in $#ic# t#e audience1 $#et#er armed or not1 is incited to t#e commission of t#e crime of treason1 re0ellion or insurrection1 sedition1 or assault upon
person in aut#ority or #is agents.
1. T#ere is a meeting1 a gat#ering or group of persons1 $#et#er in a fi4ed place or mo&ing;
2. T#e audience1 $#et#er armed or not1 is incited to t#e commission of t#e crime of treason1 re0ellion or insurrection1 sedition or direct assault.
-ersons lia0le for illegal assem0ly
1. T#e organi:er or leaders of t#e meeting;
2. -ersons merely present at t#e meeting1 $#o must #a&e a common intent to commit t#e felony of illegal assem0ly.
%f any person present at t#e meeting carries an unlicensed firearm1 it is presumed t#at t#e purpose of t#e meeting insofar as #e is concerned is to commit acts punis#a0le
under t#e 2e&ised -enal Code1 and #e is considered a leader or organi:er of t#e meeting.
The gravamen of the offense is mere assembly of or gathering of people for illegal purpose punishable by the Revised Penal Code. .ithout gathering, there is no illegal
assembly. &f unlawful purpose is a crime under a special law, there is no illegal assembly. 2or example, the gathering of drug pushers to facilitate drug traffic4ing is not
illegal assembly because the purpose is not violative of the Revised Penal Code but of The @angerous @rugs !ct of (8?", as amended, which is a special law.
Two forms of illegal assembly
#(% ,o attendance of armed men, but persons in the meeting are incited to commit treason, rebellion or insurrection, sedition or assault upon a person in authority.
.hen the illegal purpose of the gathering is to incite people to commit the crimes mentioned above, the presence of armed men is unnecessary. The mere
gathering for the purpose is sufficient to bring about the crime already.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 132
#"% !rmed
men
attendi
ng the
gatheri
ng + &f
the
illegal
purpos
e is
other
than
those
mentio
ned
above,
the
presen
ce of
armed
men
during
the
gatheri
ng
brings
about
the
crime
of
illegal
assem
bly.
)xample' Persons conspiring to rob a ban4 were arrested. 5ome were with firearms. Aiable for illegal assembly, not for conspiracy, but for gathering with armed
men.
@istinction between illegal assembly and illegal association
&n illegal assembly, the basis of liability is the gathering for an illegal purpose which constitutes a crime under the Revised Penal Code.
&n illegal association, the basis is the formation of or organi3ation of an association to engage in an unlawful purpose which is not limited to a violation of the Revised
Penal Code. &t includes a violation of a special law or those against public morals. 0eaning of public morals' inimical to public welfare< it has nothing to do with
decency., not acts of obscenity.
Article 14). Ille*al Associatios
%llegal associations
1. Associations totally or partially organi:ed for t#e purpose of committing any of t#e crimes punis#a0le under t#e Code;
2. Associations totally or partially organi:ed for some purpose contrary to pu0lic morals.
-ersons lia0le
1. +ounders1 directors and president of t#e association;
2. Mere mem0ers of t#e association.
9istinction 0et$een illegal association and illegal assem0ly
1. %n illegal association1 it is not necessary t#at t#ere 0e an actual meeting.
%n illegal assem0ly1 it is necessary t#at t#ere is an actual meeting or assem0ly or armed persons for t#e purpose of committing any of t#e crimes punis#a0le under
t#e Code1 or of indi&iduals $#o1 alt#oug# not armed1 are incited to t#e commission of treason1 re0ellion1 sedition1 or assault upon a person in aut#ority or #is agent.
2. %n illegal association1 it is t#e act of forming or organi:ing and mem0ers#ip in t#e association t#at are punis#ed.
%n illegal assem0ly1 it is t#e meeting and attendance at suc# meeting t#at are punis#ed.
3. %n illegal association1 t#e persons lia0le are (1) t#e founders1 directors and president; and (2) t#e mem0ers.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 133
%n
illegal
assem
0ly1 t#e
person
s lia0le
are (1)
t#e
organi
:ers or
leader
s of
t#e
meetin
g and
(2) t#e
person
s
presen
t at
meetin
g.
Article 14/.
Direct
Assa.
lt
Acts punis#ed
1.
@it#out pu0lic uprising1 0y employing force or intimidation for t#e attainment of any of t#e purposes enumerated in defining t#e crimes of re0ellion and
sedition;
!lements
1. .ffender employs force or intimidation;
2. T#e aim of t#e offender is to attain any of t#e purposes of t#e crime of re0ellion or any of t#e o0?ects of t#e crime of sedition;
3. T#ere is no pu0lic uprising.
2. @it#out pu0lic uprising1 0y attac6ing1 0y employing force or 0y seriously intimidating or 0y seriously resisting any person in aut#ority or any of #is agents1 $#ile
engaged in t#e performance of official duties1 or on occasion of suc# performance.
!lements
1. .ffender ma6es an attac61 employs force1 ma6es a serious intimidation1 or ma6es a serious resistance;
2. T#e person assaulted is a person in aut#ority or #is agent;
3. At t#e time of t#e assault1 t#e person in aut#ority or #is agent is engaged in t#e actual performance of official duties1 or t#at #e is assaulted 0y reason of t#e
past performance of official duties;
4. .ffender 6no$s t#at t#e one #e is assaulting is a person in aut#ority or #is agent in t#e e4ercise of #is duties.
5. T#ere is no pu0lic uprising.
The crime is not based on the material conse9uence of the unlawful act. The crime of direct assault punishes the spirit of lawlessness and the contempt or hatred for the
authority or the rule of law.
To be specific, if a judge was 4illed while he was holding a session, the 4illing is not the direct assault, but murder. There could be direct assault if the offender 4illed the
judge simply because the judge is so strict in the fulfillment of his duty. &t is the spirit of hate which is the essence of direct assault.

5o, where the spirit is present, it is always complexed with the material conse9uence of the unlawful act. &f the unlawful act was murder or homicide committed under
circumstance of lawlessness or contempt of authority, the crime would be direct assault with murder or homicide, as the case may be. &n the example of the judge who
was 4illed, the crime is direct assault with murder or homicide.
The only time when it is not complexed is when material conse9uence is a light felony, that is, slight physical injury. @irect assault absorbs the lighter felony< the crime of
direct assault can not be separated from the material result of the act. 5o, if an offender who is charged with direct assault and in another court for the slight physical
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 134
&njury which is
part of the act,
ac9uittal or
conviction in
one is a bar to
the
prosecution in
the other.
)xample of
the first form
of direct
assault'
Three men
bro4e into a
,ational 2ood
!uthority
warehouse
and lamented
sufferings of
the people.
They called
on people to
help
themselves to
all the rice.
They did not
even help
themselves to
a single grain.
The crime
committed
was direct
assault.
There was no
robbery for
there was no
intent to gain.
The crime is direct assault by committing acts of sedition under !rticle (68 #$%, that is, spoiling of the property, for any political or social end, of any person municipality or
province or the national government of all or any its property, but there is no public uprising.
Person in authority is any person directly vested with jurisdiction, whether as an individual or as a member of some court or government corporation, board, or
commission. ! barangay chairman is deemed a person in authority.
!gent of a person in authority is any person who by direct provision of law or by election or by appointment by competent authority, is charged with the maintenance of
public order and the protection and security of life and property, such as a barangay councilman, barrio policeman, barangay leader and any person who comes
to the aid of a person in authority.
&n applying the provisions of !rticles (*1 and ($(, teachers, professors, and persons charged with the supervision of public or duly recogni3ed private schools, colleges
and universities and lawyers in the actual performance of their duties or on the occasion of such performance, shall be deemed a person in authority.
&n direct assault of the first form, the stature of the offended person is immaterial. The crime is manifested by the spirit of lawlessness.
&n the second form, you have to distinguish a situation where a person in authority or his agent was attac4ed while performing official functions, from a situation when he
is not performing such functions. &f attac4 was done during the exercise of official functions, the crime is always direct assault. &t is enough that the offender 4new that
the person in authority was performing an official function whatever may be the reason for the attac4, although what may have happened was a purely private affair.
>n the other hand, if the person in authority or the agent was 4illed when no longer performing official functions, the crime may simply be the material conse9uence of he
unlawful act' murder or homicide. 2or the crime to be direct assault, the attac4 must be by reason of his official function in the past. 0otive becomes important in this
respect. )xample, if a judge was 4illed while resisting the ta4ing of his watch, there is no direct assault.
&n the second form of direct assault, it is also important that the offended party 4new that the person he is attac4ing is a person in authority or an agent of a person in
authority, performing his official functions. ,o 4nowledge, no lawlessness or contempt.
2or example, if two persons were 9uarreling and a policeman in civilian clothes comes and stops them, but one of the protagonists stabs the policeman, there would be
no direct assault unless the offender 4new that he is a policeman.
&n this respect it is enough that the offender should 4now that the offended party was exercising some form of authority. &t is not necessary that the offender 4nows what
is meant by person in authority or an agent of one because ignorantia legis non excusat.
Article 141. I$irect Assa.lt
!lements
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 135
1. A
person
in
aut#ori
ty or
#is
agent
is t#e
&ictim
of any
of t#e
forms
of
direct
assault
define
d in
Article
14';
2. A
person
comes
to t#e
aid of
suc#
aut#ori
ty or
#is
agent;
3. .ffender ma6es use of force or intimidation upon suc# person coming to t#e aid of t#e aut#ority or #is agent.
The victim in indirect assault should be a private person who comes in aid of an agent of a person in authority. The assault is upon a person who comes in aid of the
person in authority. The victim cannot be the person in authority or his agent.
There is no indirect assault when there is no direct assault.
Ta4e note that under !rticle ($", as amended, when any person comes in aid of a person in authority, said person at that moment is no longer a civilian + he is
constituted as an agent of the person in authority. &f such person were the one attac4ed, the crime would be direct assault.
@ue to the amendment of !rticle ($", without the corresponding amendment in !rticle ($;, the crime of indirect assault can only be committed when assault is upon a
civilian giving aid to an agent of the person in authority. He does not become another agent of the person in authority.
Article 1!4. Diso9e$iece to S.&&os Iss.e$ 9# Co*ress@ Its Co&&ittees or S.9co&&ittees@ 9# t,e Costit.tioal Co&&issios@ Its Co&&ittees@
S.9co&&ittees or Di0isios
Acts punis#ed
1. 7y refusing1 $it#out legal e4cuse1 to o0ey summons of Congress1 its special or standing committees and su0committees1 t#e Constitutional Commissions and its
committees1 su0committees or di&isions1 or 0y any commission or committee c#airman or mem0er aut#ori:ed to summon $itnesses;
2. 7y refusing to 0e s$orn or placed under affirmation $#ile 0eing 0efore suc# legislati&e or constitutional 0ody or official;
3. 7y refusing to ans$er any legal in3uiry or to produce any 0oo6s1 papers1 documents1 or records in #is possession1 $#en re3uired 0y t#em to do so in t#e e4ercise
of t#eir functions;
4. 7y restraining anot#er from attending as a $itness in suc# legislati&e or constitutional 0ody;
5. 7y inducing diso0edience to a summons or refusal to 0e s$orn 0y any suc# 0ody or official.
Article 1!1. Resistace a$ Diso9e$iece to A %erso i A.t,orit# or t,e A*ets o( S.c, %erso
!lements of resistance and serious diso0edience under t#e first paragrap#
1. A person in aut#ority or #is agent is engaged in t#e performance of official duty or gi&es a la$ful order to t#e offender;
2. .ffender resists or seriously diso0eys suc# person in aut#ority or #is agent;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 136
3. T#e
act of
t#e
offend
er is
not
include
d in
t#e
pro&isi
on of
Article
s 14'1
14)
and
15*.
!lements of
simple
diso0edience
under t#e
second
paragrap#
1. An agent of a person in aut#ority is engaged in t#e performance of official duty or gi&es a la$ful order to t#e offender;
2. .ffender diso0eys suc# agent of a person in aut#ority;
3. <uc# diso0edience is not of a serious nature.
9istinction 0et$een resistance or serious diso0edience and direct assault

1. %n resistance1 t#e person in aut#ority or #is agent must 0e in actual performance of #is duties.
%n direct assault1 t#e person in aut#ority or #is agent must 0e engaged in t#e performance of official duties or t#at #e is assaulted 0y reason t#ereof.
2. 2esistance or serious diso0edience is committed only 0y resisting or seriously diso0eying a person in aut#ority or #is agent.
9irect assault (t#e second form) is committed in four $ays1 t#at is1 (1) 0y attac6ing1 (2) 0y employing force1 (3) 0y seriously intimidating1 and (4) 0y seriously
resisting a persons in aut#ority or #is agent.
3. %n 0ot# resistance against an agent of a person in aut#ority and direct assault 0y resisting an agent of a person in aut#ority1 t#ere is force employed1 0ut t#e use of
force in resistance is not so serious1 as t#ere is no manifest intention to defy t#e la$ and t#e officers enforcing it.
T#e attac6 or employment of force $#ic# gi&es rise to t#e crime of direct assault must 0e serious and deli0erate; ot#er$ise1 e&en a case of simple resistance to an
arrest1 $#ic# al$ays re3uires t#e use of force of some 6ind1 $ould constitute direct assault and t#e lesser offense of resistance or diso0edience in Article 151
$ould entirely disappear.
7ut $#en t#e one resisted is a person % aut#ority1 t#e use of any 6ind or degree of force $ill gi&e rise to direct assault.
%f no force is employed 0y t#e offender in resisting or diso0eying a person in aut#ority1 t#e crime committed is resistance or serious diso0edience under t#e first
paragrap# of Article 151.
@#o are deemed persons in aut#ority and agents of persons in aut#ority under Article 1!3
A person in aut#ority is one directly &ested $it# ?urisdiction1 t#at is1 t#e po$er and aut#ority to go&ern and e4ecute t#e la$s.
An agent of a person in aut#ority is one c#arged $it# (1) t#e maintenance of pu0lic order and (2) t#e protection and security of life and property.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 137
!4amples of persons in
aut#ority
1. Munici
pal
mayor;
2. 9i&isio
n
superi
ntende
nt of
sc#ool
s;
3. -u0lic
and
pri&ate
sc#ool
teac#e
rs;
4. Teac#e
rB
nurse;
5. -resid
ent of
sanitar
y
di&isio
n;
. -ro&in
cial
fiscal;
". Fustice
of t#e
-eace;
'. Municipal councilor;
). 7arrio captain and 0arangay c#airman.
Article 1!8. T.&.lts a$ Ot,er Dist.r9aces o( %.9lic Or$er
Acts punis#ed
1. Causing any serious distur0ance in a pu0lic place1 office or esta0lis#ment;
2. %nterrupting or distur0ing performances1 functions or gat#erings1 or peaceful meetings1 if t#e act is not included in Articles 131 and 132;
3. Ma6ing any outcry tending to incite re0ellion or sedition in any meeting1 association or pu0lic place;
4. 9isplaying placards or em0lems $#ic# pro&o6e a distur0ance of pu0lic order in suc# place;
5. 7urying $it# pomp t#e 0ody of a person $#o #as 0een legally e4ecuted.
The essence is creating public disorder. This crime is brought about by creating serious disturbances in public places, public buildings, and even in private places where
public functions or performances are being held.
2or a crime to be under this article, it must not fall under !rticles (6( #prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of peaceful meetings% and (6" #interruption of religious
worship%.
&n the act of ma4ing outcry during speech tending to incite rebellion or sedition, the situation must be distinguished from inciting to sedition or rebellion. &f the spea4er,
even before he delivered his speech, already had the criminal intent to incite the listeners to rise to sedition, the crime would be inciting to sedition. However, if
the offender had no such criminal intent, but in the course of his speech, tempers went high and so the spea4er started inciting the audience to rise in sedition
against the government, the crime is disturbance of the public order.
The disturbance of the pubic order is tumultuous and the penalty is increased if it is brought about by armed men. The term EarmedF does not refer to firearms but
includes even big stones capable of causing grave injury.
&t is also disturbance of the public order if a convict legally put to death is buried with pomp. He should not be made out as a martyr< it might incite others to hatred.
Article 1!4. Ula+(.l Use o( Meas o( %.9licatio a$ Ula+(.l Utteraces
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 138
Acts punis#ed
1.
-u0lis
#ing or
causin
g to 0e
pu0lis#
ed1 0y
means
of
printin
g1 lit#ograp#y or any ot#er means of pu0lication1 as ne$s any false ne$s $#ic# may endanger t#e pu0lic order; or cause damage to t#e interest or credit of t#e
<tate;
2. !ncouraging diso0edience to t#e la$ or to t#e constituted aut#orities or praising1 ?ustifying or e4tolling any act punis#ed 0y la$1 0y t#e same means or 0y $ords1
utterances or speec#es;
3. Maliciously pu0lis#ing or causing to 0e pu0lis#ed any official resolution or document $it#out proper aut#ority1 or 0efore t#ey #a&e 0een pu0lis#ed officially;
4. -rinting1 pu0lis#ing or distri0uting (or causing t#e same) 0oo6s1 pamp#lets1 periodicals1 or leaflets $#ic# do not 0ear t#e real printerEs name1 or $#ic# are classified
as anonymous.
Actual pu0lic disorder or actual damage to t#e credit of t#e <tate is not necessary.
Re".9lic Act No. 34/ pro#i0its t#e reprinting1 reproduction or repu0lication of go&ernment pu0lications and official documents $it#out pre&ious aut#ority.
Article 1!!. Alar&s a$ Sca$als
Acts punis#ed
1. 9isc#arging any firearm1 roc6et1 firecrac6er1 or ot#er e4plosi&e $it#in any to$n or pu0lic place1 calculated to cause ($#ic# produces) alarm of danger;
2. %nstigating or ta6ing an acti&e part in any c#ari&ari or ot#er disorderly meeting offensi&e to anot#er or pre?udicial to pu0lic tran3uility;
3. 9istur0ing t#e pu0lic peace $#ile $andering a0out at nig#t or $#ile engaged in any ot#er nocturnal amusements;
4. Causing any distur0ance or scandal in pu0lic places $#ile into4icated or ot#er$ise1 pro&ided Article 153 in not applica0le.
.hen a person discharges a firearm in public, the act may constitute any of the possible crimes under the Revised Penal Code'
#(% !larms and scandals if the firearm when discharged was not directed to any particular person<
#"% &llegal discharge of firearm under !rticle "$* if the firearm is directed or pointed to a particular person when discharged but intent to 4ill is absent<
#6% !ttempted homicide, murder, or parricide if the firearm when discharged is directed against a person and intent to 4ill is present.
&n this connection, understand that it is not necessary that the offended party be wounded or hit. 0ere discharge of firearm towards another with intent to 4ill already
amounts to attempted homicide or attempted murder or attempted parricide. &t can not be frustrated because the offended party is not mortally wounded.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 139
&n Arane)a v.
Cour)
o*
A!!ea
l+, it
was
held
that if
a
person
is shot
at and
is
wound
ed, the
crime
is
autom
atically
attemp
ted
homici
de.
&ntent
to 4ill
is
inhere
nt in
the
use of
the
deadly
weapo
n.
The crime alarms and scandal is only one crime. @o not thin4 that alarms and scandals are two crimes.
5candal here does not refer to moral scandal< that one is grave scandal in !rticle ";;. The essence of the crime is disturbance of public tran9uility and public peace. 5o,
any 4ind of disturbance of public order where the circumstance at the time renders the act offensive to the tran9uility prevailing, the crime is committed.
Charivari is a moc4 serenade wherein the supposed serenaders use bro4en cans, bro4en pots, bottles or other utensils thereby creating discordant notes. !ctually, it is
producing noise, not music and so it also disturbs public tran9uility. =nderstand the nature of the crime of alarms and scandals as one that disturbs public tran9uility
or public peace. &f the annoyance is intended for a particular person, the crime is unjust vexation.
)ven if the persons involved are engaged in nocturnal activity li4e those playing patintero at night, or selling balut, if they conduct their activity in such a way that disturbs
public peace, they may commit the crime of alarms and scandals.
Article 1!'. Deli0eri* %risoers (ro& <ail
!lements
1. T#ere is a person confined in a ?ail or penal esta0lis#ment;
2. .ffender remo&es t#erefrom suc# person1 or #elps t#e escape of suc# person.
-enalty of arresto mayor in its ma4imum period to prision correccional in its minimum period is imposed if &iolence1 intimidation or 0ri0ery is used.
-enalty of arresto mayor if ot#er means are used.
-enalty decreased to t#e minimum period if t#e escape of t#e prisoner s#all ta6e place outside of said esta0lis#ments 0y ta6ing t#e guards 0y surprise.
&n relation to infidelity in the custody of prisoners, correlate the crime of delivering person from jail with infidelity in the custody of prisoners punished under !rticles ""6,
""* and ""$ of the Revised Penal Code. &n both acts, the offender may be a public officer or a private citi3en. @o not thin4 that infidelity in the custody of
prisoners can only be committed by a public officer and delivering persons from jail can only be committed by private person. :oth crimes may be committed
by public officers as well as private persons.
&n both crimes, the person involved may be a convict or a mere detention prisoner.
The only point of distinction between the two crimes lies on whether the offender is the custodian of the prisoner or not at the time the prisoner was made to escape. &f
the offender is the custodian at that time, the crime is infidelity in the custody of prisoners. :ut if the offender is not the custodian of the prisoner at that time, even though
he is a public officer, the crime he committed is delivering prisoners from jail.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 140
Aiability of the
priso
ner
or
detai
nee
who
esca
ped +
.he
n
these
crime
s are
com
mitte
d,
whet
her
infide
lity in
the
custo
dy of
priso
ners
or
deliv
ering
priso
ners
from
jail,
the
priso
ner
so
esca
ping
may
also have criminal liability and this is so if the prisoner is a convict serving sentence by final judgment. The crime of evasion of service of sentence is committed
by the prisoner who escapes if such prisoner is a convict serving sentence by final judgment.
&f the prisoner who escapes is only a detention prisoner, he does not incur liability from escaping if he does not 4now of the plan to remove him from jail. :ut if such
prisoner 4nows of the plot to remove him from jail and cooperates therein by escaping, he himself becomes liable for delivering prisoners from jail as a principal by
indispensable cooperation.
&f three persons are involved + a stranger, the custodian and the prisoner + three crimes are committed'
#(% &nfidelity in the custody of prisoners<
#"% @elivery of the prisoner from jail< and
#6% )vasion of service of sentence.
Article 1!). E0asio o( Ser0ice o( Setece
!lements
1. .ffender is a con&ict 0y final ?udgment;
2. 5e is ser&ing sentence $#ic# consists in t#e depri&ation of li0erty;
3. 5e e&ades ser&ice of #is sentence 0y escaping during t#e term of #is imprisonment.
Dualifying circumstances as to penalty imposed
%f suc# e&asion or escape ta6es place /
1. 7y means of unla$ful entry (t#is s#ould 0e H0y scalingI B 2eyes);
2. 7y 0rea6ing doors1 $indo$s1 gates1 $alls1 roofs or floors;
3. 7y using pic6loc61 false 6eys1 disguise1 deceit1 &iolence or intimidation; or
4. T#roug# conni&ance $it# ot#er con&icts or employees of t#e penal institution.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 141
)vasion of
servi
ce of
sente
nce
has
three
forms
'
#(% :y
simply
leaving
or
escapi
ng
from
the
penal
establi
shmen
t under
!rticle
($?<
#"% 2ailure
to
return
within
*1
hours
after
having
left the
penal establishment because of a calamity, conflagration or mutiny and such calamity, conflagration or mutiny has been announced as already passed under
!rticle ($1<
#6% 7iolating the condition of conditional pardon under !rticle ($8.
&n leaving or escaping from jail or prison, that the prisoner immediately returned is immaterial. &t is enough that he left the penal establishment by escaping therefrom.
His voluntary return may only be mitigating, being analogous to voluntary surrender. :ut the same will not absolve his criminal liability.
Article 1!/. E0asio o( Ser0ice o( Setece o t,e Occasio o( Disor$ers@ Co(la*ratios@ Eart,B.a=es@ or Ot,er Cala&ities
!lements
1. .ffender is a con&ict 0y final ?udgment1 $#o is confined in a penal institution;
2. T#ere is disorder1 resulting from /
a. conflagration;
0. eart#3ua6e;
c. e4plosion; or
d. similar catastrop#e; or
e. mutiny in $#ic# #e #as not participated;
3. 5e e&ades t#e ser&ice of #is sentence 0y lea&ing t#e penal institution $#ere #e is confined1 on t#e occasion of suc# disorder or during t#e mutiny;
4. 5e fails to gi&e #imself up to t#e aut#orities $it#in 4' #ours follo$ing t#e issuance of a proclamation 0y t#e C#ief !4ecuti&e announcing t#e passing a$ay of suc#
calamity.
The leaving from the penal establishment is not the basis of criminal liability. &t is the failure to return within *1 hours after the passing of the calamity, conflagration or
mutiny had been announced. =nder !rticle ($1, those who return within *1 hours are given credit or deduction from the remaining period of their sentence
e9uivalent to (J$ of the original term of the sentence. :ut if the prisoner fails to return within said *1 hours, an added penalty, also (J$, shall be imposed but the
(J$ penalty is based on the remaining period of the sentence, not on the original sentence. &n no case shall that penalty exceed six months.
Those who did not leave the penal establishment are not entitled to the (J$ credit. >nly those who left and returned within the *1hour period.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 142
The mutiny
referr
ed to
in the
seco
nd
form
of
evasi
on of
servi
ce of
sente
nce
does
not
inclu
de
riot.
The
mutin
y
referr
ed to
here
invol
ves
subor
dinat
e
perso
nnel
rising
again
st the
supervisor within the penal establishment. >ne who escapes during a riot will be subject to !rticle ($?, that is, simply leaving or escaping the penal
establishment.
Mutiny is one of the causes which may authorize a convict serving sentence in the penitentiary to leave the jail provided he has not taken part in the
mutiny.
The crime of evasion of service of sentence may be committed even if the sentence is destierro, and this is committed if the convict sentenced to destierro will enter the
prohibited places or come within the prohibited radius of "$ 4ilometers to such places as stated in the judgment.
&f the sentence violated is destierro, the penalty upon the convict is to be served by way of destierro also, not imprisonment. This is so because the penalty for the
evasion can not be more severe than the penalty evaded.
Article 1!1. Ot,er Cases o( E0asio o( Ser0ice o( Setece
!lements of &iolation of conditional pardon
1. .ffender $as a con&ict;
2. 5e $as granted pardon 0y t#e C#ief !4ecuti&e;
3. 5e &iolated any of t#e conditions of suc# pardon.
&n violation of conditional pardon, as a rule, the violation will amount to this crime only if the condition is violated during the remaining period of the sentence. !s a rule, if
the condition of the pardon is violated when the remaining unserved portion of the sentence has already lapsed, there will be no more criminal liability for the
violation. However, the convict maybe re9uired to serve the unserved portion of the sentence, that is, continue serving original penalty.
The administrative liability of the convict under the conditional pardon is different and has nothing to do with his criminal liability for the evasion of service of sentence in
the event that the condition of the pardon has been violated. )xception' where the violation of the condition of the pardon will constitute evasion of service of sentence,
even though committed beyond the remaining period of the sentence. This is when the conditional pardon expressly so provides or the language of the conditional
pardon clearly shows the intention to ma4e the condition perpetual even beyond the unserved portion of the sentence. &n such case, the convict may be re9uired to serve
the unserved portion of the sentence even though the violation has ta4en place when the sentence has already lapsed.
&n order that the conditional pardon may be violated, it is conditional that the pardonee received the conditional pardon. &f he is released without conformity to the
conditional pardon, he will not be liable for the crime of evasion of service of sentence.
6.estio 7 As+er
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 143
%s t#e
&iolation of
conditional
pardon a
su0stanti&e
offense=
=nder
!rticle ($8,
there are two
situations
provided'
#(% There
is a
penalt
y of
prision
correc
cional
minim
um for
the
violatio
n of
the
conditi
onal
pardon
<
#"% There is no new penalty imposed for the violation of the conditional pardon. &nstead, the convict will be re9uired to serve the unserved portion of the sentence.
&f the remitted portion of the sentence is less than six years or up to six years, there is an added penalty of prision correccional minimum for the violation of the
conditional pardon< hence, the violation is a substantive offense if the remitted portion of the sentence does not exceed six years because in this case a new penalty is
imposed for the violation of the conditional pardon.
:ut if the remitted portion of the sentence exceeds six years, the violation of the conditional pardon is not a substantive offense because no new penalty is
imposed for the violation.
&n other words, you have to 9ualify your answer.
The 5upreme Court, however, has ruled in the case of An%ele+ v. ,o+e that this is not a substantive offense. This has been highly critici3ed.
Article 1'4. Co&&issio o( Aot,er Cri&e D.ri* Ser0ice o( %ealt# I&"ose$ (or Aot,er %re0io.s O((ese
!lements
1. .ffender $as already con&icted 0y final ?udgment of one offense;
2. 5e committed a ne$ felony 0efore 0eginning to ser&e suc# sentence or $#ile ser&ing t#e same.
TITLE I2. CRIMES AGAINST %UALIC INTEREST
Crimes against pu0lic interest
1. Counterfeiting t#e great seal of t#e ;o&ernment of t#e -#ilippines (Art. 11);
2. 8sing forged signature or counterfeiting seal or stamp (Art. 12);
3. Ma6ing and importing and uttering false coins (Art. 13);
4. Mutilation of coins1 importation and uttering of mutilated coins (Art. 14);
5. <elling of false or mutilated coins1 $it#out conni&ance (Art. 15);
. +orging treasury or 0an6 notes or ot#er documents paya0le to 0earer1 importing and uttering of suc# false or forged notes and documents (Art. 1);
". Counterfeiting1 importing and uttering instruments not paya0le to 0earer (Art. 1");
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 144
'. %llegal
posses
sion
and
use of
forged
treasur
y or
0an6
notes
and
ot#er
instru
ments
of
credit
(Art.
1');
).
+alsific
ation
of
legislat
i&e
docum
ents
(Art.
1"*);
1*. +alsification 0y pu0lic officer1 employee or notary (Art. 1"1);
11. +alsification 0y pri&ate indi&iduals and use of falsified documents (Art. 1"2);
12. +alsification of $ireless1 ca0le1 telegrap# and telep#one messages and use of said falsified messages (Art. 1"3);
13. +alse medical certificates1 false certificates of merit or ser&ice (Art. 1"4);
14. 8sing false certificates (Art. 1"5);
15. Manufacturing and possession of instruments or implements for falsification (Art. 1");
1. 8surpation of aut#ority or official functions (Art. 1"");
1". 8sing fictitious name and concealing true name (Art. 1"');
1'. %llegal use of uniforms or insignia (Art. 1"));
1). +alse testimony against a defendant (Art. 1'*);
2*. +alse testimony fa&ora0le to t#e defendant (Art. 1'1);
21. +alse testimony in ci&il cases (Art. 1'2);
22. +alse testimony in ot#er cases and per?ury (Art. 1'3);
23. .ffering false testimony in e&idence (Art. 1'4);
24. Mac#inations in pu0lic auction (Art. 1'5);
25. Monopolies and com0inations in restraint of trade (Art. 1');
2. %mportation and disposition of falsely mar6ed articles or merc#andise made of gold1 sil&er1 or ot#er precious metals or t#eir alloys (Art. 1'");
2". <u0stituting and altering trade mar6s and trade names or ser&ice mar6s (Art. 1'');
2'. 8nfair competition and fraudulent registration of trade mar6 or trade name1 or ser&ice mar6; fraudulent designation of origin1 and false description (Art. 1')).
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 145
The crimes in
this title are in
the nature of
fraud or falsity
to the public.
The essence
of the crime
under this title
is that which
defraud the
public in
general.
There is
deceit
perpetrated
upon the
public. This is
the act that is
being
punished
under this
title.
Article 1'1.
Co.ter(eiti
* t,e Great
Seal o( t,e
Go0er&et
o( t,e
%,ili""ie
Isla$s@
For*i* t,e
Si*at.re or
Sta&" o( t,e
C,ie(
E?ec.ti0e
Acts punis#ed
1. +orging t#e great seal of t#e ;o&ernment of t#e -#ilippines;
2. +orging t#e signature of t#e -resident;
3. +orging t#e stamp of t#e -resident.
Article 1'3. Usi* For*e$ Si*at.re or Co.ter(eit Seal or Sta&"
!lements
1. T#e great seal of t#e 2epu0lic $as counterfeited or t#e signature or stamp of t#e C#ief !4ecuti&e $as forged 0y anot#er person;
2. .ffender 6ne$ of t#e counterfeiting or forgery;
3. 5e used t#e counterfeit seal or forged signature or stamp.
.ffender under t#is article s#ould not 0e t#e forger.
Article 1'8. Ma=i* a$ I&"orti* a$ Utteri* False Cois
!lements
1. T#ere 0e false or counterfeited coins;
2. .ffender eit#er made1 imported or uttered suc# coins;
3. %n case of uttering suc# false or counterfeited coins1 #e conni&ed $it# t#e counterfeiters or importers.
Jinds of coins t#e counterfeiting of $#ic# is punis#ed
1. <il&er coins of t#e -#ilippines or coins of t#e Central 7an6 of t#e -#ilippines;
2. Coins of t#e minor coinage of t#e -#ilippines or of t#e Central 7an6 of t#e -#ilippines;
3. Coin of t#e currency of a foreign country.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 146
Article 1'4.
M.tilatio o(
Cois
Acts punis#ed
1.
Mutilati
ng
coins
of t#e
legal
curren
cy1 $it#
t#e
furt#er
re3uire
ments
t#at
t#ere
0e
intent
to
damag
e or to
defrau
d
anot#e
r;
2. %mporting or uttering suc# mutilated coins1 $it# t#e furt#er re3uirement t#at t#ere must 0e conni&ances $it# t#e mutilator or importer in case of uttering.
The first acts of falsification or falsity are +
#(% Counterfeiting + refers to money or currency<
#"% 2orgery + refers to instruments of credit and obligations and securities issued by the Philippine government or any ban4ing institution authori3ed by the Philippine
government to issue the same<
#6% 2alsification + can only be committed in respect of documents.
&n so far as coins in circulation are concerned, there are two crimes that may be committed'
#(% Counterfeiting coins This is the crime of rema4ing or manufacturing without any authority to do so.
&n the crime of counterfeiting, the law is not concerned with the fraud upon the public such that even though the coin is no longer legal tender, the act of imitating or
manufacturing the coin of the government is penali3ed. &n punishing the crime of counterfeiting, the law wants to prevent people from trying their ingenuity in their
imitation of the manufacture of money.
&t is not necessary that the coin counterfeited be legal tender. 5o that even if the coin counterfeited is of vintage, the crime of counterfeiting is committed. The reason is
to bar the counterfeiter from perfecting his craft of counterfeiting. The law punishes the act in order to discourage people from ever attempting to gain expertise in gaining
money. This is because if people could counterfeit money with impunity just because it is no longer legal tender, people would try to counterfeit nonlegal tender coins.
5oon, if they develop the expertise to ma4e the counterfeiting more or less no longer discernible or no longer noticeable, they could ma4e use of their ingenuity to
counterfeit coins of legal tender. 2rom that time on, the government shall have difficulty determining which coins are counterfeited and those which are not. &t may
happen that the counterfeited coins may loo4 better than the real ones. 5o, counterfeiting is penali3ed right at the very start whether the coin is legal tender or otherwise.
6.estio 7 As+er
K #as in #is possession a coin $#ic# $as legal tender at t#e time of Magellan and is considered a collectorEs item. 5e manufactured se&eral pieces of t#at coin.
%s t#e crime committed=
Bes. &t is not necessary that the coin be of legal tender. The provision punishing counterfeiting does not re9uire that the money be of legal tender and the law
punishes this even if the coin concerned is not of legal tender in order to discourage people from practicing their ingenuity of imitating money. &f it were otherwise, people
may at the beginning try their ingenuity in imitating money not of legal tender and once they ac9uire expertise, they may then counterfeit money of legal tender.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 147
#"%
0utilati
on of
coins
This
refers
to the
deliber
ate act
of
diminis
hing
the
proper
metal contents of the coin either by scraping, scratching or filling the edges of the coin and the offender gathers the metal dust that has been scraped from the
coin.
Re9uisites of mutilation under the Revised Penal Code
#(% Coin mutilated is of legal tender<
#"% >ffender gains from the precious metal dust abstracted from the coin< and
#6% &t has to be a coin.
0utilation is being regarded as a crime because the coin, being of legal tender, it is still in circulation and which would necessarily prejudice other people who may come
across the coin. 2or example, C mutilated a P ".;; coin, the octagonal one, by converting it into a round one and extracting (J(; of the precious metal dust from it. The
coin here is no longer P".;; but only P (.1;, therefore, prejudice to the public has resulted.
There is no expertise involved here. &n mutilation of coins under the Revised Penal Code, the offender does nothing but to scrape, pile or cut the coin and collect the dust
and, thus, diminishing the intrinsic value of the coin.
0utilation of coins is a crime only if the coin mutilated is legal tender. &f the coin whose metal content has been depreciated through scraping, scratching, or filing the coin
and the offender collecting the precious metal dust, even if he would use the coin after its intrinsic value had been reduced, nobody will accept the same. &f it is not legal
tender anymore, no one will accept it, so nobody will be defrauded. :ut if the coin is of legal tender, and the offender minimi3es or decreases the precious metal dust
content of the coin, the crime of mutilation is committed.
&n the example, if the offender has collected (J(; of the P ".;; coin, the coin is actually worth only P (.1;. He is paying only P(.1; in effect defrauding the seller of P .";.
Punishment for mutilation is brought about by the fact that the intrinsic value of the coin is reduced.
The offender must deliberately reduce the precious metal in the coin. @eliberate intent arises only when the offender collects the precious metal dust from the mutilated
coin. &f the offender does not collect such dust, intent to mutilate is absent, but Presidential @ecree ,o. "*? will apply.
%resi$etial Decree No. 34) :De(ace&et@ M.tilatio@ Teari*@ A.ri* or Destro#i* Cetral Aa= Notes a$ Cois>
%t s#all 0e unla$ful for any person to $illfully deface1 mutilate1 tear1 0urn1 or destroy in any manner $#atsoe&er1 currency notes and coins issued 0y t#e Central 7an6.
0utilation under the Revised Penal Code is true only to coins. &t cannot be a crime under the Revised Penal Code to mutilate paper bills because the idea of mutilation
under the code is collecting the precious metal dust. However, under Presidential @ecree ,o. "*?, mutilation is not limited to coins.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 148
6.estios 7
As+ers
1.
T#e
people playing
cara y cru:1
0efore t#ey
t#ro$ t#e coin
in t#e air
$ould ru0 t#e
money to t#e
side$al6
t#ere0y
diminis#ing
t#e intrinsic
&alue of t#e
coin. %s t#e
crime of
mutilation
committed=
0utilati
on, under the
Revised Penal
Code, is not
committed because they do not collect the precious metal content that is being scraped from the coin. However, this will amount to violation of Presidential @ecree ,o.
"*?.
2. @#en t#e image of Fose 2i:al on a fi&eBpeso 0ill is transformed into t#at of 2andy <antiago1 is t#ere a &iolation of -residential 9ecree Co. 24"=
Bes. Presidential @ecree ,o. "*? is violated by such act.
3. <ometime 0efore martial la$ $as imposed1 t#e people lost confidence in 0an6s t#at t#ey preferred #oarding t#eir money t#an depositing it in 0an6s.
+ormer -resident +erdinand Marcos declared upon declaration of martial la$ t#at all 0ills $it#out t#e 7agong Aipunan sign on t#em $ill no longer 0e recogni:ed.
7ecause of t#is1 t#e people #ad no c#oice 0ut to surrender t#eir money to 0an6s and e4c#ange t#em $it# t#ose $it# t#e 7agong Aipunan sign on t#em. 5o$e&er1 people
$#o came up $it# a lot of money $ere also 0eing c#arged $it# #oarding for $#ic# reason certain printing presses did t#e stamping of t#e 7agong Aipunan sign
t#emsel&es to a&oid prosecution. @as t#ere a &iolation of -residential 9ecree Co. 24"=
Bes. This act of the printing presses is a violation of Presidential @ecree ,o. "*?.
4. An old $oman $#o $as a cigarette &endor in Duiapo refused to accept oneBcenta&o coins for payment of t#e &endee of cigarettes #e purc#ased. T#en
came t#e police $#o ad&ised #er t#at s#e #as no rig#t to refuse since t#e coins are of legal tender. .n t#is1 t#e old $oman accepted in #er #ands t#e oneBcenta&o coins
and t#en t#re$ it to t#e face of t#e &endee and t#e police. @as t#e old $oman guilty of &iolating -residential 9ecree Co. 24"=
5he was guilty of violating Presidential @ecree ,o. "*? because if no one ever pic4s up the coins, her act would result in the diminution of the coin in circulation.
5. A certain customer in a restaurant $anted to s#o$ off and used a - 2*.** 0ill to lig#t #is cigarette. @as #e guilty of &iolating -residential 9ecree Co. 24"=
He was guilty of arrested for violating of Presidential @ecree ,o. "*?. !nyone who is in possession of defaced money is the one who is the violator of Presidential
@ecree ,o. "*?. The intention of Presidential @ecree ,o. "*? is not to punish the act of defrauding the public but what is being punished is the act of destruction of
money issued by the Central :an4 of the Philippines.
,ote that persons ma4ing bracelets out of some coins violate Presidential @ecree ,o. "*?.
The primary purpose of Presidential @ecree ,o. "*? at the time it was ordained was to stop the practice of people writing at the bac4 or on the edges of the paper bills,
such as Kwanted' pen palK.
5o, if the act of mutilating coins does not involve gathering dust li4e playing cara y cru3, that is not mutilation under the Revised Penal Code because the offender does
not collect the metal dust. :ut by rubbing the coins on the sidewal4, he also defaces and destroys the coin and that is punishable under Presidential @ecree ,o. "*?.
Article 1'!. Selli* o( False or M.tilate$ Coi@ +it,o.t Coi0ace
Acts punis#ed
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 149
1.
-osse
ssion
of coin1
counte
rfeited
or
mutilat
ed 0y
anot#e
r
person
1 $it#
intent
to utter
t#e
same1
6no$in
g t#at
it is
false
or
mutilat
ed;
!lements
1. -ossessio
n;
2. @it# intent
to
utter;
and
3. Jno$ledg
e.
2. Actually uttering suc# false or mutilated coin1 6no$ing t#e same to 0e false or mutilated.
!lements
1. Actually uttering; and
2. Jno$ledge.
Article 1''. For*i* Treas.r# or Aa= Notes or Ot,er Doc.&ets %a#a9le to AearerC I&"orti* a$ Utteri* S.c, False or For*e$ Notes a$ Doc.&ets
Acts punis#ed
1. +orging or falsification of treasury or 0an6 notes or ot#er documents paya0le to 0earer;
2. %mportation of suc# false or forged o0ligations or notes;
3. 8ttering of suc# false or forged o0ligations or notes in conni&ance $it# t#e forgers or importers.
Article 1'). Co.ter(eiti*@ I&"orti*@ a$ Utteri* Istr.&ets Not %a#a9le to Aearer
!lements
1. T#ere is an instrument paya0le to order or ot#er documents of credit not paya0le to 0earer;
2. .ffender eit#er forged1 imported or uttered suc# instrument;
3. %n case of uttering1 #e conni&ed $it# t#e forger or importer.
Article 1'/. Ille*al %ossessio a$ Use o( False Treas.r# or Aa= Notes a$ Ot,er Istr.&ets o( Cre$it
!lements
1. Any treasury or 0an6 note or certificate or ot#er o0ligation and security paya0le to 0earer1 or any instrument paya0le to order or ot#er document of credit not
paya0le to 0earer is forged or falsified 0y anot#er person;
2. .ffender 6no$s t#at any of t#ose instruments is forged or falsified;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 150
3. 5e
eit#er
/
a. uses
any of
suc#
forged
or
falsifie
d
instru
ments;
or
0.
posses
ses
$it#
intent
to use
any of
suc#
forged
or
falsifie
d
instru
ments.
5o$ forgery is
committed
under Article
1'1
1. 7y gi&ing to a treasury or 0an6 note or any instrument paya0le to 0earer or to order mentioned t#erein1 t#e appearance of a true and genuine document;
2. 7y erasing1 su0stituting1 counterfeiting1 or altering 0y any means t#e figures1 letters1 $ords1 or sign contained t#erein.
2orgery under the Revised Penal Code applies to papers, which are in the form of obligations and securities issued by the Philippine government as its own obligations,
which is given the same status as legal tender. /enerally, the word EcounterfeitingF is not used when it comes to notes< what is used is Eforgery.F Counterfeiting refers to
money, whether coins or bills.
The Revised Penal Code defines forgery under !rticle (-8. ,otice that mere change on a document does not amount to this crime. The essence of forgery is giving a
document the appearance of a true and genuine document. ,ot any alteration of a letter, number, figure or design would amount to forgery. !t most, it would only be
frustrated forgery.

.hen what is being counterfeited is obligation or securities, which under the Revised Penal Code is given a status of money or legal tender, the crime committed is
forgery.
6.estios 7 As+ers
1. %nstead of t#e peso sign (-)1 some0ody replaced it $it# a dollar sign (L). @as t#e crime of forgery committed=
,o. 2orgery was not committed. The forged instrument and currency note must be given the appearance of a true and genuine document. The crime committed
is a violation of Presidential @ecree ,o. "*?. .here the currency note, obligation or security has been changed to ma4e it appear as one which it purports to be as
genuine, the crime is forgery. &n chec4s or commercial documents, this crime is committed when the figures or words are changed which materially alters the document.
2. An old man1 in #is desire to earn somet#ing1 scraped a digit in a losing s$eepsta6es tic6et1 cut out a digit from anot#er tic6et and pasted it t#ere to matc#
t#e series of digits corresponding to t#e $inning s$eepsta6es tic6et. 5e presented t#is tic6et to t#e -#ilippine C#arity <$eepsta6es .ffice. 7ut t#e alteration is so crude
t#at e&en a c#ild can notice t#at t#e supposed digit is merely superimposed on t#e digit t#at $as scraped. @as t#e old man guilty of forgery=
:ecause of the impossibility of deceiving whoever would be the person to whom that tic4et is presented, the 5upreme Court ruled that what was committed was an
impossible crime. ,ote, however, that the decision has been critici3ed. &n a case li4e this, the 5upreme Court of 5pain ruled that the crime is frustrated. .here the
alteration is such that nobody would be deceived, one could easily see that it is a forgery, the crime is frustrated because he has done all the acts of execution which
would bring about the felonious conse9uence but nevertheless did not result in a consummation for reasons independent of his will.
3. A person #as a t$entyBpeso 0ill. 5e applied toot#ac#e drops on one side of t#e 0ill. 5e #as a mimeograp# paper similar in te4ture to t#at of t#e currency
note and placed it on top of t#e t$entyBpeso 0ill and put some $eig#t on top of t#e paper. After sometime1 #e remo&ed it and t#e printing on t#e t$entyBpeso 0ill $as
reproduced on t#e mimeo paper. 5e too6 t#e re&erse side of t#e -2* 0ill1 applied toot#ac#e drops and re&ersed t#e mimeo paper and pressed it to t#e paper. After
sometime1 #e remo&ed it and it $as reproduced. 5e cut it out1 scraped it a little and $ent to a sariBsari store trying to 0uy a cigarette $it# t#at 0ill. @#at #e o&erloo6ed
$as t#at1 $#en #e placed t#e 0ill1 t#e printing $as in&erted. 5e $as appre#ended and $as prosecuted and con&icted of forgery. @as t#e crime of forgery committed=
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 151
The
5upreme
Court ruled
that it was
only frustrated
forgery
because
although the
offender has
performed all
the acts of
execution, it is
not possible
because by
simply loo4ing
at the forged
document, it
could be seen
that it is not
genuine. &t
can only be a
consummated
forgery if the
document
which
purports to be
genuine is
given the
appearance of
a true and
genuine
document.
>therwise, it
is at most
frustrated.
Article 1)4. Falsi(icatio o( Le*islati0e Doc.&ets
!lements
1. T#ere is a 0ill1 resolution or ordinance enacted or appro&ed or pending appro&al 0y eit#er 5ouse of t#e Aegislature or any pro&incial 0oard or municipal council;
2. .ffender alters t#e same;
3. 5e #as no proper aut#ority t#erefor;
4. T#e alteration #as c#anged t#e meaning of t#e documents.
T#e $ords Gmunicipal councilG s#ould include t#e city council or municipal 0oard / 2eyes.
The crime of falsification must involve a writing that is a document in the legal sense. The writing must be complete in itself and capable of extinguishing an obligation or
creating rights or capable of becoming evidence of the facts stated therein. =ntil and unless the writing has attained this 9uality, it will not be considered as document in
the legal sense and, therefore, the crime of falsification cannot be committed in respect thereto.
2ive classes of falsification'
#(% 2alsification of legislative documents<
#"% 2alsification of a document by a public officer, employee or notary public<
#6% 2alsification of a public or official, or commercial documents by a private individual<
#*% 2alsification of a private document by any person<
#$% 2alsification of wireless, telegraph and telephone messages.
@istinction between falsification and forgery'
2alsification is the commission of any of the eight acts mentioned in !rticle (?( on legislative #only the act of ma4ing alteration%, public or official, commercial, or private
documents, or wireless, or telegraph messages.
The term forgery as used in !rticle (-8 refers to the falsification and counterfeiting of treasury or ban4 notes or any instruments payable to bearer or to order.
,ote that forging and falsification are crimes under 2orgeries.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 152
Article 1)1.
Falsi(icatio
9# %.9lic
O((icer@
E&"lo#ee or
Notar# or
Ecclesiastica
l Miister
!lements
1.
.ffend
er is a
pu0lic
officer1
employ
ee1 or
notary
pu0lic;
2. 5e
ta6es
ad&ant
age of
#is
official
positio
n;
3. 5e falsifies a document 0y committing any of t#e follo$ing acts>
a. Counterfeiting or imitating any #and$riting1 signature or ru0ric;
0. Causing it to appear t#at persons #a&e participated in any act or proceeding $#en t#ey did not in fact so participate;
c. Attri0uting to persons $#o #a&e participated in an act or proceeding statements ot#er t#an t#ose in fact made 0y t#em;
d. Ma6ing untrut#ful statements in a narration of facts;
e. Altering true dates;
f. Ma6ing any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document $#ic# c#anges its meaning;
g. %ssuing in an aut#enticated form a document purporting to 0e a copy of an original document $#en no suc# original e4ists1 or including in suc# a copy a
statement contrary to1 or different from1 t#at of t#e genuine original; or

#. %ntercalating any instrument or note relati&e to t#e issuance t#ereof in a protocol1 registry1 or official 0oo6.
4. %n case t#e offender is an ecclesiastical minister $#o s#all commit any of t#e offenses enumerated1 $it# respect to any record or document of suc# c#aracter t#at
its falsification may affect t#e ci&il status of persons.
2or example, a customer in a hotel did not write his name on the registry boo4, which was intended to be a memorial of those who got in and out of that hotel. There is no
complete document to spea4 of. The document may not extinguish or create rights but it can be an evidence of the facts stated therein.
,ote that a chec4 is not yet a document when it is not completed yet. &f somebody writes on it, he ma4es a document out of it.
The document where a crime was committed or the document subject of the prosecution may be totally false in the sense that it is entirely spurious. This notwithstanding,
the crime of falsification is committed.
&t does not re9uire that the writing be genuine. )ven if the writing was through and through false, if it appears to be genuine, the crime of falsification is nevertheless
committed.
6.estios 7 As+ers
1. A is one of t#ose selling residence certificates in Duiapo. 5e $as 0roug#t to t#e police precincts on suspicion t#at t#e certificates #e $as selling to t#e
pu0lic proceed from spurious sources and not from t#e 7ureau of Treasury. 8pon &erification1 it $as found out t#at t#e certificates $ere indeed printed $it# a 0oo6let of
supposed residence certificates. @#at crime $as committed=
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 153
Crime
committed is
violation of
!rticle (?-
#manufacturin
g and
possession of
instruments or
implements
for
falsification%.
! cannot be
charged of
falsification
because the
boo4let of
residence
certificates
found in his
possession is
not in the
nature of
EdocumentF in
the legal
sense. They
are mere
forms which
are not to be
completed to be a document in the legal sense. This is illegal possession with intent to use materials or apparatus which may be used in counterfeitingJforgery or
falsification.
2. -u0lic officers found a traffic &iolation receipts from a certain person. T#e receipts $ere not issued 0y t#e Motor (e#icle .ffice. +or $#at crime s#ould #e
0e prosecuted for=
&t cannot be a crime of usurpation of official functions. &t may be the intention but no overt act was yet performed by him. He was not arrested while performing
such overt act. He was apprehended only while he was standing on the street suspiciously. ,either can he be prosecuted for falsification because the document is not
completed yet, there being no name of any erring driver. The document remains to be a mere form. &t not being completed yet, the document does not 9ualify as a
document in the legal sense.
4. Can t#e $riting on t#e $all 0e considered a document=
Bes. &t is capable of spea4ing of the facts stated therein. .riting may be on anything as long as it is a product of the handwriting, it is considered a document.
5. %n a case $#ere a la$yer tried to e4tract money from a spinster 0y typing on a 0ond paper a su0poena for estafa. T#e spinster agreed to pay. T#e spinster
$ent to t#e prosecutorEs office to &erify t#e e4act amount and found out t#at t#ere $as no c#arge against #er. T#e la$yer $as prosecuted for falsification. 5e contended
t#at only a genuine document could 0e falsified. 2ule.
!s long as any of the acts of falsification is committed, whether the document is genuine or not, the crime of falsification may be committed. )ven totally false
documents may be falsified.
There are four 4inds of documents'
#(% Public document in the execution of which, a person in authority or notary public has ta4en part<
#"% >fficial document in the execution of which a public official ta4es part<
#6% Commercial document or any document recogni3ed by the Code of Commerce or any commercial law< and
#*% Private document in the execution of which only private individuals ta4e part.
Public document is broader than the term official document. :efore a document may be considered official, it must first be a public document. :ut not all public
documents are official documents. To become an official document, there must be a law which re9uires a public officer to issue or to render such document. )xample'
! cashier is re9uired to issue an official receipt for the amount he receives. The official receipt is a public document which is an official document.
Article 1)3. Falsi(icatio 9# %ri0ate I$i0i$.al a$ Use o( Falsi(ie$ Doc.&ets
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 154
Acts punis#ed
1.
+alsific
ation
of
pu0lic1
official
or
comm
ercial
docum
ent 0y
a
pri&ate
indi&id
ual;
2.
+alsific
ation
of
pri&ate
docum
ent 0y
any
person
;
3. 8se of
falsified
document.
!lements
under
paragrap# 1
1. .ffender is a pri&ate indi&idual or pu0lic officer or employee $#o did not ta6e ad&antage of #is official position;
2. 5e committed any act of falsification;
3. T#e falsification $as committed in a pu0lic1 official1 or commercial document or letter of e4c#ange.
!lements under paragrap# 2
1. .ffender committed any of t#e acts of falsification e4cept Article 1"1(")1 t#at is1 issuing in an aut#enticated form a document purporting to 0e a copy of an original
document $#en no suc# original e4ists1 or including in suc# a copy a statement contrary to1 or different from1 t#at of t#e genuine original;
2. +alsification $as committed in any pri&ate document;
3. +alsification causes damage to a t#ird party or at least t#e falsification $as committed $it# intent to cause suc# damage.
!lements under t#e last paragrap#
%n introducing in a ?udicial proceeding /
1. .ffender 6ne$ t#at t#e document $as falsified 0y anot#er person;
2. T#e false document is in Articles 1"1 or 1"2 (1 or 2);
3. 5e introduced said document in e&idence in any ?udicial proceeding.
%n use in any ot#er transaction /
1. .ffender 6ne$ t#at a document $as falsified 0y anot#er person;
2. T#e false document is em0raced in Articles 1"1 or 1"2 (1 or 2);
3. 5e used suc# document;
4. T#e use caused damage to anot#er or at least used $it# intent to cause damage.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 155
Article 1)8.
Falsi(icatio
o( Wireless@
Ca9le@
Tele*ra",
a$
Tele",oe
Messa*es@
a$ Use o(
Sai$ Falsi(ie$
Messa*es
Acts punis#ed
1.
8tterin
g
fictitiou
s
$ireles
s1
telegra
p# or
telep#
one
messa
ge;
!lements
11
.ffend
er is
an
officer
or
employ
ee of t#e go&ernment or an officer or employee of a pri&ate corporation1 engaged in t#e ser&ice of sending or recei&ing $ireless1 ca0le or telep#one
message;
2. 5e utters fictitious $ireless1 ca0le1 telegrap# or telep#one message.
2. +alsifying $ireless1 telegrap# or telep#one message;
!lements
11 .ffender is an officer or employee of t#e go&ernment or an officer or employee of a pri&ate corporation1 engaged in t#e ser&ice of sending or recei&ing
$ireless1 ca0le or telep#one message;
2. 5e falsifies $ireless1 ca0le1 telegrap# or telep#one message.
3. 8sing suc# falsified message.
!lements
1. .ffender 6ne$ t#at $ireless1 ca0le1 telegrap#1 or telep#one message $as falsified 0y an officer or employee of t#e go&ernment or an officer or employee of
a pri&ate corporation1 engaged in t#e ser&ice of sending or recei&ing $ireless1 ca0le or telep#one message;
2. 5e used suc# falsified dispatc#;
3. T#e use resulted in t#e pre?udice of a t#ird party or at least t#ere $as intent to cause suc# pre?udice.
Article 1)4. False Me$ical Certi(icates@ False Certi(icates o( Merits or Ser0ice@ Etc.
-ersons lia0le
1. -#ysician or surgeon $#o1 in connection $it# t#e practice of #is profession1 issues a false certificate (it must refer to t#e illness or in?ury of a person);
MT#e crime #ere is false medical certificate 0y a p#ysician.N
2. -u0lic officer $#o issues a false certificate of merit of ser&ice1 good conduct or similar circumstances;
MT#e crime #ere is false certificate of merit or ser&ice 0y a pu0lic officer.N
3. -ri&ate person $#o falsifies a certificate falling $it#in t#e classes mentioned in t#e t$o preceding su0di&isions.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 156
Article 1)!.
Usi* False
Certi(icates
!lements
1. T#e
follo$i
ng
issues
a false
certific
ate>
a.
-#ysici
an or
surgeo
n1 in
connec
tion
$it#
t#e
practic
e of #is
profes
sion1
issues
a false
certific
ate;
0. -u0lic officer issues a false certificate of merit of ser&ice1 good conduct or similar circumstances;
c. -ri&ate person falsifies a certificate falling $it#in t#e classes mentioned in t#e t$o preceding su0di&isions.
2. .ffender 6no$s t#at t#e certificate $as false;
3. 5e uses t#e same.
Article 1)'. Ma.(act.ri* a$ %ossessio o( Istr.&ets or I&"le&ets (or Falsi(icatio
Acts punis#ed
1. Ma6ing or introducing into t#e -#ilippines any stamps1 dies1 mar6s1 or ot#er instruments or implements for counterfeiting or falsification;
2. -ossession $it# intent to use t#e instruments or implements for counterfeiting or falsification made in or introduced into t#e -#ilippines 0y anot#er person.
Article 1)). Us.r"atio o( A.t,orit# or O((icial F.ctios
Acts punis#ed
1. 8surpation of aut#ority;
!lements
1. .ffender 6no$ingly and falsely represents #imself;
2. As an officer1 agent or representati&e of any department or agency of t#e -#ilippine go&ernment or of any foreign go&ernment.
2. 8surpation of official functions.
!lements
1. .ffender performs any act;
2. -ertaining to any person in aut#ority or pu0lic officer of t#e -#ilippine go&ernment or any foreign go&ernment1 or any agency t#ereof;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 157
3. 8nder
preten
se of
official
positio
n;
4.
@it#ou
t 0eing
la$full
y
entitled
to do
so.
Article 1)/.
Usi*
Fictitio.s
Na&e a$
Coceali*
Tr.e Na&e
Acts punis#ed
1. 8sing
fictitious name
!lements
1. .ffender uses a name ot#er t#an #is real name;
2. 5e uses t#e fictitious name pu0licly;
3. -urpose of use is to conceal a crime1 to e&ade t#e e4ecution of a ?udgment or to cause damage Mto pu0lic interest / 2eyesN.

2. Concealing true name
!lements
1. .ffender conceals #is true name and ot#er personal circumstances;
2. -urpose is only to conceal #is identity.
Co&&o+ealt, Act No. 143 :Re*.lati* t,e Use o( Aliases>
Co person s#all use any name different from t#e one $it# $#ic# #e $as registered at 0irt# in t#e office of t#e local ci&il registry1 or $it# $#ic# #e $as registered in t#e
0ureau of immigration upon entry; or suc# su0stitute name as may #a&e 0een aut#ori:ed 0y a competent court.
!4ception> -seudonym solely for literary1 cinema1 tele&ision1 radio1 or ot#er entertainment and in at#letic e&ents $#ere t#e use of pseudonym is a normally accepted
practice.
Article 1)1. Ille*al Use o( Ui(or&s or Isi*ia
!lements
1. .ffender ma6es use of insignia1 uniforms or dress;

2. T#e insignia1 uniforms or dress pertains to an office not #eld 0y suc# person or a class of persons of $#ic# #e is not a mem0er;
3. <aid insignia1 uniform or dress is used pu0licly and improperly.
@earing t#e uniform of an imaginary office is not punis#a0le.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 158
<o also1 an
e4act imitation
of a uniform or
dress is
unnecessary;
a colora0le
resem0lance
calculated to
decei&e t#e
common run
of people is
sufficient.
Article 1/4.
False
Testi&o#
a*aist A
De(e$at
!lements
1. T#ere
is a
crimina
l
procee
ding;
2. .ffender testifies falsely under oat# against t#e defendant t#erein;
3. .ffender $#o gi&es false testimony 6no$s t#at it is false.
4. 9efendant against $#om t#e false testimony is gi&en is eit#er ac3uitted or con&icted in a final ?udgment.
T#ree forms of false testimony
1. +alse testimony in criminal cases under Article 1'* and 1'1;
2. +alse testimony in ci&il case under Article 1'2;
3. +alse testimony in ot#er cases under Article 1'3.
Article 1/1. False Testi&o# Fa0ora9le to t,e De(e$at
!lements
1. A person gi&es false testimony;
2. %n fa&or of t#e defendant;
3. %n a criminal case.
Article 1/3. False Testi&o# i Ci0il Cases
!lements
1. Testimony gi&en in a ci&il case;
2. Testimony relates to t#e issues presented in said case;
3. Testimony is false;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 159
4. .ffender
6no$s
t#at
testimo
ny is
false;
5. Testimony
is
malicio
us and
gi&en
$it# an
intent
to
affect
t#e
issues
presen
ted in
said
case.
Article 1/8.
False
Testi&o# i
Ot,er Cases
a$ %erD.r#
i Sole&
A((ir&atio
Acts punis#ed
1. 7y falsely testifying under oat#;
2. 7y ma6ing a false affida&it.
!lements of per?ury
1. .ffender ma6es a statement under oat# or e4ecutes an affida&it upon a material matter;
2. T#e statement or affida&it is made 0efore a competent officer1 aut#ori:ed to recei&e and administer oat#s;
3. .ffender ma6es a $illful and deli0erate assertion of a false#ood in t#e statement or affida&it;
4. T#e s$orn statement or affida&it containing t#e falsity is re3uired 0y la$1 t#at is1 it is made for a legal purpose.
Article 1/4. O((eri* False Testi&o# i E0i$ece
!lements
1. .ffender offers in e&idence a false $itness or testimony;

2 5e 6no$s t#at t#e $itness or t#e testimony $as false;
3. T#e offer is made in any ?udicial or official proceeding.
Article 1/!. Mac,iatios i %.9lic A.ctios
Acts punis#ed
1. <oliciting any gift or promise as a consideration for refraining from ta6ing part in any pu0lic auction;
!lements
1. T#ere is a pu0lic auction;
2. .ffender solicits any gift or a promise from any of t#e 0idders;
3. <uc# gift or promise is t#e consideration for #is refraining from ta6ing part in t#at pu0lic auction;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 160
4.
.ffend
er #as
t#e
intent
to
cause
t#e
reducti
on of
t#e
price
of t#e
t#ing
auction
ed.
2.
Attemp
ting to
cause
0idder
s to
stay
a$ay
from
an
auction
0y
t#reats
1 gifts1
promis
es or
any
ot#er
artifice.
!lements
1. T#ere is a pu0lic auction;
2. .ffender attempts to cause t#e 0idders to stay a$ay from t#at pu0lic auction;
3. %t is done 0y t#reats1 gifts1 promises or any ot#er artifice;
4. .ffender #as t#e intent to cause t#e reduction of t#e price of t#e t#ing auctioned.
Article 1/'. Moo"olies a$ Co&9iatios i Restrait o( Tra$e
Acts punis#ed
1. Com0ination to pre&ent free competition in t#e mar6et;
!lements
1. !ntering into any contract or agreement or ta6ing part in any conspiracy or com0ination in t#e form of a trust or ot#er$ise;
2. %n restraint of trade or commerce or to pre&ent 0y artificial means free competition in t#e mar6et.
2. Monopoly to restrain free competition in t#e mar6et;
!lements
1. 7y monopoli:ing any merc#andise or o0?ect of trade or commerce1 or 0y com0ining $it# any ot#er person or persons to monopoli:e said merc#andise or
o0?ect;
2. %n order to alter t#e prices t#ereof 0y spreading false rumors or ma6ing use of any ot#er artifice;
3. To restrain free competition in t#e mar6et
3. Manufacturer1 producer1 or processor or importer com0ining1 conspiring or agreeing $it# any person to ma6e transactions pre?udicial to la$ful commerce or to
increase t#e mar6et price of merc#andise.
!lements
1. Manufacturer1 producer1 processor or importer of any merc#andise or o0?ect of commerce;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 161
2.
Com0i
nes1
conspir
es or
agrees
$it#
any
person
;
3.
-urpos
e is to
ma6e
transa
ctions
pre?udi
cial to
la$ful
comm
erce or to increase t#e mar6et price of any merc#andise or o0?ect of commerce manufactured1 produced1 processed1 assem0led or imported into t#e
-#ilippines.
Article 1/). I&"ortatio a$ Dis"ositio o( Falsel# Mar=e$ Articles or Merc,a$ise Ma$e o( Gol$@ Sil0er@ or Ot,er %recio.s Metals o( T,eir Allo#s
!lements
1. .ffender imports1 sells or disposes articles made of gold1 sil&er1 or ot#er precious metals or t#eir alloys;
2. T#e stamps1 0rands1 or mar6s of t#ose articles of merc#andise fail to indicate t#e actual fineness or 3uality of said metals or alloys;
3. .ffender 6no$s t#at t#e stamps1 0rands1 or mar6s fail to indicate t#e actual fineness or 3uality of t#e metals or alloys.
Article 1//. S.9stit.ti* a$ Alteri* Tra$e&ar=s@ Tra$e a&es@ or Ser0ice Mar=s
Acts punis#ed
1. <u0stituting t#e trade name or trademar6 of some ot#er manufacturer or dealer1 or a colora0le imitation t#ereof for t#e trade name or trademar6 of t#e real
manufacturer or dealer upon any article of commerce and selling t#e same;
2. <elling or offering for sale suc# articles of commerce 6no$ing t#at t#e trade name or trademar6 #as 0een fraudulently used;
3. 8sing or su0stituting t#e ser&ice mar6 of some ot#er person1 or a colora0le imitation of suc# mar6 n t#e sale or ad&ertising of #is ser&ices;
4. -rinting1 lit#ograp#ing or reproducing trade name1 trademar61 or ser&ice mar6 of one person or a colora0le imitation t#ereof to ena0le anot#er person to
fraudulently use t#e same 6no$ing t#e fraudulent purpose for $#ic# it is to 0e used.
Article 1/1. U(air Co&"etitio@ Fra.$.let Re*istratio o( Tra$e Na&e@ Tra$e&ar=@ or Ser0ice Mar=@ Fra.$.let Desi*atio o( Ori*i@ a$ False Descri"tio
Acts punis#ed
1. 8nfair competition;
!lements
1. 7y selling #is goods;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 162
2. ;i&ing
t#em
t#e
genera
l
appear
ance
of t#e
goods
of
anot#e
r
manuf
acturer
or
dealer;
3. T#e
genera
l appearance is s#o$n in t#e goods t#emsel&es1 or in t#e $rapping of t#eir pac6ages1 or in t#e de&ice or $ords t#erein1 or in any feature of t#eir
appearance;
4. T#ere is actual intent to decei&e t#e pu0lic or defraud a competitor.
2. +raudulent designation of origin; false description>
!lements
1. 7y affi4ing to #is goods or using in connection $it# #is ser&ices a false designation of origin1 or any false description or representation; and
2. <elling suc# goods or ser&ices.
3. +raudulent registration
!lements
1. 7y procuring fraudulently from t#e patent office;

2. T#e registration of trade name1 trademar6 or ser&ice mar6
Re".9lic Act No. /318 :A Act %rescri9i* t,e Itellect.al %ro"ert# Co$e a$ Esta9lis,i* t,e Itellect.al %ro"ert# O((ice@ %ro0i$i* (or Its %o+er a$
F.ctios@ a$ (or Ot,er %.r"oses>
Sectio 1)4. Penalties. / %ndependent of t#e ci&il and administrati&e sanctions imposed 0y la$1 a criminal penalty of imprisonment from t$o (2) years to fi&e (5)
years and a fine ranging from +ifty t#ousand pesos (- 5*1***.**) to T$o #undred t#ousand pesos (- 2**1***.**)1 s#all 0e imposed on any person $#o is found guilty of
committing any of t#e acts mentioned in <ection 1551 <ection 1' and <u0section 1).1.
Sectio 1!!. Remedies< &nfringement. / Any person $#o s#all1 $it#out t#e consent of t#e o$ner of t#e registered mar6>
155.1. 8se in commerce any reproduction1 counterfeit1 copy1 or colora0le imitation of a registered mar6 or t#e same container or a dominant feature t#ereof in
connection $it# t#e sale1 offering for sale1 distri0ution1 ad&ertising of any goods or ser&ices including ot#er preparatory steps necessary to carry out t#e sale of any goods
or ser&ices on or in connection $it# $#ic# suc# use is li6ely to course confusion1 or to cause mista6e1 or to decei&e; or
155.2. 2eproduce1 counterfeit1 copy or colora0ly imitate a registered mar6 or a dominant feature t#ereof and apply suc# reproduction1 counterfeit1 copy or
colora0le imitation to la0els1 signs1 prints1 pac6ages1 $rappers1 receptacles or ad&ertisement intended to 0e used in commerce upon or in connection $it# t#e sale1
offering for sale1 distri0ution1 or ad&ertising of goods or ser&ices on or in connection $it# $#ic# suc# use is li6ely to cause confusion1 or to cause mista6e1 or to decei&e
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 163
s#all 0e lia0le
in a ci&il action
for
infringement
0y t#e
registrant for
t#e remedies
#ereinafter set
fort#>
Provided, t#at
t#e
infringement
ta6es place at
t#e moment
any of t#e acts
stated in
<u0section
155.1 or t#is
su0section are
committed
regardless of
$#et#er t#ere
is actual sale
of goods or
ser&ices using
t#e infringing
material.
Sectio 1'/.
=nfair
Competition,
Rights,
Regulation
and
Remedies.
1'.1.
Any person
$#o #as
identified in t#e mind of t#e pu0lic t#e goods #e manufactures or deals in1 #is 0usiness or ser&ices from t#ose of ot#ers1 $#et#er or not a registered mar6 is employed1 #as
a property rig#t in t#e good$ill of t#e said goods1 0usiness or ser&ice so identified1 $#ic# $ill 0e protected in t#e same manner as ot#er property rig#ts.
1'.2. Any person $#o s#all employ deception or any ot#er means contrary to good fait# 0y $#ic# #e s#all pass off t#e goods manufactured 0y #im or in $#ic# #e
deals1 or #is 0usiness1 or ser&ices for t#ose of t#e one #a&ing esta0lis#ed suc# good$ill1 or $#o s#all commit any acts calculated to produce said result1 s#all 0e guilty of
unfair competition1 and s#all 0e su0?ect to an action t#erefor.
1'.3. %n particular1 and $it#out in any $ay limiting t#e scope of protection against unfair competition1 t#e follo$ing s#all 0e deemed guilty of unfair competition>
(a) Any person1 $#o is selling #is goods and gi&es t#em t#e general appearance of goods of anot#er manufacturer or dealer1 eit#er as to t#e goods
t#emsel&es or in t#e $rapping of t#e pac6ages in $#ic# t#ey are contained1 or t#e de&ices or $ords t#ereon1 on in any ot#er feature or t#eir appearance1 $#ic# $ould 0e
li6ely to influence purc#asers to 0elie&e t#at t#e goods offered are t#ose of a manufacturer or dealer1 ot#er t#an t#e actual manufacturer or dealer1 or $#o ot#er$ise
clot#es t#e goods $it# suc# appearance as s#all decei&e t#e pu0lic and defraud anot#er of #is legitimate trade1 or any su0se3uent &endor of suc# goods or any agent of
any &endor engaged in selling suc# goods $it# a li6e purpose; or
(0) Any person $#o 0y any artifice1 or de&ice1 or $#o employs any ot#er means calculated to induce t#e false 0elief t#at suc# person is offering t#e ser&ices of
anot#er $#o a#s identified suc# ser&ices in t#e mind of t#e pu0lic; or
(c) Any person $#o s#all ma6e any false statement in t#e course of trade or $#o s#all commit any ot#er act contrary to good fait# of a nature calculated to
discredit t#e goods1 0usiness or ser&ices of anot#er.
1'.4. T#e remedies pro&ided 0y <ection 151 15" and 11 s#all apply mutatis mutandis.
Sectio 1'1. 2alse @esignation or >rigin< 2alse @escription or Representation.
1).1. Any person $#o1 on or in connection $it# any goods or ser&ices1 or any container for goods1 uses in commerce any $ord1 term1 name1 sym0ol1 or de&ice1
or any com0ination t#ereof1 or any false designation of origin1 false or misleading description of fact1 or false or misleading representation of fact1 $#ic#>
(a) %s li6ely to cause confusion1 or to cause mista6e1 or to decei&e as to t#e affiliation1 connection1 or association of suc# person $it# anot#er person1 or as to
t#e origin1 sponsors#ip1 or appro&al of #is or #er goods1 ser&ices1 or commercial acti&ities 0y anot#er person; or
(0) %n commercial ad&ertising or promotion1 misrepresents t#e nature1 c#aracteristics1 3ualities1 or geograp#ic origin of #is or #er or anot#er person,s goods1
ser&ices or commercial acti&ities1 s#all 0e lia0le to a ci&il action for damages and in?unction pro&ided in <ection 15 and 15" of t#is Act 0y any person $#o 0elie&es t#at #e
or s#e is or li6ely to 0e damaged 0y suc# act.
TITLE 2. CRIMES RELATI2E TO O%IUM AND OTHER %ROHIAITED DRUGS
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 164
Articles 1)*1
1)11 1)21 1)3
and1)4 of t#e
2e&ised -enal
Code #a&e
0een repealed
0y Re".9lic
Act No. '43!
:T,e
Da*ero.s
Dr.*s Act o(
11)3>@ as
amended 0y
-residential
9ecree Co.
1'3 and
furt#er
amended 0y
2epu0lic Act
Co. "5).
Acts punis#ed
0y t#e
2epu0lic Act
Co. 425
1. %mportatio
n of
pro#i0i
ted
drugs;
2. <ale1 administration1 deli&ery1 distri0ution and transportation of pro#i0ited drugs;
3. Maintenance of a den1 di&e or resort for pro#i0ited drug users;
4. 7eing employees and &isitors of pro#i0ited drug den;
5. Manufacture of pro#i0ited drugs;
. -ossession or use of pro#i0ited drugs;
". Culti&ation of plants $#ic# are sources of pro#i0ited drugs;
'. +ailure to comply $it# t#e pro&isions of t#e Act relati&e to t#e 6eeping of records of prescriptions1 sales1 purc#ases1 ac3uisitions andOor deli&eries of pro#i0ited drugs;
). 8nla$ful prescription of pro#i0ited drugs;
1*. 8nnecessary prescription of pro#i0ited drugs;
11. -ossession of opium pipe and ot#er parap#ernalia for pro#i0ited drugs;
12. 8naut#ori:ed importation1 manufacture1 sale administration1 dispensation1 deli&ery1 transportation1 distri0ution1 possession or use of regulated drugs1 failure to
comply $it# t#e pro&isions of t#e Act relati&e to t#e 6eeping of records of prescriptions1 sales1 purc#ases1 ac3uisitions andOor deli&eries1 unla$ful prescription1
unnecessary prescription of regulated drugs1 and maintenance of a den1 di&e or resort for regulated drug users.
TITLE 2I. CRIMES AGAINST %UALIC MORALS
Crimes against pu0lic morals
1. ;am0ling (Art. 1)5);
2. %mportation1 sale and possession of lottery tic6ets or ad&ertisements (Art. 1));
3. 7etting in sport contests (Art. 1)");
4. %llegal 0etting on #orse races (Art. 1)');
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 165
5. %llegal
coc6fig
#ting
(Art.
1)));
. ;ra&e
scanda
l (Art.
2**);
". %mmoral
doctrin
es1
o0scen
e
pu0lica
tions
and
e4#i0iti
ons
(Art.
2*1);
and
'. (agrancy
and
prostit
ution
(Art.
2*2).
Article 11!.
W,at Acts
Are
%.is,a9le i
Ga&9li*
Acts punis#ed
1. Ta6ing part directly or indirectly in /
a. any game of monte1 ?ueteng1 or any ot#er form of lottery1 policy1 0an6ing1 or percentage game1 dog races1 or any ot#er game or sc#eme t#e results of $#ic#
depend $#olly or c#iefly upon c#ance or #a:ard; or $#erein $agers consisting of money1 articles of &alue1 or representati&e of &alue are made; or
0. t#e e4ploitation or use of any ot#er mec#anical in&ention or contri&ance to determine 0y c#ance t#e loser or $inner of money or any o0?ect or
representati&e of &alue;
2. Jno$ingly permitting any form of gam0ling to 0e carried on in any place o$ned or controlled 0y t#e offender;
3. 7eing maintainer1 conductor1 or 0an6er in a game of ?ueteng or similar game;
4. Jno$ingly and $it#out la$ful purpose possessing lottery list1 paper1 or ot#er matter containing letters1 figures1 signs or sym0ol $#ic# pertain to or are in any
manner used in t#e game of ?ueteng or any similar game.
Article 11'. I&"ortatio@ Sale a$ %ossessio o( Lotter# Tic=ets or A$0ertise&ets
Acts punis#ed
1. %mporting into t#e -#ilippines from any foreign place or port any lottery tic6et or ad&ertisement; or

2. <elling or distri0uting t#e same in conni&ance $it# t#e importer;
3. -ossessing1 6no$ingly and $it# intent to use t#em1 lottery tic6ets or ad&ertisements; or
4. <elling or distri0uting t#e same $it#out conni&ance $it# t#e importer of t#e same.
Cote t#at possession of any lottery tic6et or ad&ertisement is prima facie e&idence of an intent to sell1 distri0ute or use t#e same in t#e -#ilippines.
Article 11). Aetti* i S"ort Cotests
T#is article #as 0een repealed 0y %resi$etial Decree No. 4/8 :Aetti*@ Ga&e;(i?i* or %oit;s,a0i* a$ Mac,iatios i S"ort Cotests>E
Sectio 3. :etting, gamefixing, pointshaving or game machination unlawful. / ;ameBfi4ing1 pointBs#a&ing1 game mac#ination1 as defined in t#e preceding
section1 in connection $it# t#e games of 0as6et0all1 &olley0all1 soft0all1 0ase0all; c#ess1 0o4ing 0outs1 ?aiBalia1 sipa1 pelota and all ot#er sports contests1 games or races;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 166
as $ell as
0etting t#erein
e4cept as may
0e aut#ori:ed
0y la$1 is
#ere0y
declared
unla$ful.
Article 11/.
Ille*al
Aetti* o
Horse Race
Acts punis#ed
1. 7etting on
#orse
races
during
period
s not
allo$e
d 0y
la$;
2. Maintaining or employing a totali:er or ot#er de&ice or sc#eme for 0etting on races or reali:ing profit t#erefrom during t#e periods not allo$ed 0y la$.
@#en #orse races not allo$ed
1. Fuly 4 (2epu0lic Act Co. 13");
2. 9ecem0er 3* (2epu0lic Act Co. 22));
3. Any registration or &oting days (2epu0lic Act Co. 1'*1 2e&ised !lection Code); and
4. 5oly T#ursday and ;ood +riday (2epu0lic Act Co. )4).
Article 111. Ille*al Coc=(i*,ti*
T#is article #as 0een modified or repealed 0y %resi$etial Decree No. 441 :T,e Coc=(i*,ti* La+ o( 11)4>E
• .nly allo$s one coc6pit per municipality1 unless t#e population e4ceeds 1**1*** in $#ic# case t$o coc6pits may 0e esta0lis#ed;
• Coc6fig#ts can only 0e #eld in licensed coc6pits on <undays and legal #olidays and local fiestas for not more t#an t#ree days;
• Also allo$ed during pro&incial1 municipal1 city1 industrial1 agricultural fairs1 carni&als1 or e4position not more t#an t#ree days;
• Coc6fig#ting not allo$ed on 9ecem0er 3*1 Fune 121 Co&em0er 3*1 5oly T#ursday1 ;ood +riday1 !lection or 2eferendum 9ay1 and registration days for
referendums and elections;
• .nly municipal and city mayors are allo$ed to issue licenses for suc#.
%resi$etial Decree No. 1'43 :Si&"li(#i* a$ %ro0i$i* Sti((er %ealties (or 2iolatios o( %,ili""ie Ga&9li* La+s>
Sectio 1. 7iolations and Penalties. T#e penalty of prision mayor in its medium degree or a fine ranging from +i&e 5undred -esos to T$o T#ousand -esos and
in case of recidi&ism t#e penalty of prision correccional in its medium degree or a fine of ranging from .ne T#ousand -esos to <i4 T#ousand -esos s#all 0e imposed
upon>
(a) Any person ot#er t#an t#ose referred to in t#e succeeding su0section $#o in any manner1 s#all directly or indirectly ta6e part in any game of coc6fig#ting1
?ueteng1 0oo6ies (?aiB alai or #orse racing to include game fi4ing) and ot#er lotteries1 cara y cru: or pompiang and t#e li6e1 0lac6 ?ac61 luc6y nine1 HpusoyI or 2ussian -o6er1
monte1 0accarat and ot#er card games1 pal6 3ue1 domino1 ma#?ong1 #ig# and lo$1 slot mac#ines1 roulette1 pin0all and ot#er mec#anical in&entories or de&ices1 dog racing1
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 167
0oat racing1
car raising
and ot#er
races1
0as6et0all1
&olley0all1
0o4ing1 se&enB
ele&en dice
games and
t#e li6e and
ot#er contests
to include
game fi4ing1
point s#a&ing
and ot#er
mac#inations
0an6ing or
percentage
game1 or any
ot#er game or
sc#eme1
$#et#er upon
c#ance or
s6ill1 $#ic# do
not #a&e a
franc#ise from
t#e national
go&ernment1
$#erein
$agers
consisting of
money1
articles of
&alue of
representati&e
of &alue are
made;
(0)
Any
person $#o s#all 6no$ingly permit any form of gam0ling referred to in t#e preceding su0di&ision to 0e carried on in in#a0ited or unin#a0ited places or any 0uilding1 &essel
or ot#er means of transportation o$ned or controlled 0y #im. %f t#e place $#ere gam0ling is carried on #as a reputation of a gam0ling place or t#at pro#i0ited gam0ling is
fre3uently carried on t#erein or t#e place is a pu0lic or go&ernment 0uilding or 0arangay #all1 t#e culprit s#all 0e punis#ed 0y t#e penalty pro&ided for in its ma4imum
period and a fine of <i4 T#ousand -esos.
T#e penalty of prision correccional in its ma4imum degree and a fine of <i4 T#ousand -esos s#all 0e imposed upon t#e maintainer1 conductor of t#e a0o&e
gam0ling sc#emes.
T#e penalty of prision mayor in its medium degree and temporary a0solute dis3ualification and a fine of <i4 T#ousand -esos s#all 0e imposed if t#e maintainer1
conductor or 0an6er is a go&ernment official1 or if a player1 promoter1 referee1 umpire1 ?udge or coac# in cases of gameBfi4ing1 pointBs#a&ing and ot#er game mac#ination.
T#e penalty of prision correccional in its medium degree and a fine ranging from +i&e 5undred pesos to T$o T#ousand -esos s#all 0e imposed upon any person
$#o s#all 6no$ingly and $it#out la$ful purpose in any #our of any day s#all #a&e in #is possession any lottery list1 paper1 or ot#er matter containing letter1 figures1 signs or
sym0ols $#ic# pertain to or in any manner used in t#e game of ?ueteng1 ?aiBalai or #orse racing 0oo6ies and similar game or lottery $#ic# #as ta6en place or a0out to ta6e
place.
Sectio 3. :arangay >fficial. + Any 0arangay official in $#ose ?urisdiction suc# gam0ling #ouse is found and $#ic# #ouse #as t#e reputation of a gam0ling
place s#all suffer t#e penalty of prision correccional in its medium period and a fine ranging from +i&e 5undred to T$o T#ousand -esos and temporary a0solute
dis3ualifications.
.hile the acts under the Revised Penal Code are still punished under the new law, yet the concept of gambling under it has been changed by the new gambling law.
:efore, the Revised Penal Code considered the s4ill of the player in classifying whether a game is gambling or not. :ut under the new gambling law, the s4ill of the
players is immaterial.
!ny game is considered gambling where there are bets or wagers placed with the hope to win a pri3e therefrom.
=nder this law, even sports contents li4e boxing, would be gambling insofar as those who are betting therein are concerned. =nder the old penal code, if the s4ill of the
player outweighs the chance or ha3ard involved in winning the game, the game is not considered gambling but a sport. &t was because of this that betting in boxing and
bas4etball games proliferated.
E=nless authori3ed by a franchise, any form of gambling is illegal.F 5o said the court in the recent resolution of the case against the operation of jaialai.
There are socalled parlor games which have been exempted from the operation of the decree li4e when the games are played during a wa4e to 4eep the mourners
awa4e at night. Pursuant to a memorandum circular issued by the )xecutive :ranch, the offshoot of the exemption is the intentional prolonging of the wa4e of the dead
by gambling lords.
!s a general rule, betting or wagering determines whether a game is gambling or not. )xceptions' These are games which are expressly prohibited even without bets.
0onte, jueteng or any form of lottery< dog races< slot machines< these are habitforming and addictive to players, bringing about the pernicious effects to the family and
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 168
economic life
of the players.
0ere
possession of
lottery tic4ets
or lottery lists
is a crime
punished also
as part of
gambling.
However, it is
necessary to
ma4e a
distinction
whether a
tic4et or list
refers to a
past date or to
a future date.
&llustration'
C was
accused one
night and
found in his
possession
was a list of
jueteng. &f the
date therein
refers to the
past, C cannot
be convicted
of gambling or
illegal
possession of
lottery list
without
proving that
such game was indeed played on the date stated. 0ere possession is not enough. &f the date refers to the future, C can be convicted by the mere possession with intent
to use. This will already bring about criminal liability and there is no need to prove that the game was played on the date stated. &f the possessor was caught, chances
are he will not go on with it anymore.
There are two criteria as to when the lottery is in fact becomes a gambling game'
(. &f the public is made to pay not only for the merchandise that he is buying, but also for the chance to win a pri3e out of the lottery, lottery becomes a gambling
game. Public is made to pay a higher price.
". &f the merchandise is not saleable because of its inferior 9uality, so that the public actually does not buy them, but with the lottery the public starts patroni3ing such
merchandise. &n effect, the public is paying for the lottery and not for the merchandise, and therefore the lottery is a gambling game. Public is not made to pay a
higher price.
&llustrations'
(1) ! certain supermar4et wanted to increase its sales and sponsored a lottery where valuable prices are offered at sta4e. To defray the cost of the prices offered in
the lottery, the management increased their prices of the merchandise by (; cents each. .henever someone buys from that supermar4et, he pays (; cents more
for each merchandise and for his purchase, he gets a coupon which is to be dropped at designated drop boxes to be raffled on a certain period.
The increase of the price is to answer for the cost of the valuable prices that will be covered at sta4e. The increase in the price is the consideration for the chance
to win in the lottery and that ma4es the lottery a gambling game.
:ut if the increase in prices of the articles or commodities was not general, but only on certain items and the increase in prices is not the same, the fact that a
lottery is sponsored does not appear to be tied up with the increase in prices, therefore not illegal.
!lso, in case of manufacturers, you have to determine whether the increase in the price was due to the lottery or brought about by the normal price increase. &f
the increase in price is brought about by the normal price increase Heconomic factorI that even without the lottery the price would be li4e that, there is no
consideration in favor of the lottery and the lottery would not amount to a gambling game.
&f the increase in the price is due particularly to the lottery, then the lottery is a gambling game. !nd the sponsors thereof may be prosecuted for illegal gambling
under Presidential @ecree ,o. (-;".
#"% The merchandise is not really saleable because of its inferior 9uality. ! certain manufacturer, :hey Company, manufacture cigarettes which is not saleable
because the same is irritating to the throat, sponsored a lottery and a coupon is inserted in every pac4 of cigarette so that one who buys it shall have a chance to
participate. @ue to the coupons, the public started buying the cigarette. !lthough there was no price increase in the cigarettes, the lottery can be considered a
gambling game because the buyers were really after the coupons not the low 9uality cigarettes.
&f without the lottery or raffle, the public does not patroni3e the product and starts to patroni3e them only after the lottery or raffle, in effect the public is paying for
the price not the product.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 169
=nder this
decree, a
barangay
captain who is
responsible
for the
existence of
gambling
dens in their
own locality
will be held
liable and
dis9ualified
from office if
he fails to
prosecute
these
gamblers. :ut
this is not
being
implemented.
/ambling, of
course, is
legal when
authori3ed by
law.
2undraising
campaigns
are not
gambling.
They are for
charitable purposes but they have to obtain a permit from @epartment of 5ocial .elfare and @evelopment. This includes concerts for causes, Christmas caroling, and the
li4e.
Article 344. Gra0e Sca$al
!lements
1. .ffender performs an act or acts;
2. <uc# act or acts 0e #ig#ly scandalous as offending against decency or good customs;

3. T#e #ig#ly scandalous conduct is not e4pressly falling $it#in any ot#er article of t#is Code; and

4. T#e act or acts complained of 0e committed in a pu0lic place or $it#in t#e pu0lic 6no$ledge or &ie$.
&n grave scandal, the scandal involved refers to moral scandal offensive to decency, although it does not disturb public peace. :ut such conduct or act must be open to
the public view.
&n alarms and scandals, the scandal involved refers to disturbances of the public tran9uility and not to acts offensive to decency.
!ny act which is notoriously offensive to decency may bring about criminal liability for the crime of grave scandal provided such act does not constitute some other crime
under the Revised Penal Code. /rave scandal is a crime of last resort.
@istinction should be made as to the place where the offensive act was committed, whether in the public place or in a private place'
#(% &n public place, the criminal liability arises irrespective of whether the immoral act is open to the public view. &n short public view is not re9uired.
#"% .hen act offensive to decency is done in a private place, public view or public 4nowledge is re9uired.
Public view does not re9uire numerous persons. )ven if there was only one person who witnessed the offensive act for as long as the third person was not an intruder,
grave scandal is committed provided the act does not fall under any other crime in the Revised Penal Code.
&llustrations'
#(% ! man and a woman enters a movie house which is a public place and then goes to the dar4est part of the balcony and while there the man started performing
acts of lasciviousness on the woman.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 170
&f it is
agains
t the
will of
the
woma
n, the
crime
would
be
acts of
lascivi
ousne
ss.
:ut if
there
is
mutual
ity, this
constit
utes
grave
scand
al.
Public
view is
not
necess
ary so
long
as it is
perfor
med in
a
public
place.
#"% ! man and a woman went to Auneta and slept there. They covered themselves their blan4et and made the grass their conjugal bed.
This is grave scandal.
#6% &n a certain apartment, a lady tenant had the habit of undressing in her room without shutting the blinds. 5he does this every night at about eight in the evening.
5o that at this hour of the night, you can expect people outside gathered in front of her window loo4ing at her silhouette. 5he was charged of grave scandal. Her
defense was that she was doing it in her own house.
&t is no defense that she is doing it in her private home. &t is still open to the public view.
#*% &n a particular building in 0a4ati which stands right next to the house of a young lady who goes sunbathing in her poolside. )very morning several men in the
upper floors would stic4 their heads out to get a full view of said lady while in her twopiece swimsuit. The lady was then charged with grave scandal. Her defense
was that it is her own private pool and it is those men loo4ing down at her who are malicious.
This is an act which even though done in a private place is nonetheless open to public view.
Article 341. I&&oral Doctries@ O9scee %.9licatios a$ E?,i9itios a$ I$ecet S,o+s
Acts punis#ed
1. T#ose $#o s#all pu0licly e4pound or proclaim doctrines openly contrary to pu0lic morals;
2. a. T#e aut#ors of o0scene literature1 pu0lis#ed $it# t#eir 6no$ledge in any form1 t#e editors pu0lis#ing suc# literature; and t#e o$nersOoperators of t#e
esta0lis#ment selling t#e same;
b. Those who, in theaters, fairs, cinematographs, or any other pace, e!hibit in"ecent or immora pays, scenes, acts, or shows, it being
#n"erstoo" that the obscene iterat#re or in"ecent or immora pays, scenes, acts or shows, whether i$e or in %m, which are proscribe" by
$irt#e hereof, sha inc#"e those which& '1( gorify criminas or con"one crimes) '2( ser$e no other p#rpose b#t to satisfy the mar*et for
$ioence, #st or pornography) '3( o+en" any race, or reigion) '4( ten" to abet tra,c in an" #se of prohibite" "r#gs) an" '5( are contrary to
la$1 pu0lic order1 morals1 good customs1 esta0lis#ed policies1 la$ful orders1 decrees and edicts; and
3. T#ose $#o s#all sell1 gi&e a$ay1 or e4#i0it films1 prints1 engra&ings1 sculptures1 or literature $#ic# are offensi&e to morals.
Article 343. 2a*rats a$ %rostit.tesC %ealt#
(agrants
1. Any person #a&ing no apparent means of su0sistence1 $#o #as t#e p#ysical a0ility to $or6 and $#o neglects to apply #imself or #erself to some la$ful calling;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 171
2. Any
person
found
loiterin
g
a0out
pu0lic
or
semiB
pu0lic
0uildin
gs or
places
or
trampli
ng or
$ande
ring
a0out
t#e
countr
y or
t#e
streets
$it#out
&isi0le
means
of
suppor
t;

3. Any idle or dissolute person $#o ledges in #ouses of ill fame;

4. 2uffians or pimps and t#ose $#o #a0itually associate $it# prostitutes;

5. Any person $#o1 not 0eing included in t#e pro&isions of ot#er articles of t#is Code1 s#all 0e found loitering in any in#a0ited or unin#a0ited place 0elonging to anot#er
$it#out any la$ful or ?ustifia0le purpose;
. -rostitutes1 $#o are $omen $#o1 for money or profit1 #a0itually indulge in se4ual intercourse or lasci&ious conduct.
Prostitutes are women who, for money or profit, habitually indulge in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed to be prostitutes.
Test of >bscenity' .hether or not the material charged as obscene has the tendency to deprave and corrupt the minds of those open to the influence thereof, or into
whose hands such material may come to #Lottinger Rule%.
The test is objective. &t is more on the effect upon the viewer and not alone on the conduct of the performer.
&f the material has the tendency to deprave and corrupt the mind of the viewer then the same is obscene and where such obscenity is made publicly, criminal liability
arises.
:ecause there is a government body which deliberates whether a certain exhibition, movies and plays is pornographic or not, if such body approves the wor4 the same
should not be charged under this title. :ecause of this, the test of obscenity may be obsolete already. &f allowed by the 0ovies and Television Review and Classification
:oard #0TRC:%, the 9uestion is moot and academic.
The law is not concerned with the moral of one person. !s long as the pornographic matter or exhibition is made privately, there is no crime committed under the Revised
Penal Code because what is protected is the morality of the public in general. Third party is there. Performance of one to another is not.
&llustration'
! sexy dancing performed for a 8; year old is not obscene anymore even if the dancer strips na4ed. :ut if performed for a ($ year old 4id, then it will corrupt the 4idDs
mind. #!pply Lottinger Rule here.%
&n some instances though, the 5upreme Court did not stic4 to this test. &t also considered the intention of the performer.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 172
&n Peo!le v.
A!aric
i, the
accuse
d was
a
perfor
mer in
the
defunc
t
Pacific
Theatr
e, a
movie
house
which
opens
only at
midnig
ht.
5he
was
arreste
d
becau
se she
was
dancin
g in a
Ediffere
nt 4ind
of
way.F
5he
was
not
really
nude.
5he
was wearing some sort of an abbreviated bi4ini with a flimsy cloth over it. However, on her waist hung a string with a ball reaching down to her private part so that
every time she gyrates, it arouses the audience when the ball would actually touch her private part. The defense set up by !parici was that she should not be
criminally liable for as a matter of fact, she is better dressed than the other dancers. The 5upreme Court ruled that it is not only the display of the body that gives it
a depraved meaning but rather the movement of the body coupled with the Etomtom drumsF as bac4ground. ,udity alone is not the real scale. #Reaction Test%
&llustration'
! sidewal4 vendor was arrested and prosecuted for violation of !rticle ";(. &t appears that the fellow was selling a ballpen where one who buys the ballpen can peep into
the top of the pen and see a girl dancing in it. He put up the defense that he is not the manufacturer and that he was merely selling it to earn a living. The fact of selling
the ballpen was being done at the expense of public morals. >ne does not have to be the manufacturer to be criminally liable. This holds true for those printing or selling
Playboy 0aga3ines.
The common concept of a vagrant is a person who loiters n public places without any visible means of livelihood and without any lawful purpose.
.hile this may be the most common form of vagrancy, yet even millionaires or one who has more that enough for his livelihood can commit vagrancy by habitually
associating with prostitutes, pimps, ruffians, or by habitually lodging in houses of illrepute.
7agrancy is not only a crime of the privileged or the poor. The law punishes the act involved here as a stepping stone to the commission of other crimes. .ithout this
article, law enforcers would have no way of chec4ing a person loitering in the wrong place in the wrong time. The purpose of the law is not simply to punish a person
because he has no means of livelihood< it is to prevent further criminality. =se this when someone loiters in front of your house every night.
!ny person found wandering in an estate belonging to another whether public or private without any lawful purpose also commits vagrancy, unless his acts constitutes
some other crime in the Revised Penal Code.
6.estio 7 As+er
%f a person is found $andering in an estate 0elonging to anot#er1 $#et#er pu0lic or pri&ate1 $it#out any la$ful purpose1 $#at ot#er crimes may 0e committed=
.hen a person is apprehended loitering inside an estate belonging to another, the following crimes may be committed'
#(% Trespass to property under !rticle "1( if the estate is fenced and there is a clear prohibition against entering, but the offender entered without the consent of the
owner or overseer thereof. .hat is referred to here is estate, not dwelling.
#"% !ttempted theft under !rticle 6;1, paragraph 6, if the estate is fenced and the offender entered the same to hunt therein or fish from any waters therein or to
gather any farm products therein without the consent of the owner or overseer thereof<
#6% 7agrancy under !rticle ";" if the estate is not fenced or there is no clear prohibition against entering.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 173
Prostitution
and vagrancy
are both
punished by
the same
article, but
prostitution
can only be
committed by
a woman.
The term
prostitution is
applicable to a
woman who
for profit or
money
habitually
engages in
sexual or
lascivious
conduct. !
man if he
engages in
the same
conduct + sex
for money + is
not a
prostitute, but
a vagrant.
&n law the
mere
indulging in
lascivious
conduct
habitually
because of
money or gain would amount to prostitution, even if there is no sexual intercourse. 7irginity is not a defense. Habituality is the controlling factor< is has to be more than
one time.
There cannot be prostitution by conspiracy. >ne who conspires with a woman in the prostitution business li4e pimps, taxi drivers or solicitors of clients are guilty of the
crime under !rticle 6*( for white slavery.
TITLE 2II. CRIMES COMMITTED AY %UALIC OFFICERS
Crimes committed 0y pu0lic officers
1. Jno$ingly rendering un?ust ?udgment (Art. 2*4);
2. Fudgment rendered t#roug# negligence (Art. 2*5);
3. 8n?ust interlocutory order (Art. 2*);
4. Malicious delay in t#e administration of ?ustice (Art. 2*");
5. -rosecution of offenses; negligence and tolerance (Art. 2*');
. 7etrayal of trust 0y an attorney or solicitor / 2e&elation of secrets (Art. 2*));
". 9irect 0ri0ery (Art. 21*);
'. %ndirect 0ri0ery (Art. 211);
). Dualified 0ri0ery (Art. 211BA);
1*. Corruption of pu0lic officials (Art. 212);
11. +rauds against t#e pu0lic treasury and similar offenses (Art. 213);
12. .t#er frauds (Art. 214);
13. -ro#i0ited transactions (Art. 215);
14. -ossession of pro#i0ited interest 0y a pu0lic officer (Art. 21);
15. Mal&ersation of pu0lic funds or property / -resumption of mal&ersation (Art. 21")
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 174
1. +ailure
of
accoun
ta0le
officer
to
render
accoun
ts (Art.
21');
1". +ailure
of a
respon
si0le
pu0lic
officer
to
render
accoun
ts
0efore
lea&ing
t#e
countr
y (Art.
21));
1'. %llegal
use of
pu0lic
funds
or
propert
y (Art.
22*);
1). +ailure to ma6e deli&ery of pu0lic funds or property (Art. 221);
2*. Conni&ing $it# or consenting to e&asion (Art. 223);
21. !&asion t#roug# negligence (Art. 224);
22. !scape of prisoner under t#e custody of a person not a pu0lic officer (Art. 225);
23. 2emo&al1 concealment or destruction of documents (Art. 22);
24. .fficer 0rea6ing seal (Art. 22");
25. .pening of closed documents (Art. 22');
2. 2e&elation of secrets 0y an officer (Art. 22));
2". -u0lic officer re&ealing secrets of pri&ate indi&idual (Art. 23*);
2'. .pen diso0edience (Art. 231);
2). 9iso0edience to order of superior officer $#en said order $as suspended 0y inferior officer (Art. 232);
3*. 2efusal of assistance (Art. 233);
31. 2efusal to disc#arge electi&e office (Art. 234);
32. Maltreatment of prisoners (Art. 235);
33. Anticipation of duties of a pu0lic office (Art. 23);
34. -rolonging performance of duties and po$ers (Art. 23");
35. A0andonment of office or position (Art. 23');
3. 8surpation of legislati&e po$ers (Art. 23));
3". 8surpation of e4ecuti&e functions (Art. 24*);
3'. 8surpation of ?udicial functions (Art. 241);
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 175
3).
9iso0e
ying
re3ues
t for
dis3ual
ificatio
n (Art.
242);
4*. .rders
or
re3ues
ts 0y
e4ecuti
&e
officers
to any
?udicial
aut#ori
ty (Art.
243);
41.
8nla$f
ul
appoin
tments
(Art.
244);
and
42. A0uses against c#astity (Art. 245).
The designation of the title is misleading. Crimes under this title can be committed by public officers or a nonpublic officer, when the latter become a conspirator with a
public officer, or an accomplice, or accessory to the crime. The public officer has to be the principal.
&n some cases, it can even be committed by a private citi3en alone such as in !rticle "?$ #infidelity in the custody of a prisoner where the offender is not a public officer% or
in !rticle """ #malversation%.
2e3usites to 0e a pu0lic officer under Article 348
1. Ta6ing part in t#e performance of pu0lic functions in t#e go&ernment;
or
-erforming in said go&ernment or in any of its 0ranc#es pu0lic duties as an employee1 agent or su0ordinate official1 or any ran6 or class;
2. 5is aut#ority to ta6e part in t#e performance of pu0lic functions or to perform pu0lic duties must 0e /
a. 7y direct pro&ision of t#e la$;
0. 7y popular election; or
c. 7y appointment 0y competent aut#ority.
>riginally, Title 7&& used the phrase Epublic officer or employeeF but the latter word has been held meaningless and useless because in criminal law, Epublic officerF covers
all public servants, whether an official or an employee, from the highest to the lowest position regardless of ran4 or class< whether appointed by competent authority or by
popular election or by direct provision of law.
=nder Republic !ct ,o. 6;(8 #The !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct%, the term public officer is broader and more comprehensive because it includes all persons
whether an official or an employee, temporary or not, classified or not, contractual or otherwise. !ny person who receives compensation for services rendered is a public
officer.
:reach of oath of office parta4es of three forms'
#(% 0alfeasance when a public officer performs in his public office an act prohibited by law.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 176
)xamp
le' bribery.
#"%
0isfea
sance
when
a
public
officer
perfor
ms
official
acts in
the
manne
r not in
accord
ance
with
what
the law
prescri
bes.
#6% ,onfeasance when a public officer willfully refrains or refuses to perform an official duty which his office re9uires him to perform.
Article 344. Fo+i*l# Re$eri* UD.st <.$*&et
1. .ffender is a ?udge;
2. 5e renders a ?udgment in a case su0mitted to #im for decision;
3. Fudgment is un?ust;
4. T#e ?udge 6no$s t#at #is ?udgment is un?ust .
Article 34!. <.$*&et Re$ere$ t,ro.*, Ne*li*ece
1. .ffender is a ?udge;
2. 5e renders a ?udgment in a case su0mitted to #im for decision;
3. T#e ?udgment is manifestly un?ust;
4. %t is due to #is inexcusable negligence or ignorance.
Article 34'. UD.st Iterloc.tor# Or$er
1. .ffender is a ?udge;
2. 5e performs any of t#e follo$ing acts>
a. Jno$ingly rendering an un?ust interlocutory order or decree; or
0. 2endering a manifestly un?ust interlocutory order or decree t#roug# ine4cusa0le negligence or ignorance.
The crime of 4nowingly rendering an unjust judgment, or 4nowingly issuing an unjust interlocutory order, may be committed only by a judge of a trial court and never of an
appellate court. The reason for this is that in appellate court, not only one magistrate renders or issues the interlocutory order. !n appellate court functions as a division
and the resolutions thereof are handed down only after deliberations among the members of a division so that it cannot be said that there is malice or inexcusable
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 177
negligence or
ignorance in
the rendering
of a judgment
or order that is
supposedly
unjust as held
by the
5upreme
Court in one
administrative
case.
There is more
injustice done
in cases of
judgment than
mere
interlocutory
order that is
why the
penalty is
higher in the
first case.
Article 34).
Malicio.s
Dela# i t,e
A$&iistratio
o( <.stice
1. .ffender is
a
?udge;
2. T#ere is a proceeding in #is court;

3. 5e delays in t#e administration of ?ustice;
4. T#e delay is malicious1 t#at is1 $it# deli0erate intent to inflict damage on eit#er party in t#e case.
0alice must be proven. 0alice is present where the delay is sought to favor one party to the prejudice of the other.
These have been interpreted by the 5upreme Court to refer only to judges of the trial court.
Article 34/. %rosec.tio o( O((esesC Ne*li*ece a$ Tolerace
Acts -unis#ed
1. Maliciously refraining from instituting prosecution against &iolators of t#e la$;
2. Maliciously tolerating t#e commission of offenses.
!lements of dereliction of duty in t#e prosecution of offenses
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or officer of t#e la$ $#o #as a duty to cause t#e prosecution of1 or to prosecute1 offenses;
2. T#ere is a dereliction of t#e duties of #is office1 t#at is1 6no$ing t#e commission of t#e crime1 #e does not cause t#e prosecution of t#e criminal1 or 6no$ing t#at a
crime is a0out to 0e committed1 #e tolerates its commission;
3. .ffender acts $it# malice and deli0erate intent to fa&or t#e &iolator of t#e la$.
! public officer engaged in the prosecution of offenders shall maliciously tolerate the commission of crimes or refrain from prosecuting offenders or violators of the law.
This crime can only be committed by a public officer whose official duty is to prosecute offenders, that is, state prosecutors. Hence, those officers who are not duty bound
to perform these obligations cannot commit this crime in the strict sense.
.hen a policeman tolerates the commission of a crime or otherwise refrains from apprehending the offender, such peace officer cannot be prosecuted for this crime but
they can be prosecuted as'
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 178
#(% !n
access
ory to
the
crime
commi
tted by
the
princip
al in
accord
ance
with
!rticle
(8,
paragr
aph 6<
or
#"% He may become a fence if the crime committed is robbery or theft, in which case he violates the !nti2encing Aaw< or
#6% He may be held liable for violating the !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct.
However, in distant provinces or municipalities where there are no municipal attorneys, the local chief of police is the prosecuting officer. &f he is the one who tolerates the
violations of laws or otherwise allows offenders to escape, he can be prosecuted under this article.
This is also true in the case of a barangay chairman. They are supposed to prosecute violators of laws within their jurisdiction. &f they do not do so, they can be
prosecuted for this crime.
Prevaricacion
This used to be a crime under the 5panish Codigo Penal, wherein a public officer regardless of his duty violates the oath of his office by not carrying out the duties of his
office for which he was sworn to office, thus, amounting to dereliction of duty.
:ut the term prevaricacion is not limited to dereliction of duty in the prosecution of offenders. &t covers any dereliction of duty whereby the public officer involved violates
his oath of office. The thrust of prevaricacion is the breach of the oath of office by the public officer who does an act in relation to his official duties.
.hile in !rticle ";1, dereliction of duty refers only to prosecuting officers, the term prevaricacion applies to public officers in general who is remiss or who is maliciously
refraining from exercising the duties of his office.
&llustration'
The offender was caught for white slavery. The policeman allowed the offender to go free for some consideration. The policeman does not violate !rticle ";1 but he
becomes an accessory to the crime of white slavery.
:ut in the crime of theft or robbery, where the policeman shared in the loot and allowed the offender to go free, he becomes a fence. Therefore, he is considered an
offender under the !nti2encing Aaw.
Relative to this crime under !rticle ";1, consider the crime of 9ualified bribery. !mong the amendments made by Republic !ct ,o. ?-$8 on the Revised Penal Code is a
new provision which reads as follows'
!rticle. "((!. Mualified :ribery + &f any public officer is entrusted with law enforcement and he refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender
who has committed a crime punishable by Reclusion Perpetua andJor death in consideration of any offer, promise, gift, or present, he shall suffer the
penalty for the offense which was not prosecuted.
&f it is the public officer who as4s or demands such gift or present, he shall suffer the penalty of death.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 179
!ctually the
crime is a 4ind
of direct
bribery where
the bribe,
offer, promise,
gift or present
has a
consideration
on the part of
the public
officer, that is
refraining from
arresting or
prosecuting
the offender in
consideration
for such offer,
promise, gift
or present. &n
a way, this
new provision
modifies
!rticle "(; of
the Revised
Penal Code
on direct
bribery.
However, the
crime of
9ualified
bribery may
be committed
only by public
officers
Eentrusted
with
enforcementF
whose official
duties authori3e then to arrest or prosecute offenders. !pparently, they are peace officers and public prosecutors since the nonfeasance refers to Earresting or
prosecuting.F :ut this crime arises only when the offender whom such public officer refrains from arresting or prosecuting, has committed a crime punishable by reclusion
perpetua andJor death. &f the crime were punishable by a lower penalty, then such nonfeasance by the public officer would amount to direct bribery, not 9ualified bribery.
&f the crime was 9ualified bribery, the dereliction of the duty punished under !rticle ";1 of the Revised Penal Code should be absorbed because said article punishes the
public officer who Emaliciously refrains from instituting prosecution for the punishment of violators of the law or shall tolerate the commission of offensesF. The dereliction
of duty referred to is necessarily included in the crime of 9ualified bribery.
>n the other hand, if the crime was direct bribery under !rticle "(; of the Revised Penal Code, the public officer involved should be prosecuted also for the dereliction of
duty, which is a crime under !rticle ";1 of the Revised Penal Code, because the latter is not absorbed by the crime of direct bribery. This is because in direct bribery,
where the public officer agreed to perform an act constituting a crime in connection with the performance of his official duties, !rticle "(; expressly provides that the
liabilty thereunder shall be Ein addition to the penalty corresponding to the crime agreed upon, if the crime shall have been committed.
&llustration'
! fiscal, for a sum of money, refrains from prosecuting a person charged before him. &f the penalty for the crime involved is reclusion perpetua, the fiscal commits
9ualified bribery. &f the crime is punishable by a penalty lower than reclusion perpetua, the crime is direct bribery.
&n the latter situation, three crimes are committed' direct bribery and dereliction of duty on the part of the fiscal< and corruption of a public officer by the giver.
Article 341. Aetra#al o( Tr.st 9# A Attore# or Solicitor - Re0elatio o( Secrets
Acts punis#ed
1. Causing damage to #is client1 eit#erP
a. 7y any malicious 0reac# of professional duty;
0. 7y ine4cusa0le negligence or ignorance.
Cote> @#en t#e attorney acts $it# malicious a0use of #is employment or ine4cusa0le negligence or ignorance1 t#ere must 0e damage to #is client.
2. 2e&ealing any of t#e secrets of #is client learned 0y #im in #is professional capacity;
3. 8nderta6ing t#e defense of t#e opposing party in t#e same case1 $it#out t#e consent of #is first client1 after #a&ing underta6en t#e defense of said first client of
after #a&ing recei&ed confidential information from said client.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 180
=nder the
rules on
evidence,
communicatio
ns made with
prospective
clients to a
lawyer with a
view to
engaging his
professional
services are
already
privileged
even though
the client
lawyer
relationship
did not
eventually
materiali3e
because the
client cannot
afford the fee
being as4ed
by the lawyer.
The lawyer
and his
secretary or
cler4 cannot
be examined
thereon.
That this
communicatio
n with a
prospective
client is
considered
privileged,
implies that the same is confidential. Therefore, if the lawyer would reveal the same or otherwise accept a case from the adverse party, he would already be violating
!rticle ";8. 0ere malicious breach without damage is not violative of !rticle ";8< at most he will be liable administratively as a lawyer, e.g., suspension or disbarment
under the Code of Professional Responsibility.
&llustration'
:, who is involved in the crime of seduction wanted !, an attorney at law, to handle his case. ! received confidential information from :. However, : cannot pay the
professional fee of !. C, the offended party, came to ! also and the same was accepted.
! did not commit the crime under !rticle ";8, although the lawyerDs act may be considered unethical. The clientlawyer relationship between ! and : was not yet
established. Therefore, there is no trust to violate because : has not yet actually engaged the services of the lawyer !. ! is not bound to :. However, if ! would reveal
the confidential matter learned by him from :, then !rticle ";8 is violated because it is enough that such confidential matters were communicated to him in his
professional capacity, or it was made to him with a view to engaging his professional services.
Here, matters that are considered confidential must have been said to the lawyer with the view of engaging his services. >therwise, the communication shall not be
considered privileged and no trust is violated.
&llustration'
! went to :, a lawyerJnotary public, to have a document notari3ed. ! narrated to : the detail of the criminal case. &f : will disclose what was narrated to him there is no
betrayal of trust since : is acting as a notary public and not as a counsel. The lawyer must have learned the confidential matter in his professional capacity.
5everal acts which would ma4e a lawyer criminally liable'
#(% 0aliciously causing damage to his client through a breach of his professional duty. The breach of professional duty must be malicious. &f it is just incidental, it
would not give rise to criminal liability, although it may be the subject of administrative discipline<
#"% Through gross ignorance, causing damage to the client<
#6% &nexcusable negligence<
#*% Revelation of secrets learned in his professional capacity<
#$% =nderta4ing the defense of the opposite party in a case without the consent of the first client whose defense has already been underta4en.
,ote that only numbers (, " and 6 must approximate malice.
! lawyer who had already underta4en the case of a client cannot later on shift to the opposing party. This cannot be done.
=nder the circumstances, it is necessary that the confidential matters or information was confided to the lawyer in the latterDs professional capacity.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 181
&t is not the
duty of the
lawyer to give
advice on the
commission of
a future crime.
&t is, therefore,
not privileged
in character.
The lawyer is
not bound by
the mandate
of privilege if
he reports
such
commission of
a future crime.
&t is only
confidential
information
relating to
crimes
already
committed
that are
covered by
the crime of
betrayal of
trust if the
lawyer should
underta4e the
case of
opposing
party or
otherwise
divulge
confidential
information of
a client.
=nder the law on evidence on privileged communication, it is not only the lawyer who is protected by the matter of privilege but also the office staff li4e the secretary.
The nominal liability under this article may be constituted either from breach of professional duties in the handling of the case or it may arise out of the confidential relation
between the lawyer and the client.
-reach o* !ro*e++ional #u).
Tardiness in the prosecution of the case for which reason the case was dismissed for being nonprosecuted< or tardiness on the part of the defense counsel leading to
declaration of default and adverse judgment.
Professional duties + Aawyer must appear on time. :ut the client must have suffered damage due to the breach of professional duty. >therwise, the lawyer cannot be
held liable.
&f the prosecutor was tardy and the case was dismissed as nonprosecuted, but he filed a motion for consideration which was granted, and the case was continued, the
lawyer is not liable, because the client did not suffer damage.
&f lawyer was neglectful in filing an answer, and his client declared in default, and there was an adverse judgment, the client suffered damages. The lawyer is liable.
-reach o* con*i#en)ial rela)ion
Revealing information obtained or ta4ing advantage thereof by accepting the engagement with the adverse party. There is no need to prove that the client suffered
damages. The mere breach of confidential relation is punishable.
&n a conjugal case, if the lawyer disclosed the confidential information to other people, he would be criminally liable even though the client did not suffer any damage.
The client who was suing his wife disclosed that he also committed acts of unfaithfulness. The lawyer tal4ed about this to a friend. He is, thus, liable.
Article 314. Direct Ari9er#
Acts punis#ed
1. Agreeing to perform1 or performing1 in consideration of any offer1 promise1 gift or present / an act constituting a crime1 in connection $it# t#e performance of #is
official duties;
2. Accepting a gift in consideration of t#e e4ecution of an act $#ic# does not constitute a crime1 in connection $it# t#e performance of #is official duty;
3. Agreeing to refrain1 or 0y refraining1 from doing somet#ing $#ic# it is #is official duty to do1 in consideration of gift or promise.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 182
!lements
1.
.ffend
er is a
pu0lic
officer
$it#in
t#e
scope
of
Article
2*3;
2.
.ffend
er
accept
s an
offer or
a
promis
e or
recei&e
s a gift
or
presen
t 0y
#imself
or
t#roug
#
anot#e
r;
3. <uc# offer or promise 0e accepted1 or gift or present recei&ed 0y t#e pu0lic officer /
a. @it# a &ie$ to committing some crime; or
0. %n consideration of t#e e4ecution of an act $#ic# does not constitute a crime1 0ut t#e act must 0e un?ust; or
c. To refrain from doing somet#ing $#ic# it is #is official duty to do.
4. T#e act $#ic# offender agrees to perform or $#ic# #e e4ecutes 0e connected $it# t#e performance of #is official duties.
&t is a common notion that when you tal4 of bribery, you refer to the one corrupting the public officer. &nvariably, the act refers to the giver, but this is wrong. :ribery refers
to the act of the receiver and the act of the giver is corruption of public official.
@istinction between direct bribery and indirect bribery
:ribery is direct when a public officer is called upon to perform or refrain from performing an official act in exchange for the gift, present or consideration given to him.
&f he simply accepts a gift or present given to him by reason of his public position, the crime is indirect bribery. :ear in mind that the gift is given Kby reason of his officeK,
not Kin considerationK thereof. 5o never use the term Econsideration.F The public officer in &ndirect bribery is not to perform any official act.
,ote however that what may begin as an indirect bribery may actually ripen into direct bribery.
&llustration'
.ithout any understanding with the public officer, a taxi operator gave an expensive suiting material to a :AT registrar. =pon receipt by the :AT registrar of his valuable
suiting material, he as4ed who the giver was. He found out that he is a taxi operator. !s far as the giver is concerned, he is giving this by reason of the office or position
of the public officer involved. &t is just indirect bribery
.
&f the :AT registrar calls up his subordinates and said to ta4e care of the taxis of the taxi operator so much so that the registration of the taxis is facilitated ahead of the
others, what originally would have been indirect bribery becomes direct bribery.
&n direct bribery, consider whether the official act, which the public officer agreed to do, is a crime or not.
&f it will amount to a crime, it is not necessary that the corruptor should deliver the consideration or the doing of the act. The moment there is a meeting of the minds, even
without the delivery of the consideration, even without the public officer performing the act amounting to a crime, bribery is already committed on the part of the public
officer. Corruption is already committed on the part of the supposed giver. The reason is that the agreement is a conspiracy involving the duty of a public officer. The
mere agreement is a felony already.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 183
&f the public
officer
commits the
act which
constitutes the
crime, he, as
well as the
corruptor shall
be liable also
for that other
crime.
&llustrations'
#(% &f the
corrupt
or
offers
a
consid
eration
to a
custodi
an of a
public record to remove certain files, the mere agreement, without delivery of the consideration, brings about the crime of direct bribery and corruption of public
official.
&f the records were actually removed, both the public officer and the corruptor will in addition to the two felonies above, will also be liable for the crime committed,
which is infidelity in the custody of the public records for which they shall be liable as principals< one as principal by inducement, the other as principal by direct
participation.
#"% ! party litigant approached the courtDs stenographer and proposed the idea of altering the transcript of stenographic notes. The court stenographer agreed and he
demanded P ",;;;.;;.
=n4nown to them, there were law enforcers who already had a tip that the court stenographer had been doing this before. 5o they were waiting for the chance to
entrap him. They were apprehended and they said they have not done anything yet.
=nder !rticle "(;, the mere agreement to commit the act, which amounts to a crime, is already bribery. That stenographer becomes liable already for
consummated crime of bribery and the party who agreed to give that money is already liable for consummated corruption, even though not a single centavo is
delivered yet and even though the stenographer had not yet made the alterations.
&f he changed the transcript, another crime is committed' falsification.
The same criterion will apply with respect to a public officer who agrees to refrain from performing his official duties. &f the refraining would give rise to a crime, such as
refraining to prosecute an offender, the mere agreement to do so will consummate the bribery and the corruption, even if no money was delivered to him. &f the refraining
is not a crime, it would only amount to bribery if the consideration be delivered to him.
&f it is not a crime, the consideration must be delivered by the corruptor before a public officer can be prosecuted for bribery. 0ere agreement, is not enough to constitute
the crime because the act to be done in the first place is legitimate or in the performance of the official duties of the public official.
=nless the public officer receives the consideration for doing his official duty, there is no bribery. &t is necessary that there must be delivery of monetary consideration.
This is so because in the second situation, the public officer actually performed what he is supposed to perform. &t is just that he would not perform what he is re9uired by
law to perform without an added consideration from the public which gives rise to the crime.
The idea of the law is that he is being paid salary for being there. He is not supposed to demand additional compensation from the public before performing his public
service. The prohibition will apply only when the money is delivered to him, or if he performs what he is supposed to perform in anticipation of being paid the money.
Here, the bribery will only arise when there is already the acceptance of the consideration because the act to be done is not a crime. 5o, without the acceptance, the
crime is not committed.
@irect bribery may be committed only in the attempted and consummated stages because, in frustrated felony, the offender must have performed all the acts of execution
which would produce the felony as a conse9uence. &n direct bribery, it is possible only if the corruptor concurs with the offender. >nce there is concurrence, the direct
bribery is already consummated. &n short, the offender could not have performed all the acts of execution to produce the felony without consummating the same.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 184
!ctually, you
cannot have a
giver unless
there is one
who is willing
to receive and
there cannot
be a receiver
unless there is
one willing to
give. 5o this
crime re9uires
two to
commit. &t
cannot be
said,
therefore, that
one has
performed all
the acts of
execution
which would
produce the
felony as a
conse9uence
but for
reasons
independent
of the will, the
crime was not
committed.
&t is now
settled,
therefore, that
the crime of bribery and corruption of public officials cannot be committed in the frustrated stage because this re9uires two to commit and that means a meeting of the
minds.
&llustrations'
#() &f the public official accepted the corrupt consideration and turned it over to his superior as evidence of the corruption, the offense is attempted corruption only and
not frustrated. The official did not agree to be corrupted.
&f the public officer did not report the same to his superior and actually accepted it, he allowed himself to be corrupted. The corruptor becomes liable for
consummated corruption of public official. The public officer also becomes e9ually liable for consummated bribery.
#"% &f a public official demanded something from a taxpayer who pretended to agree and use mar4ed money with the 4nowledge of the police, the crime of the public
official is attempted bribery. The reason is that because the giver has no intention to corrupt her and therefore, he could not perform all the acts of execution.
:e sure that what is involved is a crime of bribery, not extortion. &f it were extortion, the crime is not bribery, but robbery. The one who yielded to the demand does
not commit corruption of a public officer because it was involuntary.
Article 311. I$irect Ari9er#
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e accepts gifts;
3. T#e gifts are offered to #im 0y reason of #is office.
The public official does not underta4e to perform an act or abstain from doing an official duty from what he received. &nstead, the official simply receives or accepts gifts
or presents delivered to him with no other reason except his office or public position. This is always in the consummated stage. There is no attempted much less
frustrated stage in indirect bribery.
The 5upreme Court has laid down the rule that for indirect bribery to be committed, the public officer must have performed an act of appropriating of the gift for himself,
his family or employees. &t is the act of appropriating that signifies acceptance. 0erely delivering the gift to the public officer does not bring about the crime. >therwise it
would be very easy to remove a public officer' just deliver a gift to him.
Article 311;A. 6.ali(ie$ Ari9er#
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 185
!lements
1. .ffender is
a
pu0lic
officer
entrust
ed $it#
la$
enforc
ement;
2. 5e refrains
from
arresti
ng or
prosec
uting
an
offend
er $#o
#as
commit
ted a
crime;
3. .ffender
#as
commit
ted a
crime
punis#
a0le 0y
reclusi
on
perpet
ua
andOor
deat#;
4. .ffender refrains from arresting or prosecuting in consideration of any offer1 promise1 gift1 or present.
,ote that the penalty is 9ualified if the public officer is the one who as4s or demands such present.
%resi$etial Decree No. 4'
-residential 9ecree Co. 4 pro#i0its gi&ing and acceptance of gifts 0y a pu0lic officer or to a pu0lic officer1 e&en during anni&ersary1 or $#en t#ere is an occasion li6e
C#ristmas1 Ce$ Qear1 or any giftBgi&ing anni&ersary. T#e -residential 9ecree punis#es 0ot# recei&er and gi&er.
T#e pro#i0ition gi&ing and recei&ing gifts gi&en 0y reason of official position1 regardless of $#et#er or not t#e same is for past or future fa&ors.
T#e gi&ing of parties 0y reason of t#e promotion of a pu0lic official is considered a crime e&en t#oug# it may call for a cele0ration. T#e gi&ing of a party is not limited to
t#e pu0lic officer only 0ut also to any mem0er of #is family.
%resi$etial Decree No. )41
T#e decree grants immunity from prosecution to a pri&ate person or pu0lic officer $#o s#all &oluntarily gi&e information and testify in a case of 0ri0ery or in a case
in&ol&ing a &iolation of t#e AntiBgraft and Corrupt -ractices Act.
%t pro&ides immunity to t#e 0ri0eBgi&er pro&ided #e does t$o t#ings>
(1) 5e &oluntarily discloses t#e transaction #e #ad $it# t#e pu0lic officer constituting direct or indirect 0ri0ery1 or any ot#er corrupt transaction;
(2) 5e must $illingly testify against t#e pu0lic officer in&ol&ed in t#e case to 0e filed against t#e latter.
7efore t#e 0ri0eBgi&er may 0e dropped from t#e information1 #e #as to 0e c#arged first $it# t#e recei&er. 7efore trial1 prosecutor may mo&e for dropping 0ri0eBgi&er from
information and 0e granted immunity. 7ut first1 fi&e conditions #a&e to 0e met>
(1) %nformation must refer to consummated 0ri0ery;
(2) %nformation is necessary for t#e proper con&iction of t#e pu0lic officer in&ol&ed;
(3) T#at t#e information or testimony to 0e gi&en is not yet in t#e possession of t#e go&ernment or 6no$n to t#e go&ernment;
(4) T#at t#e information can 0e corro0orated in its material points;
(5) T#at t#e information #as not 0een con&icted pre&iously for any crime in&ol&ing moral turpitude.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 186
T#ese
conditions are
analogous to
t#e conditions
under t#e
<tate @itness
2ule under
Criminal
-rocedure.
T#e immunity
granted t#e
0ri0eBgi&er is
limited only to
t#e illegal
transaction
$#ere t#e
informant
ga&e
&oluntarily t#e
testimony. %f
t#ere $ere
ot#er
transactions
$#ere t#e
informant also
participated1
#e is not
immune from
prosecution.
T#e immunity
in one
transaction
does not
e4tend to
ot#er
transactions.
T#e immunity attac#es only if t#e information gi&en turns out to 0e true and correct. %f t#e same is false1 t#e pu0lic officer may e&en file criminal and ci&il actions against
t#e informant for per?ury and t#e immunity under t#e decree $ill not protect #im.
Re".9lic Act No. )4/4 :%l.$er>
-lunder is a crime defined and penali:ed under 2epu0lic Act Co. "*'*1 $#ic# 0ecame effecti&e in 1))1. T#is crime some#o$ modified certain crimes in t#e 2e&ised
-enal Code insofar as t#e o&ert acts 0y $#ic# a pu0lic officer amasses1 ac3uires1 or accumulates illBgotten $ealt# are felonies under t#e 2e&ised -enal Code li6e 0ri0ery
(Articles 21*1 2111 211BA)1 fraud against t#e pu0lic treasury MArticle 213N1 ot#er frauds (Article 214)1 mal&ersation (Article 21")1 $#en t#e illBgotten $ealt# amounts to a total
&alue of -5*1***1***.**. T#e amount $as reduced from -"51***1***.** 0y 2epu0lic Act Co. "5) and t#e penalty $as c#anged from life imprisonment to reclusion
perpetua to deat#.
<#ort of t#e amount1 plunder does not arise. Any amount less t#an -5*1***1***.** is a &iolation of t#e 2e&ised -enal Code or t#e AntiB;raft and Corrupt -ractices Act.
8nder t#e la$ on plunder1 t#e prescripti&e period is 2* years commencing from t#e time of t#e last o&ert act.
-lunder is committed t#roug# a com0ination or series of o&ert acts>
(1) T#roug# misappropriation1 con&ersion1 misuse1 or mal&ersation of pu0lic funds or raids on t#e pu0lic treasury;
(2) 7y recei&ing1 directly or indirectly1 any commission1 gift1 s#are1 percentage1 6ic60ac6s or any ot#er form of pecuniary 0enefit from any person andOor entity in
connection $it# any go&ernment contract or pro?ect 0y reason of t#e office or position of t#e pu0lic officer;
(3) 7y illegal or fraudulent con&eyance or disposition of asset 0elonging to t#e national go&ernment or any of its su0di&isions1 agencies or instrumentalities or
go&ernmentBo$ned or controlled corporations and t#eir su0sidiaries;
(4) 7y o0taining1 recei&ing1 or accepting directly or indirectly any s#ares of stoc61 e3uity or any ot#er form of interest or participation including t#e promise of future
employment in any 0usiness or underta6ing;
(5) 7y esta0lis#ing agricultural1 industrial1 or commercial monopolies or ot#er com0inations andOor implementations of decrees and orders intended to 0enefit
particular persons or special interests; or
() 7y ta6ing undue ad&antage of official position1 aut#ority1 relations#ip1 connection or influence to un?ustly enric# #imself or t#emsel&es at t#e e4pense and to t#e
damage and pre?udice of t#e +ilipino people1 and t#e 2epu0lic of t#e -#ilippines.
.hile the crime appears to be malum prohibitum, Republic !ct ,o. ?;1; provides that Ein the imposition of penalties, the degree of participation and the attendance of
mitigating and aggravating circumstances shall be considered by the courtF.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 187
Re".9lic Act
No. 8411
:Ati;Gra(t
a$ Corr."t
%ractices
Act>
T#e mere act
of a pu0lic
officer
demanding an
amount from a
ta4payer to
$#om #e is to
render pu0lic
ser&ice does
not amount to
0ri0ery1 0ut
$ill amount to
a &iolation of
t#e AntiBgraft
and Corrupt
-ractices Act.
&llustration'
! court
secretary
received P$;;
.;; from a litigant to set a motion for an early hearing. This is direct bribery even if the act to be performed is within his official duty so long as he received a consideration
therefor.
&f the secretary persuaded the judge to ma4e a favorable resolution, even if the judge did not do so, this constitutes a violation of !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct,
5ub5ection !.
=nder the !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct, particularly 5ection 6, there are several acts defined as corrupt practices. 5ome of them are mere repetitions of the act
already penali3ed under the Revised Penal Code, li4e prohibited transactions under !rticle "($ and "(-. &n such a case, the act or omission remains to be mala in se.
:ut there are acts penali3ed under the !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct which are not penali3ed under the Revised Penal Code. Those acts may be considered as
mala prohibita. Therefore, good faith is not a defense.
&llustration'
5ection 6 #e% of the !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct + causing undue injury to the government or a private party by giving unwarranted benefit to the party whom does
not deserve the same.
&n this case, good faith is not a defense because it is in the nature of a malum prohibitum. Criminal intent on the part of the offender is not re9uired. &t is enough that he
performed the prohibited act voluntarily. )ven though the prohibited act may have benefited the government. The crime is still committed because the law is not after the
effect of the act as long as the act is prohibited.
5ection 6 #g% of the !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct + where a public officer entered into a contract for the government which is manifestly disadvantageous to the
government even if he did not profit from the transaction, a violation of the !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct is committed.
&f a public officer, with his office and a private enterprise had a transaction and he allows a relative or member of his family to accept employment in that enterprise, good
faith is not a defense because it is a malum prohibitum. &t is enough that that the act was performed.
.here the public officer is a member of the board, panel or group who is to act on an application of a contract and the act involved one of discretion, any public officer
who is a member of that board, panel or group, even though he voted against the approval of the application, as long as he has an interest in that business enterprise
whose application is pending before that board, panel or group, the public officer concerned shall be liable for violation of the !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct. His
only course of action to avoid prosecution under the !ntigraft and Corrupt Practices !ct is to sell his interest in the enterprise which has filed an application before that
board, panel or group where he is a member. >r otherwise, he should resign from his public position.
&llustration'
5en. @ominador !ytono had an interest in the &ligan 5teel 0ills, which at that time was being subject of an investigation by the 5enate Committee of which he was a
chairman. He was threatened with prosecution under Republic !ct ,o. 6;(8 so he was compelled to sell all his interest in that steel mill< there is no defense. :ecause the
law says so, even if he voted against it, he commits a violation thereof.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 188
These cases
are filed with
the
>mbudsman
and not with
the regular
prosecutorDs
office.
Nurisdiction is
exclusively
with the
5andiganbaya
n. The
accused
public officer
must be
suspended
when the case
is already filed
with the
5andiganbaya
n.
=nder the
!nti/raft and
Corrupt
Practices !ct,
the public
officer who is
accused
should not be
automatically
suspended
upon the filing
of the
information in
court. &t is the
court which
will order the
suspension of
the public officer and not the superior of that public officer. !s long as the court has not ordered the suspension of the public officer involved, the superior of that public
officer is not authori3ed to order the suspension simply because of the violation of the !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct. The court will not order the suspension of the
public officer without first passing upon the validity of the information filed in court. .ithout a hearing, the suspension would be null and void for being violative of due
process.
&llustration'
! public officer was assigned to direct traffic in a very busy corner. .hile there, he caught a thief in the act of lifting the wallet of a pedestrian. !s he could not leave his
post, he summoned a civilian to deliver the thief to the precinct. The civilian agreed so he left with the thief. .hen they were beyond the view of the policeman, the civilian
allowed the thief to go home. .hat would be the liability of the public officerO
The liability of the traffic policeman would be merely administrative. The civilian has no liability at all.
2irstly, the offender is not yet a prisoner so there is no accountability yet. The term EprisonerF refers to one who is already boo4ed and incarcerated no matter how short
the time may be.
The policeman could not be said as having assisted the escape of the offender because as the problem says, he is assigned to direct traffic in a busy corner street. 5o he
cannot be considered as falling under the third 6rd paragraph of !rticle (8 that would constitute his as an accessory.
The same is true with the civilian because the crime committed by the offender, which is snatching or a 4ind of robbery or theft as the case may be, is not one of those
crimes mentioned under the third paragraph of !rticle (8 of the Revised Penal Code.
.here the public officer is still incumbent, the prosecution shall be with the >mbudsman.
.here the respondent is separated from service and the period has not yet prescribed, the information shall be filed in any prosecutionDs office in the city where the
respondent resides. The prosecution shall file the case in the Regional Trial Court unless the violation carries a penalty higher than prision correccional, in which case the
5andiganbayan has jurisdiction.

The fact that the government benefited out of the prohibited act is no defense at all, the violation being mala prohibita.
5ection 6 #f% of the !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct + where the public officer neglects or refuses to act on a matter pending before him for the purpose of obtaining
any pecuniary or material benefit or advantage in favor of or discriminating against another interested party.
The law itself additionally re9uires that the accusedDs dereliction, besides being without justification, must be for the purpose of obtaining from any person interested in the
matter some pecuniary or material benefit or for the purpose of favoring any interested party, or discriminating against another interested party. This element is
indispensable.
&n other words, the neglect or refusal to act must motivated by gain or benefit, or purposely to favor the other interested party as held in Corona#o v. S-, decided on
!ugust (1, (886.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 189
Re".9lic Act
No. 18)1
:For(eit.re o(
Ill;*otte
Wealt,>
Correlate $it#
2A 13") BB
properly under
2emedial
Aa$. T#is
pro&ides t#e
procedure for
forfeiture of
t#e illBgotten
$ealt# in
&iolation of t#e
AntiB;raft and
Corrupt
-ractices Act.
T#e
proceedings
are ci&il and
not criminal in
nature.
Any ta4payer
#a&ing
6no$ledge
t#at a pu0lic
officer #as
amassed
$ealt# out of
proportion to
t#is legitimate
income may
file a
complaint $it#
t#e
prosecutorEs
office of t#e place $#ere t#e pu0lic officer resides or #olds office. T#e prosecutor conducts a preliminary in&estigation ?ust li6e in a criminal case and #e $ill for$ard #is
findings to t#e office of t#e <olicitor ;eneral. T#e <olicitor ;eneral $ill determine $#et#er t#ere is reasona0le ground to 0elie&e t#at t#e respondent #as accumulated an
une4plained $ealt#.
%f t#e <olicitor ;eneral finds pro0a0le cause1 #e $ould file a petition re3uesting t#e court to issue a $rit commanding t#e respondent to s#o$ cause $#y t#e illBgotten
$ealt# descri0ed in t#e petition s#ould not 0e forfeited in fa&or of t#e go&ernment. T#is is co&ered 0y t#e 2ules on Ci&il -rocedure. T#e respondent is gi&en 15 days to
ans$er t#e petition. T#ereafter trial $ould proceed. Fudgment is rendered and appeal is ?ust li6e in a ci&il case. 2emem0er t#at t#is is not a criminal proceeding. T#e 0asic
difference is t#at t#e preliminary in&estigation is conducted 0y t#e prosecutor.
Article 313. Corr."tio o( %.9lic O((icials
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 190
!lements
1.
.ffend
er
ma6es
offers
or
promis
es or
gi&es
gifts or
presen
ts to a
pu0lic
officer;
2. T#e offers or promises are made or t#e gifts or presents gi&en to a pu0lic officer1 under circumstances t#at $ill ma6e t#e pu0lic officer lia0le for direct 0ri0ery or
indirect 0ri0ery.
Article 318. Fra.$s a*aist t,e %.9lic Treas.r# a$ Si&ilar O((eses
Acts punis#ed
1. !ntering into an agreement $it# any interested party or speculator or ma6ing use of any ot#er sc#eme1 to defraud t#e go&ernment1 in dealing $it# any person $it#
regard to furnis#ing supplies1 t#e ma6ing of contracts1 or t#e ad?ustment or settlement of accounts relating to pu0lic property or funds;
2. 9emanding1 directly or indirectly1 t#e payment of sums different from or larger t#an t#ose aut#ori:ed 0y la$1 in collection of ta4es1 licenses1 fees1 and ot#er
imposts;
3. +ailing &oluntarily to issue a receipt1 as pro&ided 0y la$1 for any sum of money collected 0y #im officially1 in t#e collection of ta4es1 licenses1 fees1 and ot#er
imposts;
4. Collecting or recei&ing1 directly or indirectly1 0y $ay of payment or ot#er$ise1 t#ings or o0?ects of a nature different from t#at pro&ided 0y la$1 in t#e collection of
ta4es1 licenses1 fees1 and ot#er imposts.
!lements of frauds against pu0lic treasury under paragrap# 1
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e #as ta6en ad&antage of #is office1 t#at is1 #e inter&ened in t#e transaction in #is official capacity;
3. 5e entered into an agreement $it# any interested party or speculator or made use of any ot#er sc#eme $it# regard to furnis#ing supplies1 t#e ma6ing of contracts1
or t#e ad?ustment or settlement of accounts relating to pu0lic property or funds;
4. 5e #ad intent to defraud t#e go&ernment.
The essence of this crime is ma4ing the government pay for something not received or ma4ing it pay more than what is due. &t is also committed by refunding more than
the amount which should properly be refunded. This occurs usually in cases where a public officer whose official duty is to procure supplies for the government or enter
into contract for government transactions, connives with the said supplier with the intention to defraud the government. !lso when certain supplies for the government are
purchased for the high price but its 9uantity or 9uality is low.
&llustrations'
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 191
#(% !
public
official
who is
in
charge
of
procuri
ng
supplie
s for
the
govern
ment
obtain
ed
funds
for the
first
class
materi
als and buys inferior 9uality products and poc4ets the excess of the funds. This is usually committed by the officials of the @epartment of Public .or4s and
Highways.
#"% Poorest 9uality of in4 paid as if it were of superior 9uality.
#6% >ne thousand pieces of blan4et for certain unit of the !rmed 2orces of the Philippines were paid for but actually, only (;; pieces were bought.
#*% The Mue3on City government ordered (;,;;; but what was delivered was only (,;;; Tshirts, the public treasury is defrauded because the government is made to
pay that which is not due or for a higher price.
,ot all frauds will constitute this crime. There must be no fixed allocation or amount on the matter acted upon by the public officer.
The allocation or outlay was made the basis of fraudulent 9uotations made by the public officer involved.
2or example, there was a need to put some additional lighting along the a street and no one 4nows how much it will cost. !n officer was as4ed to canvass the cost but
he connived with the seller of light bulbs, pricing each light bulb at P$$;.;; instead of the actual price of P$;;.;;. This is a case of fraud against public treasury.
&f there is a fixed outlay of P";,;;;.;; for the lighting apparatus needed and the public officer connived with the seller so that although allocation was made a lesser
number was as4ed to be delivered, or of an inferior 9uality, or secondhand. &n this case there is no fraud against the public treasury because there is a fixed allocation.
The fraud is in the implementation of procurement. That would constitute the crime of Eother fraudF in !rticle "(*, which is in the nature of swindling or estafa.
:e sure to determine whether fraud is against public treasury or one under !rticle "(*.
!lements of illegal e4actions under paragrap# 2
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer entrusted $it# t#e collection of ta4es1 licenses1 fees and ot#er imposts;
2. 5e is guilty of any of t#e follo$ing acts or omissions>
a. 9emanding1 directly or indirectly1 t#e payment of sums different from or larger t#an t#ose aut#ori:ed 0y la$; or
0. +ailing &oluntarily to issue a receipt1 as pro&ided 0y la$1 for any sum of money collected 0y #im officially; or
c. Collecting or recei&ing1 directly or indirectly1 0y $ay of payment or ot#er$ise1 t#ings or o0?ects of a nature different from t#at pro&ided 0y la$.
This can only be committed principally by a public officer whose official duty is to collect taxes, license fees, import duties and other dues payable to the government.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 192
,ot any public
officer can
commit this
crime.
>therwise, it
is estafa.
2ixers cannot
commit this
crime unless
he conspires
with the public
officer
authori3ed to
ma4e the
collection.
!lso, public
officers with
such functions
but are in the
service of the
:ureau of
&nternal
Revenue and
the :ureau of
Customs are
not to be
prosecuted
under the
Revised Penal
Code but
under the
Revised
!dministrative
Code. These
officers are authori3ed to ma4e impositions and to enter into compromises. :ecause of this discretion, their demanding or collecting different from what is necessary is
legal.
This provision of the Revised Penal Code was provided before the :ureau of &nternal Revenue and the Tariff and Customs Code. ,ow, we have specific Code which will
apply to them. &n the absence of any provision applicable, the Revised !dministrative Code will apply.
The essence of the crime is not misappropriation of any of the amounts but the improper ma4ing of the collection which would prejudice the accounting of collected
amounts by the government.
>n the first form of illegal exaction
&n this form, mere demand will consummate the crime, even if the taxpayer shall refuse to come across with the amount being demanded. That will not affect the
consummation of the crime.
&n the demand, it is not necessary that the amount being demanded is bigger than what is payable to the government. The amount being demanded maybe less than the
amount due the government.
,ote that this is often committed with malversation or estafa because when a public officer shall demand an amount different from what the law provides, it can be
expected that such public officer will not turn over his collection to the government.
&llustrations'
#(% ! taxpayer goes to the local municipal treasurer to pay real estate taxes on his land. !ctually, what is due the government is P*;;.;; only but the municipal
treasurer demanded P$;;.;;. :y that demand alone, the crime of illegal exaction is already committed even though the taxpayer does not pay the P$;;.;;.
#"% 5uppose the taxpayer came across with P$;;.;;. :ut the municipal treasurer, thin4ing that he would abstract the P(;;.;;, issued a receipt for only P*;;.;;. The
taxpayer would naturally as4 the municipal treasurer why the receipt was only for P*;;.;;. The treasurer answered that the P(;;.;; is supposed to be for
documentary stamps. The taxpayer left.
He has a receipt for P*;;.;;. The municipal treasurer turned over to the government coffers P*;;.;; because that is due the government and poc4eted the
P(;;.;;.
The mere fact that there was a demand for an amount different from what is due the government, the public officer already committed the crime of illegal exaction.
>n the P(;;.;; which the public officer poc4eted, will it be malversation or estafaO
&n the example given, the public officer did not include in the official receipt the P(;;.;; and, therefore, it did not become part of the public funds. &t remained to
be private. &t is the taxpayer who has been defrauded of his P(;;.;; because he can never claim a refund from the government for excess payment since the
receipt issued to him was only P*;;.;; which is due the government. !s far as the P(;;.;; is concerned, the crime committed is estafa.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 193
#6% !
taxpay
er
pays
his
taxes.
.hat
is due
the
govern
ment
is
P*;;.;
; and
the
public
officer
issues
a
receipt
for
P$;;.;
; upon
payme
nt of
the taxpayer of said amount demanded by the public officer involved. :ut he altered the duplicate to reflect only P*;;.;; and he extracted the difference of
P(;;.;;.
&n this case, the entire P$;;.;; was covered by an official receipt. That act of covering the whole amount received from the taxpayer in an official receipt will have
the characteristics of becoming a part of the public funds. The crimes committed, therefore, are the following'

#a% &llegal exaction + for collecting more than he is authori3ed to collect. The mere act of demanding is enough to constitute this crime.
#b% 2alsification + because there was an alteration of official document which is the duplicate of the official receipt to show an amount less than the actual
amount collected.
#c% 0alversation + because of his act of misappropriating the P(;;.;; excess which was covered by an official receipt already, even though not payable to the
government. The entire P$;;.;; was covered by the receipt, therefore, the whole amount became public funds. 5o when he appropriated the P(;; for his
own benefit, he was not extracting private funds anymore but public funds.
5hould the falsification be complexed with the malversationO
!s far as the crime of illegal exaction is concerned, it will be the subject of separate accusation because there, the mere demand regardless of whether the
taxpayer will pay or not, will already consummate the crime of illegal exaction. &t is the breach of trust by a public officer entrusted to ma4e the collection which is
penali3ed under such article. The falsification or alteration made on the duplicate can not be said as a means to commit malversation. !t most, the duplicate was
altered in order to conceal the malversation. 5o it cannot be complexed with the malversation.
&t cannot also be said that the falsification is a necessary means to commit the malversation because the public officer can misappropriate the P(;;.;; without any
falsification. !ll that he has to do is to get the excess of P(;;.;; and misappropriate it. 5o the falsification is a separate accusation.
However, illegal exaction may be complexed with malversation because illegal exaction is a necessary means to be able to collect the P(;;.;; excess which was
malversed.
&n this crime, pay attention to whether the offender is the one charged with the collection of the tax, license or impost subject of the misappropriation. &f he is not
the one authori3ed by disposition to do the collection, the crime of illegal exaction is not committed.
&f it did not give rise to the crime of illegal exaction, the funds collected may not have become part of the public funds. &f it had not become part of the public funds,
or had not become impressed with being part of the public funds, it cannot be the subject of malversation. &t will give rise to estafa or theft as the case may be.
#6% The 0unicipal Treasurer demanded P$;;.;; when only P*;;.;; was due. He issued the receipt at P*;;.;; and explained to taxpayer that the P(;; was for
documentary stamps. The 0unicipal Treasurer placed the entire P$;;.;; in the vault of the office. .hen he needed money, he too4 the P(;;.;; and spent it.
The following crimes were committed'
#a% &llegal exaction + for demanding a different amount<
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 194
#b% )stafa
+ for
deceivi
ng the
taxpay
er< and
#c%
0alver
sation
+ for
getting
the
P(;;.;
; from
the
vault.
!lthou
gh the
excess
P(;;.;
; was
not
covere
d by
the
>fficial
Receipt, it was commingled with the other public funds in the vault< hence, it became part of public funds and subse9uent extraction thereof constitutes
malversation.
,ote that numbers ( and " are complexed as illegal exaction with estafa, while in number 6, malversation is a distinct offense.
The issuance of the >fficial Receipt is the operative fact to convert the payment into public funds. The payor may demand a refund by virtue of the >fficial Receipt.
&n cases where the payor decides to let the official to E4eep the changeF, if the latter should poc4et the excess, he shall be liable for malversation. The official has no right
but the government, under the principle of accretion, as the owner of the bigger amount becomes the owner of the whole.
>n the second form of illegal exaction
The act of receiving payment due the government without issuing a receipt will give rise to illegal exaction even though a provisional receipt has been issued. .hat the
law re9uires is a receipt in the form prescribed by law, which means official receipt.
&llustration'
&f a government cashier or officer to whom payment is made issued a receipt in his own private form, which he calls provisional, even though he has no intention of
misappropriating the amount received by him, the mere fact that he issued a receipt not in the form prescribed by law, the crime of illegal exaction is committed. There
must be voluntary failure to issue the >fficial Receipt.
>n the third form of illegal exaction
=nder the rules and regulations of the government, payment of chec4s not belonging to the taxpayer, but that of chec4s of other persons, should not be accepted to settle
the obligation of that person.
&llustration'
! taxpayer pays his obligation with a chec4 not his own but pertaining to another. :ecause of that, the chec4 bounced later on.
The crime committed is illegal exaction because the payment by chec4 is not allowed if the chec4 does not pertain to the taxpayer himself, unless the chec4 is a
managerDs chec4 or a certified chec4, amended already as of (88;. #5ee the case of Roman Catholic.%
=nder !rticle "(6, if any of these acts penali3ed as illegal exaction is committed by those employed in the :ureau of Customs or :ureau of &nternal Revenue, the law that
will apply to them will be the Revised !dministrative Code or the Tariff and Customs Code or ,ational Revenue Code.
This crime does not re9uire damage to the government.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 195
Article 314.
Ot,er Fra.$s
!lements
1.
.ffender is a
pu0lic officer;
2. 5e
ta6es
ad&antage of
#is official
position;
3. 5e
commit
s any
of t#e
frauds
or
deceits
enume
rated
in
Article
315 to
31'.
Article 31!.
%ro,i9ite$
Trasactios
!lements
1. .ffender is an appointi&e pu0lic officer;
2. 5e 0ecomes interested1 directly or indirectly1 in any transaction of e4c#ange or speculation;
3. T#e transaction ta6es place $it#in t#e territory su0?ect to #is ?urisdiction;
4. 5e 0ecomes interested in t#e transaction during #is incum0ency.
Article 31'. %ossessio o( %ro,i9ite$ Iterest A# A %.9lic O((icer
-ersons lia0le
1. -u0lic officer $#o1 directly or indirectly1 0ecame interested in any contracts or 0usiness in $#ic# it $as #is official duty to inter&ene;
2. !4perts1 ar0itrators1 and pri&ate accountants $#o1 in li6e manner1 too6 part in any contract or transaction connected $it# t#e estate or property in t#e appraisal1
distri0ution or ad?udication of $#ic# t#ey #ad acted;
3. ;uardians and e4ecutors $it# respect to t#e property 0elonging to t#eir $ards or t#e estate.
Sectio 14@ Article 2I o( t,e Costit.tio
Co <enator or Mem0er of t#e 5ouse of 2epresentati&es may personally appear as counsel 0efore any court of ?ustice or 0efore t#e !lectoral Tri0unals1 or 3uasiB
?udicial and ot#er administrati&e 0odies. Ceit#er s#all #e1 directly or indirectly1 0e interested financially in any contract $it#1 or in any franc#ise or special pri&ilege granted
0y t#e ;o&ernment or any su0di&ision1 agency or instrumentality t#ereof1 including any go&ernmentBo$ned or controlled corporation or its su0sidiary1 during #is term of
office. 5e s#all not inter&ene in any matter 0efore any office of t#e go&ernment for #is pecuniary 0enefit or $#ere #e may 0e called upon to act on account of #is office.
Sectio 18@ Article 2II o( t,e Costit.tio
T#e -resident1 (iceB-resident1 t#e Mem0ers of t#e Ca0inet and t#eir deputies or assistant s#all not1 unless ot#er$ise pro&ided in t#is Constitution1 #old any ot#er
office or employment during t#eir tenure. T#ey s#all not1 during said tenure1 directly or indirectly1 practice any ot#er profession1 participate in any 0usiness1 or 0e
financially interested in any contract $it#1 or in any franc#ise1 or special pri&ilege granted 0y t#e ;o&ernment or any su0di&ision1 agency or instrumentality t#ereof1
including go&ernmentBo$ned or controlled corporations or t#eir su0sidiaries. T#ey s#all strictly a&oid conflict of interest in t#e conduct of t#eir office.
Sectio 3@ Article IG;A o( t,e Costit.tio
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 196
Co
mem0er of a
Constitutional
Commission
s#all1 during
#is tenure1
#old any office
or
employment.
Ceit#er s#all
#e engage in
t#e practice of
any profession
or in t#e acti&e
management
or control of
any 0usiness
$#ic# in any
$ay may 0e
affected 0y t#e
functions of
#is office1 nor
s#all #e 0e
financially
interested1
directly or
indirectly1 in
any contract
$it#1 or in any
franc#ise or pri&ilege granted 0y t#e go&ernment1 or any of its su0di&isions1 agencies1 or instrumentalities1 including go&ernmentBo$ned or controlled corporations or t#eir
su0sidiaries.
Article 31). Mal0ersatio o( %.9lic F.$s or %ro"ert# - %res.&"tio o( Mal0ersatio
Acts punis#ed
1. Appropriating pu0lic funds or property;
2. Ta6ing or misappropriating t#e same;
3. Consenting1 or t#roug# a0andonment or negligence1 permitting any ot#er person to ta6e suc# pu0lic funds or property; and
4. 7eing ot#er$ise guilty of t#e misappropriation or mal&ersation of suc# funds or property.
!lements common to all acts of mal&ersation under Article 21"
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e #ad t#e custody or control of funds or property 0y reason of t#e duties of #is office;
3. T#ose funds or property $ere pu0lic funds or property for $#ic# #e $as accounta0le;
4. 5e appropriated1 too61 misappropriated or consented or1 t#roug# a0andonment or negligence1 permitted anot#er person to ta6e t#em.
This crime is predicated on the relationship of the offender to the property or funds involved. The offender must be accountable for the property misappropriated. &f the
fund or property, though public in character is the responsibility of another officer, malversation is not committed unless there is conspiracy.
&t is not necessary that the offender profited because somebody else may have misappropriated the funds in 9uestion for as long as the accountable officer was remiss in
his duty of safe4eeping public funds or property. He is liable for malversation if such funds were lost or otherwise misappropriated by another.
There is no malversation through simple negligence or rec4less imprudence, whether deliberately or negligently. This is one crime in the Revised Penal Code where the
penalty is the same whether committed with dolo or culpa.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 197
6.estio 7
As+er
@#at
crime under
t#e 2e&ised
-enal Code
carries t#e
same penalty
$#et#er
committed
intentionally or
t#roug#
negligence=
0alver
sation under
!rticle "(?.
There is no
crime of
malversation
through
negligence.
The crime is
malversation,
plain and
simple,
whether
committed
through dolo
or culpa.
There is no
crime of
malversation
under !rticle
6-$ + on
criminal
negligence + because in malversation under !rticle "(?, the same penalty is imposed whether the malversation results from negligence or was the product of deliberate
act.
The crime of malversation can be committed only by an officer accountable for the funds or property which is appropriated. This crime, therefore, bears a relation
between the offender and the funds or property involved.
The offender, to commit malversation, must be accountable for the funds or property misappropriated by him. &f he is not the one accountable but somebody else, the
crime committed is theft. &t will be 9ualified theft if there is abuse of confidence.
!ccountable officer does not refer only to cashier, disbursing officers or property custodian. !ny public officer having custody of public funds or property for which he is
accountable can commit the crime of malversation if he would misappropriate such fund or property or allow others to do so.
6.estios 7 As+ers
1. An unlicensed firearm $as confiscated 0y a policeman. %nstead of turning o&er t#e firearm to t#e property custodian for t#e prosecution of t#e offender1 t#e
policeman sold t#e firearm. @#at crime $as committed=
The crime committed is malversation because that firearm is subject to his accountability. Having ta4en custody of the firearm, he is supposed to account for it as
evidence for the prosecution of the offender.
2. Can t#e 0uyer 0e lia0le under t#e AntiBfencing la$=
,o. The crime is neither theft nor robbery, but malversation.
3. A mem0er of t#e -#ilippine Cational -olice $ent on a0sence $it#out lea&e. 5e $as c#arged $it# mal&ersation of t#e firearm issued to #im. After t$o
years1 #e came out of #iding and surrendered t#e firearm. @#at crime $as committed=
The crime committed was malversation. Payment of the amount misappropriated or restitution of property misappropriated does not erase criminal liability but
only civil liability.
.hen private property is attached or sei3ed by public authority and the public officer accountable therefor misappropriates the same, malversation is committed also.
&llustration'
&f a sheriff levied the property of the defendants and absconded with it, he is not liable of 9ualified theft but of malversation even though the property belonged to a private
person. The sei3ure of the property or fund impressed it with the character of being part of the public funds it being in custodia legis. 2or as long as the public officer is
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 198
the one
accountable
for the fund or
property that
was
misappropriat
ed, he can be
liable for the
crime of
malversation.
!bsent such
relation, the
crime could
be theft,
simple or
9ualified.
6.estio 7
As+er
T#ere
$as a long
line of payors
on t#e last day
of payment for
residence
certificates.
!mployee A of
t#e
municipality
placed all #is
collections
inside #is
ta0le and
re3uested #is
employee 7 to
$atc# o&er #is
ta0le $#ile #e
goes to t#e restroom. 7 too6 ad&antage of AEs a0sence and too6 -5*.** out of t#e collections. A returned and found #is money s#ort. @#at crimes #a&e 0een
committed=
! is guilty of malversation through negligence because he did not exercise due diligence in the safe4eeping of the funds when he did not loc4 the drawer of his
table. &nsofar as : is concerned, the crime is 9ualified theft.
=nder jurisprudence, when the public officer leaves his post without loc4ing his drawer, there is negligence. Thus, he is liable for the loss.
&llustration'
! government cashier did not bother to put the public fund in the public safeJvault but just left it in the drawer of his table which has no loc4. The next morning when he
came bac4, the money was already gone. He was held liable for malversation through negligence because in effect, he has abandoned the fund or property without any
safety.
! private person may also commit malversation under the following situations'
#(% Conspiracy with a public officer in committing malversation<
#"% .hen he has become an accomplice or accessory to a public officer who commits malversation<
#6% .hen the private person is made the custodian in whatever capacity of public funds or property, whether belonging to national or local government, and he
misappropriates the same<
#*% .hen he is constituted as the depositary or administrator of funds or property sei3ed or attached by public authority even though said funds or property belong to
a private individual.
&llustration'
0unicipal treasurer connives with outsiders to ma4e it appear that the office of the treasurer was robbed. He wor4ed overtime and the coconspirators barged in, hogtied
the treasurer and made it appear that there was a robbery. Crime committed is malversation because the municipal treasurer was an accountable officer.
,ote that damage on the part of the government is not considered an essential element. &t is enough that the proprietary rights of the government over the funds have
been disturbed through breach of trust.
&t is not necessary that the accountable public officer should actually misappropriate the fund or property involved. &t is enough that he has violated the trust reposed on
him in connection with the property.
&llustration'
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 199
#(% &t is a
comm
on
practic
e of
govern
ment
cashie
rs to
chang
e the
chec4s
of their
friends
with
cash in
their
custod
y,
someti
mes at
a
discou
nt.
The public officer 4nows that the chec4 is good because the issuer thereof is a man of name. 5o he changed the same with cash. The chec4 turned out to be
good.
.ith that act of changing the cash of the government with the chec4 of a private person, even though the chec4 is good, malversation is committed. The reason is
that a chec4 is cleared only after three days. @uring that period of three days, the government is being denied the use of the public fund. .ith more reason if that
chec4 bounce because the government suffers.
#"% !n accountable public officer, out of la3iness, declares that the payment was made to him after he had cleaned his table and loc4ed his safe for the collection of
the day. ! taxpayer came and he insisted that he pay the amount so that he will not return the next day. 5o he accepted the payment but is too la3y to open the
combination of the public safe. He just poc4eted the money. .hen he came home, the money was still in his poc4et. The next day, when he went bac4 to the
office, he changed clothes and he claims that he forgot to put the money in the new funds that he would collect the next day. /overnment auditors came and
subjected him to inspection. He was found short of that amount. He claimed that it is in his house with that alone, he was charged with malversation and was
convicted.
!ny overage or excess in the collection of an accountable public officer should not be extracted by him once it is commingled with the public funds.
&llustration'
.hen taxpayers pay their accountabilities to the government by way of taxes or licenses li4e registration of motor vehicles, the taxpayer does not bother to collect loose
change. 5o the government cashier accumulates the loose change until this amounts to a si3able sum. &n order to avoid malversation, the cashier did not separate what
is due the government which was left to her by way of loose change. &nstead, he gets all of these and 4eeps it in the public vaultJsafe. !fter the payment of the taxes and
licenses is through, he gets all the official receipts and ta4es the sum total of the payment. He then opens the public vault and counts the cash. .hatever will be the
excess or the overage, he gets. &n this case, malversation is committed.
,ote that the moment any money is commingled with the public fund even if not due the government, it becomes impressed with the characteristic of being part of public
funds. >nce they are commingled, you do not 4now anymore which belong to the government and which belong to the private persons. 5o that a public vault or safe
should not be used to hold any fund other that what is due to the government.
.hen does presumption of misappropriation ariseO
.hen a demand is made upon an accountable officer and he cannot produce the fund or property involved, there is a prima facie presumption that he had converted the
same to his own use. There must be indubitable proof that thing unaccounted for exists. !udit should be made to determine if there was shortage. !udit must be
complete and trustworthy. &f there is doubt, presumption does not arise.
Presumption arises only if at the time the demand to produce the public funds was made, the accountability of the accused is already determined and li9uidated. !
demand upon the accused to produce the funds in his possession and a failure on his part to produce the same will not bring about this presumption unless and until the
amount of his accountability is already 4nown.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 200
&n /u0a%a) v.
San#i
%anba
.an,
16&
SCRA
183, it
was
held
that
the
prima
facie
presu
mption
under
the
Revise
d
Penal
Code
arises
only if
there
is no
issue
as to
the
accura
cy,
correct
ness
and
regular
ity of
the
audit
finding
s and
if the
fact that public funds are missing is indubitably established. The audit must be thorough and complete down to the last detail, establishing with absolute certainty
the fact that the funds are indeed missing.
&n /e (uz0an v. Peo!le, 119 SCRA 337, it was held that in malversation, all that is necessary to prove is that the defendant received in his possession the public funds
and that he could not account for them and that he could not give a reasonable excuse for their disappearance. !n accountable public officer may be convicted of
malversation even if there is no direct evidence of misappropriation and the only evidence is the shortage in the accounts which he has not been able to explain
satisfactorily.
&n Cabello v. San#i%anba.a, 197 SCRA 91, it was held it was held that malversation may be committed intentionally or by negligence. The dolo or culpa bringing about
the offences is only a modality in the perpetration of the offense. The same offense of malversation is involved, whether the mode charged differs from the mode
established in the commission of the crime. !n accused charged with willful malversation may be convicted of 0alversation through her negligee.
&n 2uizo v. San#i%anba.an, the accused incurred shortage #P(.?*% mainly because the auditor disallowed certain cash advances the accused granted to employees.
:ut on the same date that the audit was made, he partly reimbursed the amount and paid it in full three days later. The 5upreme Court considered the
circumstances as negative of criminal intent. The cash advances were made in good faith and out of good will to coemployees which was a practice tolerated in
the office. The actual cash shortage was only P(.?* and together with the disallowed advances were fully reimbursed within a reasonable time. There was no
negligence, malice, nor intent to defraud.
&n Cia0*ranca ,r. v. San#i%anba.an, where the accused in malversation could not give reasonable and satisfactory explanation or excuse for the missing funds or
property accountable by him, it was held that the return of the funds or property is not a defense and does not extinguish criminal liability.
&n Parun%ao v. San#i%anba.an, 197 SCRA 173, it was held that a public officer charged with malversation cannot be convicted of technical malversation #illegal use of
public funds under !rticle "";%. To do so would violate accusedDs right to be informed of nature of accusation against him.
Technical malversation is not included in the crime of malversation. &n malversation, the offender misappropriates public funds or property for his own personal use, or
allows any other person to ta4e such funds or property for the latterDs own personal use. &n technical malversation, the public officer applies the public funds or property
under his administration to another public use different from that for which the public fund was appropriated by law or ordinance. Recourse' 2ile the proper information.
Article 31/. Fail.re o( Acco.ta9le O((icer to Re$er Acco.ts
!lements
1. .ffender is pu0lic officer1 $#et#er in t#e ser&ice or separated t#erefrom 0y resignation or any ot#er cause;
2. 5e is an accounta0le officer for pu0lic funds or property;
3. 5e is re3uired 0y la$ or regulation to render account to t#e Commission on Audit1 or to a pro&incial auditor;

R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 201
4. 5e
fails to
do so
for a
period
of t$o
mont#
s after
suc#
accoun
ts
s#ould
0e
render
ed.
Article 311.
Fail.re o( A
Res"osi9le
%.9lic O((icer
to Re$er
Acco.ts
9e(ore
Lea0i* t,e
Co.tr#
!lements
1. .ffender is
a
pu0lic
officer;

2. 5e is an accounta0le officer for pu0lic funds or property;
3. 5e unla$fully lea&es or attempts to lea&e t#e -#ilippine %slands $it#out securing a certificate from t#e Commission on Audit s#o$ing t#at #is accounts #a&e 0een
finally settled.
.hen an accountable officer leaves the country without first settling his accountability or otherwise securing a clearance from the Commission on !udit regarding such
accountability, the implication is that he left the country because he has misappropriated the funds under his accountability.
.ho can commit this crimeO ! responsible public officer, not necessarily an accountable one, who leaves the country without first securing clearance from the
Commission on !udit.
The purpose of the law is to discourage responsible or accountable officers from leaving without first li9uidating their accountability.
0ere leaving without securing clearance constitutes violation of the Revised Penal Code. &t is not necessary that they really misappropriated public funds.
Article 334. Ille*al .se o( ".9lic (.$s or "ro"ert#
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;

2. T#ere are pu0lic funds or property under #is administration;
3. <uc# fund or property $ere appropriated 0y la$ or ordinance;

4. 5e applies suc# pu0lic fund or property to any pu0lic use ot#er t#an for $#ic# it $as appropriated for.
&llegal use of public funds or property is also 4nown as technical malversation. The term technical malversation is used because in this crime, the fund or property
involved is already appropriated or earmar4ed for a certain public purpose.
The offender is entrusted with such fund or property only to administer or apply the same to the public purpose for which it was appropriated by law or ordinance. &nstead
of applying it to the public purpose to which the fund or property was already appropriated by law, the public officer applied it to another purpose.
5ince damage is not an element of malversation, even though the application made proved to be more beneficial to public interest than the original purpose for which the
amount or property was appropriated by law, the public officer involved is still liable for technical malversation.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 202
&f public funds
were not yet
appropriated
by law or
ordinance,
and this was
applied to a
public
purpose by
the custodian
thereof, the
crime is plain
and simple
malversation,
not technical
malversation.
&f the funds
had been
appropriated
for a particular
public
purpose, but
the same was
applied to
private
purpose, the
crime
committed is
simple
malversation
only.
&llustration'
The office
lac4ed bond
papers. .hat
the
government
cashier did was to send the janitor, get some money from his collection, told the janitor to buy bond paper so that the office will have something to use. The amount
involved maybe immaterial but the cashier commits malversation pure and simple.
This crime can also be committed by a private person.
&llustration'
! certain road is to be cemented. :ags of cement were already being unloaded at the side. :ut then, rain began to fall so the supervisor of the road building went to a
certain house with a garage, as4ed the owner if he could possibly deposit the bags of cement in his garage to prevent the same from being wet. The owner of the house,
>live, agreed. 5o the bags of cement were transferred to the garage of the private person. !fter the public officer had left, and the wor4ers had left because it is not
possible to do the cementing, the owner of the garage started using some of the cement in paving his own garage. The crime of technical malversation is also committed.
,ote that when a private person is constituted as the custodian in whatever capacity, of public funds or property, and he misappropriates the same, the crime of
malversation is also committed. 5ee !rticle """.
&llustration'
The payroll money for a government infrastructure project on the way to the site of the project, the officers bringing the money were ambushed. They were all wounded.
>ne of them, however, was able to get away from the scene of the ambush until he reached a certain house. He told the occupant of the house to safeguard the amount
because it is the payroll money of the government laborers of a particular project. The occupant of the house accepted the money for his own use. The crime is not theft
but malversation as long as he 4new that what was entrusted in his custody is public fund or property.
6.estio 7 As+er
T#e s#eriff1 after #a&ing le&ied on t#e property su0?ect of a ?udgment1 conducted a pu0lic auction sale. 5e recei&ed t#e proceeds of t#e pu0lic auction. Actually1
t#e proceeds are to 0e deli&ered to t#e plaintiff. T#e s#eriff1 after deducting t#e s#eriffEs fees due to t#e office1 spent part of t#at amount. 5e ga&e t#e 0alance to t#e
plaintiff and e4ecuted a promissory note to pay t#e plaintiff t#e amount spent 0y #im. %s t#ere a crime committed=
The 5upreme Court ruled that the sheriff committed the crime of malversation because the proceeds of the auction sale was turned over to the plaintiff, such
proceeds is impressed with the characteristic of being part of public funds. The sheriff is accountable therefore because he is not supposed to use any part of such
proceeds.
Article 331. Fail.re to Ma=e Deli0er# o( %.9lic F.$s o( %ro"ert#
Acts punis#ed
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 203
1. +ailing
to
ma6e
payme
nt 0y a
pu0lic
officer
$#o is
under
o0ligati
on to
ma6e
suc#
payme
nt from
go&ern
ment
funds
in #is
posses
sion;
2.
2efusing to ma6e deli&ery 0y a pu0lic officer $#o #as 0een ordered 0y competent aut#ority to deli&er any property in #is custody or under #is
administration.
!lements of failure to ma6e payment
1. -u0lic officer #as go&ernment funds in #is possession;
2. 5e is under o0ligation to ma6e payment from suc# funds;
3. 5e fails to ma6e t#e payment maliciously.
Article 338. Coi0i* +it, or Coseti* to E0asio
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e #ad in #is custody or c#arge a prisoner1 eit#er detention prisoner or prisoner 0y final ?udgment;
3. <uc# prisoner escaped from #is custody;
4. 5e $as in conni&ance $it# t#e prisoner in t#e latterEs escape.
Classes of prisoners in&ol&ed
1. %f t#e fugiti&e #as 0een sentenced 0y final ?udgment to any penalty;
2. %f t#e fugiti&e is #eld only as detention prisoner for any crime or &iolation of la$ or municipal ordinance.
Article 334. E0asio t,ro.*, Ne*li*ece
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e is c#arged $it# t#e con&eyance or custody of a prisoner or prisoner 0y final ?udgment;
3. <uc# prisoner escapes t#roug# negligence.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 204
Article 33!.
Esca"e o(
%risoer
.$er t,e
C.sto$# o( a
%erso ot a
%.9lic O((icer
!lements
1. .ffend
er is a
pri&ate
person
;
2. T#e
con&ey
ance
or
custod
y of a
prison
er or
person
under
arrest
is
confide
d to
#im;
3. T#e prisoner or person under arrest escapes;
4. .ffender consents to t#e escape1 or t#at t#e escape ta6es place t#roug# #is negligence.
The crime is infidelity in the custody of prisoners if the offender involved is the custodian of the prisoner.
&f the offender who aided or consented to the prisonerDs escaping from confinement, whether the prisoner is a convict or a detention prisoner, is not the custodian, the
crime is delivering prisoners from jail under !rticle($-.
The crime of infidelity in the custody of prisoners can be committed only by the custodian of a prisoner.
&f the jail guard who allowed the prisoner to escape is already offduty at that time and he is no longer the custodian of the prisoner, the crime committed by him is
delivering prisoners from jail.
,ote that you do not apply here the principle of conspiracy that the act of one is the act of all. The party who is not the custodian who conspired with the custodian in
allowing the prisoner to escape does not commit infidelity in the custody of the prisoner. He commits the crime of delivering prisoners from jail.
6.estio 7 As+er
%f a pri&ate person approac#ed t#e custodian of t#e prisoner and for a certain consideration1 told t#e custodian to lea&e t#e door of t#e cell unloc6ed for t#e
prisoner to escape. @#at crime #ad 0een committed=
&t is not infidelity in the custody of prisoners because as far as the private person is concerned, this crime is delivering prisoners from jail. The infidelity is only
committed by the custodian.
This crime can be committed also by a private person if the custody of the prisoner has been confided to a private person.
&llustration'
! policeman escorted a prisoner to court. !fter the court hearing, this policeman was shot at with a view to liberate the prisoner from his custody. The policeman fought
the attac4er but he was fatally wounded. .hen he could no longer control the prisoner, he went to a nearby house, tal4ed to the head of the family of that house and
as4ed him if he could give the custody of the prisoner to him. He said yes. !fter the prisoner was handcuffed in his hands, the policeman expired. Thereafter, the head
of the family of that private house as4ed the prisoner if he could afford to give something so that he would allow him to go. The prisoner said, EBes, if you would allow me
to leave, you can come with me and & will give the money to you.F This private persons went with the prisoner and when the money was given, he allowed him to go.
.hat crimeJs had been committedO
=nder !rticle ""$, the crime can be committed by a private person to whom the custody of a prisoner has been confided.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 205

.here such
private
person, while
performing a
private
function by
virtue of a
provision of
law, shall
accept any
consideration
or gift for the
non
performance
of a duty
confided to
him, :ribery is
also
committed.
5o the crime
committed by
him is
infidelity in the
custody of
prisoners and
bribery.
&f the crime is delivering prisoners from jail, bribery is just a means, under !rticle ($-, that would call for the imposition of a heavier penalty, but not a separate charge of
bribery under !rticle ($-.
:ut under !rticle ""$ in infidelity, what is basically punished is the breach of trust because the offender is the custodian. 2or that, the crime is infidelity. &f he violates the
trust because of some consideration, bribery is also committed.
! higher degree of vigilance is re9uired. 2ailure to do so will render the custodian liable. The prevailing ruling is against laxity in the handling of prisoners.
&llustration'
! prison guard accompanied the prisoner in the toilet. .hile answering the call of nature, police officer waiting there, until the prisoner escaped. Police officer was
accused of infidelity.
There is no criminal liability because it does not constitute negligence. ,egligence contemplated here refers to deliberate abandonment of duty.
,ote, however, that according to a recent 5upreme Court ruling, failure to accompany lady prisoner in the comfort room is a case of negligence and therefore the
custodian is liable for infidelity in the custody of prisoner.
Prison guard should not go to any other place not officially called for. This is a case of infidelity in the custody of prisoner through negligence under !rticle ""*.
Article 33'. Re&o0al@ Coceal&et@ or Destr.ctio o( Doc.&ets
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e a0stracts1 destroys or conceals a document or papers;
3. <aid document or papers s#ould #a&e 0een entrusted to suc# pu0lic officer 0y reason of #is office;
4. 9amage1 $#et#er serious or not1 to a t#ird party or to t#e pu0lic interest #as 0een caused.
Crimes falling under the section on infidelity in the custody of public documents can only be committed by the public officer who is made the custodian of the document in
his official capacity. &f the officer was placed in possession of the document but it is not his duty to be the custodian thereof, this crime is not committed.
&llustration'
! letter is entrusted to a postmaster for transmission of a registered letter to another. The postmaster opened the letter and finding the money, extracted the same. The
crime committed is infidelity in the custody of the public document because under !rticle ""-, the law refers also to papers entrusted to public officer involved and
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 206
currency note
is considered
to be within
the term
paper
although it is
not a
document.
.ith respect
to official
documents,
infidelity is
committed by
destroying the
document, or
removing the
document or
concealing the
document.
@amage to
public interest
is necessary.
However,
material
damage is not
necessary.
&llustration'
&f any citi3en
goes to a
public office,
desiring to go
over public
records and
the custodian
of the records
had
concealed the same so that this citi3en is re9uired to go bac4 for the record to be ta4en out, the crime of infidelity is already committed by the custodian who removed the
records and 4ept it in a place where it is not supposed to be 4ept. Here, it is again the breach of public trust which is punished.
!lthough there is no material damage caused, mere delay in rendering public service is considered damage.
Removal of public records by the custodian does not re9uire that the record be brought out of the premises where it is 4ept. &t is enough that the record be removed from
the place where it should be and transferred to another place where it is not supposed to be 4ept. &f damage is caused to the public service, the public officer is criminally
liable for infidelity in the custody of official documents.
@istinction between infidelity in the custody of public document, estafa and malicious mischief
• &n infidelity in the custody of public document, the offender is the custodian of the official document removed or concealed.
• &n estafa, the offender is not the custodian of the document removed or concealed.
• &n malicious mischief, the offender purposely destroyed and damaged the propertyJdocument.
.here in case for bribery or corruption, the monetary considerations was mar4ed as exhibits, such considerations ac9uires the nature of a document such that if the
same would be spent by the custodian the crime is not malversation but &nfidelity in the custody of public records, because the money adduced as exhibits parta4e the
nature of a document and not as money. !lthough such monetary consideration ac9uires the nature of a document, the best evidence rule does not apply here.
)xample, photocopies may be presented in evidence.
Article 33). O((icer Area=i* Seal
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e is c#arged $it# t#e custody of papers or property;
3. T#ese papers or property are sealed 0y proper aut#ority;
4. 5e 0rea6s t#e seal or permits t#em to 0e 0ro6en.
&f the official document is sealed or otherwise placed in an official envelope, the element of damage is not re9uired. The mere brea4ing of the seal or the mere opening of
the document would already bring about infidelity even though no damage has been suffered by anyone or by the public at large. The offender does not have to
misappropriate the same. Nust trying to discover or loo4 what is inside is infidelity already.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 207
The act is
punished
because if a
document is
entrusted to
the custody of
a public officer
in a sealed or
closed
envelope,
such public
officer is
supposed not
to 4now what
is inside the
same. &f he
would brea4
the seal or
open the
closed
envelop,
indications
would be that
he tried to find
out the
contents of
the document.
2or that act,
he violates the
confidence or
trust reposed
on him.
! crime is
already
committed
regardless of
whether the
contents of
the document
are secret or private. &t is enough that it is entrusted to him in a sealed form or in a closed envelope and he bro4e the seal or opened the envelop. Public trust is already
violated if he managed to loo4 into the contents of the document.
@istinction between infidelity and theft
• There is infidelity if the offender opened the letter but did not ta4e the same.
• There is theft if there is intent to gain when the offender too4 the money.
,ote that he document must be complete in legal sense. &f the writings are mere form, there is no crime.
&llustration'
!s regard the payroll, which has not been signed by the 0ayor, no infidelity is committed because the document is not yet a payroll in the legal sense since the document
has not been signed yet.
&n Kbrea4ing of sealK, the word Kbrea4ingK should not be given a literal meaning. )ven if actually, the seal was not bro4en, because the custodian managed to open the
parcel without brea4ing the seal.
Article 33/. O"ei* o( Close$ Doc.&ets
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. Any closed papers1 documents1 or o0?ect are entrusted to #is custody;
3. 5e opens or permits to 0e opened said closed papers1 documents or o0?ects;
4. 5e does not #a&e proper aut#ority.
Article 331. Re0elatio o( Secrets 9# A O((icer
Acts punis#ed
1. 2e&ealing any secrets 6no$n to t#e offending pu0lic officer 0y reason of #is official capacity;
!lements
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 208
1.
.ffender is a
pu0lic officer;
2. 5e
6no$s
of a
secret
0y
reason
of #is
official
capacit
y;
3. 5e
re&eals
suc#
secret
$it#out
aut#ori
ty or
?ustifia
0le
reason
s;
4. 9amage1 great or small1 is caused to t#e pu0lic interest.
2. 9eli&ering $rongfully papers or copies of papers of $#ic# #e may #a&e c#arge and $#ic# s#ould not 0e pu0lis#ed.
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e #as c#arge of papers;
3. T#ose papers s#ould not 0e pu0lis#ed;
4. 5e deli&ers t#ose papers or copies t#ereof to a t#ird person;
5. T#e deli&ery is $rongful;
. 9amage is caused to pu0lic interest.
Article 384. %.9lic O((icer Re0eali* Secrets o( %ri0ate i$i0i$.al
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e 6no$s of t#e secrets of a pri&ate indi&idual 0y reason of #is office;
3. 5e re&eals suc# secrets $it#out aut#ority or ?ustifia0le reason.
Article 381. O"e Diso9e$iece
!lements
1. .fficer is a ?udicial or e4ecuti&e officer;
2. T#ere is a ?udgment1 decision or order of a superior aut#ority;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 209
3. <uc#
?udgm
ent1
decisio
n or
order
$as
made
$it#in
t#e
scope
of t#e
?urisdic
tion of
t#e
superi
or
aut#ori
ty and
issued
$it# all
t#e
legal
formali
ties;
4. 5e1 $it#out any legal ?ustification1 openly refuses to e4ecute t#e said ?udgment1 decision or order1 $#ic# #e is duty 0ound to o0ey.
Article 383. Diso9e$iece to Or$er o( S."erior O((icer W,e Sai$ Or$er Was S.s"e$e$ 9# I(erior O((icer
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. An order is issued 0y #is superior for e4ecution;
3. 5e #as for any reason suspended t#e e4ecution of suc# order;
4. 5is superior disappro&es t#e suspension of t#e e4ecution of t#e order;
5. .ffender diso0eys #is superior despite t#e disappro&al of t#e suspension.
Article 388. Re(.sal o( Assistace
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. A competent aut#ority demands from t#e offender t#at #e lend #is cooperation to$ards t#e administration of ?ustice or ot#er pu0lic ser&ice;
3. .ffender fails to do so maliciously.
!ny public officer who, upon being re9uested to render public assistance within his official duty to render and he refuses to render the same when it is necessary in the
administration of justice or for public service, may be prosecuted for refusal of assistance.
This is a crime, which a policeman may commit when, being subpoenaed to appear in court in connection with a crime investigated by him but because of some
arrangement with the offenders, the policeman does not appear in court anymore to testify against the offenders. He tried to assail the subpoena so that ultimately the
case would be dismissed. &t was already held that the policeman could be prosecuted under this crime of refusal of assistance and not that of dereliction of duty.
&llustration'
! government physician, who had been subpoenaed to appear in court to testify in connection with physical injury cases or cases involving human lives, does not want to
appear in court to testify. He may be charged for refusal of assistance. !s long as they have been properly notified by subpoena and they disobeyed the subpoena, they
can be charged always if it can be shown that they are deliberately refusing to appear in court.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 210
&t is not
always a case
or in
connection
with the
appearance in
court that this
crime may be
committed.
!ny refusal by
the public
officer to
render
assistance
when
demanded by
competent
public
authority, as
long as the
assistance
re9uested
from them is
within their
duty to render
and that
assistance is
needed for
public service,
the public
officers who
are refusing
deliberately
may be
charged with
refusal of
assistance.
,ote that the re9uest must come from one public officer to another.
&llustration'
! fireman was as4ed by a private person for services but was refused by the former for lac4 of EconsiderationF.
&t was held that the crime is not refusal of assistance because the re9uest did not come from a public authority. :ut if the fireman was ordered by the authority to put out
the fire and he refused, the crime is refusal of assistance.
&f he receives consideration therefore, bribery is committed. :ut mere demand will fall under the prohibition under the provision of Republic !ct ,o. 6;(8 #!nti/raft and
Corrupt Practices !ct%.
Article 384. Re(.sal to Disc,ar*e Electi0e O((ice
!lements
1. .ffender is elected 0y popular election to a pu0lic office;
2. 5e refuses to 0e s$orn in or to disc#arge t#e duties of said office;
3. T#ere is no legal moti&e for suc# refusal to 0e s$orn in or to disc#arge t#e duties of said office.
Article 38!. Maltreat&et o( %risoers
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer or employee;
2. 5e #as under #is c#arge a prisoner or detention prisoner;
3. 5e maltreats suc# prisoner in eit#er of t#e follo$ing manners>
a. 7y o&erdoing #imself in t#e correction or #andling of a prisoner or detention prisoner under #is c#arge eit#er /
(1) 7y t#e imposition of punis#ment not aut#ori:ed 0y t#e regulations; or
(2) 7y inflicting suc# punis#ments (t#ose aut#ori:ed) in a cruel and #umiliating manner; or
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 211
0. 7y
maltre
ating
suc#
prison
ers to
e4tort
a
confes
sion or
to
o0tain
some
inform
ation
from
t#e
prison
er.
This is
committed
only by such
public officer
charged with
direct custody
of the
prisoner. ,ot
all public
officer can
commit this
offense.
&f the public officer is not the custodian of the prisoner, and he manhandles the latter, the crime is physical injuries.
The maltreatment does not really re9uire physical injuries. !ny 4ind of punishment not authori3ed or though authori3ed if executed in excess of the prescribed degree.
&llustration'
0a4e him drin4 dirty water, sit on ice, eat on a can, ma4e him strip, hang a sign on his nec4 saying EsnatcherF.
:ut if as a result of the maltreatment, physical injuries were caused to the prisoner, a separate crime for the physical injuries shall be filed. Bou do not complex the crime
of physical injuries with the maltreatment because the way !rticle "6$ is worded, it prohibits the complexing of the crime.
&f the maltreatment was done in order to extort confession, therefore, the constitutional right of the prisoner is further violated. The penalty is 9ualified to the next higher
degree.
The offended party here must be a prisoner in the legal sense. The mere fact that a private citi3en had been apprehended or arrested by a law enforcer does not
constitute him a prisoner. To be a prisoner, he must have been boo4ed and incarcerated no matter how short it is.
&llustration'
! certain snatcher was arrested by a law enforcer, brought to the police precinct, turned over to the custodian of that police precinct. )very time a policeman entered the
police precinct, he would as4, E.hat is this fellow doing hereO .hat crime has he committedOF. The other policeman would then tell, EThis fellow is a snatcher.F 5o every
time a policeman would come in, he would inflict injury to him. This is not maltreatment of prisoner because the offender is not the custodian. The crime is only physical
injuries.
:ut if the custodian is present there and he allowed it, then he will be liable also for the physical injuries inflicted, but not for maltreatment because it was not the
custodian who inflicted the injury.
:ut if it is the custodian who effected the maltreatment, the crime will be maltreatment of prisoners plus a separate charge for physical injuries.
&f a prisoner who had already been boo4ed was ma4e to strip his clothes before he was put in the detention cell so that when he was placed inside the detention cell, he
was already na4ed and he used both of his hands to cover his private part, the crime of maltreatment of prisoner had already been committed.
!fter having been boo4ed, the prisoner was made to show any sign on his arm, hand or his nec4< E@o not follow my footsteps, & am a thief.F That is maltreatment of
prisoner if the offended party had already been boo4ed and incarcerated no matter how short, as a prisoner.
:efore this point in time, when he is not yet a prisoner, the act of hanging a sign on his nec4 will only amount to slander because the idea is to cast dishonor. !ny injury
inflicted upon him will only give rise to the crime of physical injuries.
Article 38'. Atici"atio o( D.ties o( A %.9lic O((ice
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 212
!lements
1.
.ffend
er is
entitled
to #old
a
pu0lic
office
or
employ
ment1
eit#er
0y
electio
n or
appoin
tment;

2. T#e
la$
re3uire
s t#at
#e
s#ould
first 0e
s$orn
in
andOor
s#ould
first
gi&e a
0ond;
3. 5e assumes t#e performance of t#e duties and po$ers of suc# office;
4. 5e #as not ta6en #is oat# of office andOor gi&en t#e 0ond re3uired 0y la$.
Article 38). %rolo*i* %er(or&ace o( D.ties a$ %o+ers
!lements
1. .ffender is #olding a pu0lic office;
2. T#e period pro&ided 0y la$1 regulations or special pro&ision for #olding suc# office1 #as already e4pired;
3. 5e continues to e4ercise t#e duties and po$ers of suc# office.

Article 38/. A9a$o&et o( O((ice or %ositio
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e formally resigns from #is position;
3. 5is resignation #as not yet 0een accepted;
4. 5e a0andons #is office to t#e detriment of t#e pu0lic ser&ice.
Article 381. Us.r"atio o( Le*islati0e %o+ers
!lements
1. .ffender is an e4ecuti&e or ?udicial officer;
2. 5e (a) ma6es general rules or regulations 0eyond t#e scope of #is aut#ority or (0) attempts to repeal a la$ or (c) suspends t#e e4ecution t#ereof.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 213
Article 344.
Us.r"atio o(
E?ec.ti0e
F.ctios
!lements
1.
.ffender is a
?udge;
2. 5e (a)
assum
es a
po$er
pertain
ing to
t#e
e4ecuti
&e
aut#ori
ties1 or
(0)
o0stru
cts t#e
e4ecuti
&e
aut#ori
ties in
t#e
la$ful
e4ercis
e of
t#eir
po$ers
.
Article 341. Us.r"atio o( <.$icial F.ctios
!lements
1. .ffender is an officer of t#e e4ecuti&e 0ranc# of t#e go&ernment;
2. 5e (a) assumes ?udicial po$ers1 or (0) o0structs t#e e4ecution of any order or decision rendered 0y any ?udge $it#in #is ?urisdiction.
Article 343. Diso9e#i* ReB.est (or DisB.ali(icatio
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. A proceeding is pending 0efore suc# pu0lic officer;
3. T#ere is a 3uestion 0roug#t 0efore t#e proper aut#ority regarding #is ?urisdiction1 $#ic# is not yet decided;
4. 5e #as 0een la$fully re3uired to refrain form continuing t#e proceeding;
5. 5e continues t#e proceeding.
Article 348. Or$ers or ReB.est 9# E?ec.ti0e O((icers to A# <.$icial A.t,orit#
!lements
1. .ffender is an e4ecuti&e officer;
2. 5e addresses any order or suggestion to any ?udicial aut#ority;
3. T#e order or suggestion relates to any case or 0usiness coming $it#in t#e e4clusi&e ?urisdiction of t#e courts of ?ustice.
Article 344. Ula+(.l A""oit&ets
!lements
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 214
2. 5e
nomin
ates or
appoin
ts a
person
to a
pu0lic
office;
3. <uc#
person
lac6s
t#e
legal
3ualific
ations
t#erefo
re;
4. .ffender 6no$s t#at #is nominee or appointee lac6s t#e 3ualification at t#e time #e made t#e nomination or appointment.
Article 34!. A9.ses a*aist C,astit#
Acts punis#ed
1. <oliciting or ma6ing immoral or indecent ad&ances to a $oman interested in matters pending 0efore t#e offending officer for decision1 or $it# respect to $#ic# #e is
re3uired to su0mit a report to or consult $it# a superior officer;
2. <oliciting or ma6ing immoral or indecent ad&ances to a $oman under t#e offenderEs custody;
3. <oliciting or ma6ing immoral or indecent ad&ances to t#e $ife1 daug#ter1 sister or relati&e $it#in t#e same degree 0y affinity of any person in t#e custody of t#e
offending $arden or officer.
!lements>
1. .ffender is a pu0lic officer;
2. 5e solicits or ma6es immoral or indecent ad&ances to a $oman;
3. <uc# $oman is /
a. interested in matters pending 0efore t#e offender for decision1 or $it# respect to $#ic# #e is re3uired to su0mit a report to or consult $it# a superior officer;
or
0. under t#e custody of t#e offender $#o is a $arden or ot#er pu0lic officer directly c#arged $it# t#e care and custody of prisoners or persons under arrest; or
c. t#e $ife1 daug#ter1 sister or relati&e $it#in t#e same degree 0y affinity of t#e person in t#e custody of t#e offender.
The name of the crime is misleading. &t implies that the chastity of the offended party is abused but this is not really the essence of the crime because the essence of the
crime is mere ma4ing of immoral or indecent solicitation or advances.
&llustration'
0ere indecent solicitation or advances of a woman over whom the public officer exercises a certain influence because the woman is involved in a case where the offender
is to ma4e a report of result with superiors or otherwise a case which the offender was investigating.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 215
This crime is
also
committed if
the woman is
a prisoner and
the offender is
her jail
warden or
custodian, or
even if the
prisoner may
be a man if
the jail warden
would ma4e
the immoral
solicitations
upon the wife,
sister,
daughter, or
relative by
affinity within
the same
degree of the
prisoner
involved.
Three
insta
nces
when
this
crime
may
arise'
#(% The
woma
n, who
is the
offend
ed party, is the party in interest in a case where the offended is the investigator or he is re9uired to render a report or he is re9uired to consult with a superior
officer.
This does not include any casual or incidental interest. This refers to interest in the subject of the case under investigation.
&f the public officer charged with the investigation or with the rendering of the report or with the giving of advice by way of consultation with a superior, made some
immoral or indecent solicitation upon such woman, he is ta4ing advantage of his position over the case. 2or that immoral or indecent solicitation, a crime is
already committed even if the woman did not accede to the solicitation.
)ven if the woman may have lied with the hearing officer or to the public officer and acceded to him, that does not change the crime because the crime see4s to
penali3e the ta4ing advantage of official duties.
&t is immaterial whether the woman did not agree or agreed to the solicitation. &f the woman did not agree and the public officer involved pushed through with the
advances, attempted rape may have been committed.
#"% The woman who is the offended party in the crime is a prisoner under the custody of a warden or the jailer who is the offender.
&f the warden or jailer of the woman should ma4e immoral or indecent advances to such prisoner, this crime is committed.
This crime cannot be committed if the warden is a woman and the prisoner is a man. 0en have no chastity.
&f the warden is also a woman but is a lesbian, it is submitted that this crime could be committed, as the law does not re9uire that the custodian be a man but
re9uires that the offended be a woman.
&mmoral or indecent advances contemplated here must be persistent. &t must be determined. ! mere jo4e would not suffice.
&llustrations'
#(% !n investigating prosecutor where the woman is charged with estafa as the respondent, made a remar4 to the woman, thus' EBou 4now, the way of
deciding this case depends on me. & can just say this is civil in character. & want to see a movie tonight and & want a companion.F 5uch a remar4, which is
not discerned if not persistent will not give rise to this crime. However, if the prosecutor 4ept on calling the woman and inviting her, that ma4es the act
determined and the crime is committed.
#"% ! jailer was prosecuted for abuse against chastity. The jailer said, E&t was mutual on their part. & did not really force my way upon the woman. The woman
fell in love with me, & fell in love with the woman.F The woman became pregnant. The woman admitted that she was not forced. Nust the same, the jailer
was convicted of abuse against chastity.
Aegally, a prisoner is an accountability of the government. 5o the custodian is not supposed to interfere. )ven if the prisoner may li4e it, he is not supposed to do
that. >therwise, abuse against chastity is committed.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 216
:eing
respon
sible
for the
pregna
ncy is
itself
ta4ing
advant
age
the
prison
er.
&f he
forced
himself
agains
t the
will of
the
woma
n,
anothe
r crime
is
commi
tted,
that is,
rape
aside
from
abuse
agains
t
chastit
y.
Bou cannot consider the abuse against chastity as absorbed in the rape because the basis of penali3ing the acts is different from each other.
#6% The crime is committed upon a female relative of a prisoner under the custody of the offender, where the woman is the daughter, sister or relative by affinity in the
same line as of the prisoner under the custody of the offender who made the indecent or immoral solicitation.
The mother is not included so that any immoral or indecent solicitation upon the mother of the prisoner does not give rise to this crime, but the offender may be
prosecuted under the 5ection "1 of Republic !ct ,o. 6;(8 #!ntigraft and Corrupt Practices !ct%.
.hy is the mother left outO :ecause it is the mother who easily succumbs to protect her child.
&f the offender were not the custodian, then crime would fall under Republic !ct ,o. 6;(8 #The !nti/raft and Corrupt Practices !ct%.
Re".9lic Act No. )/)) :Ati;Se?.al Harass&et Act>
Committed 0y any person #a&ing aut#ority1 influence or moral ascendancy o&er anot#er in a $or61 training or education en&ironment $#en #e or s#e demands1 re3uests1
or ot#er$ise re3uires any se4ual fa&or from t#e ot#er regardless of $#et#er t#e demand1 re3uest or re3uirement for su0mission is accepted 0y t#e o0?ect of t#e said act
(for a passing grade1 or granting of sc#olars#ip or #onors1 or payment of a stipend1 allo$ances1 0enefits1 considerations; fa&ora0le compensation terms1 conditions1
promotions or $#en t#e refusal to do so results in a detrimental conse3uence for t#e &ictim).
Also #olds lia0le any person $#o directs or induces anot#er to commit any act of se4ual #arassment1 or $#o cooperates in t#e commission1 t#e #ead of t#e office1
educational or training institution solidarily.
Complaints to 0e #andled 0y a committee on decorum1 $#ic# s#all 0e determined 0y rules and regulations on suc#.
Administrati&e sanctions s#all not 0e a 0ar to prosecution in t#e proper courts for unla$ful acts of se4ual #arassment.
TITLE 2III. CRIMES AGAINST %ERSONS
Crimes against persons
1. -arricide (Art. 24);
2. Murder (Art. 24');
3. 5omicide (Art. 24));
4. 9eat# caused in a tumultuous affray (Art. 251);
5. -#ysical in?uries inflicted in a tumultuous affray (Art. 252);
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 217
. ;i&ing
assista
nce to
suicide
(Art.
253);
".
9isc#a
rge of
firearm
s (Art.
254);
'.
%nfantic
ide
(Art.
255);
).
%ntenti
onal
a0ortio
n (Art.
25);
1*.
8ninte
ntional
a0ortio
n (Art.
25");
11. A0ortion practiced 0y t#e $oman #erself or 0y #er parents (Art. 25');
12. A0ortion practiced 0y a p#ysician or mid$ife and dispensing of a0orti&es (Art. 25));
13. 9uel (Art. 2*);
14. C#allenging to a duel (Art. 21);
15. Mutilation (Art. 22);
1. <erious p#ysical in?uries (Art. 23);
1". Administering in?urious su0stances or 0e&erages (Art. 24);
1'. Aess serious p#ysical in?uries (Art. 25);
1). <lig#t p#ysical in?uries and maltreatment (Art. 2); and
2*. 2ape (Art. 2BA).
The essence of crime here involves the ta4ing of human life, destruction of the fetus or inflicting injuries.
!s to the ta4ing of human life, you have'
#(% Parricide<
#"% 0urder<
#6% Homicide<
#*% &nfanticide< and
#$% /iving assistance to suicide.
,ote that parricide is premised on the relationship between the offender and the offended. The victim is three days old or older. ! stranger who conspires with the parent
is guilty of murder.
&n infanticide, the victim is younger than three days or ?" hours old< can be committed by a stranger. &f a stranger who conspires with parent, both commit the crime of
infanticide.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 218
Article 34'.
%arrici$e
!lements
1. A
person is
6illed;
2. T#e
deceas
ed is
6illed
0y t#e
accuse
d;
3. T#e deceased is t#e fat#er1 mot#er1 or c#ild1 $#et#er legitimate or illegitimate1 or a legitimate ot#er ascendant or ot#er descendant1 or t#e legitimate spouse1 of t#e
accused.
This is a crime committed between people who are related by blood. :etween spouses, even though they are not related by blood, it is also parricide.
The relationship must be in the direct line and not in the collateral line.
The relationship between the offender and the offended party must be legitimate, except when the offender and the offended party are related as parent and child.
&f the offender and the offended party, although related by blood and in the direct line, are separated by an intervening illegitimate relationship, parricide can no longer be
committed. The illegitimate relationship between the child and the parent renders all relatives after the child in the direct line to be illegitimate too.
The only illegitimate relationship that can bring about parricide is that between parents and illegitimate children as the offender and the offended parties.
&llustration'
! is the parent of :, the illegitimate daughter. : married C and they begot a legitimate child @. &f @, daughter of : and C, would 4ill !, the grandmother, the crime cannot
be parricide anymore because of the intervening illegitimacy. The relationship between ! and @ is no longer legitimate. Hence, the crime committed is homicide or
murder.
5ince parricide is a crime of relationship, if a stranger conspired in the commission of the crime, he cannot be held liable for parricide. His participation would ma4e him
liable for murder or for homicide, as the case may be. The rule of conspiracy that the act of one is the act of all does not apply here because of the personal relationship
of the offender to the offended party.
&llustration'
! spouse of : conspires with C to 4ill :. C is the stranger in the relationship. C 4illed : with treachery. The means employed is made 4nown to ! and ! agreed that the
4illing will be done by poisoning.
!s far as ! is concerned, the crime is based on his relationship with :. &t is therefore parricide. The treachery that was employed in 4illing :ong will only be generic
aggravating circumstance in the crime of parricide because this is not one crime that re9uires a 9ualifying circumstance.
:ut that same treachery, insofar as C is concerned, as a stranger who cooperated in the 4illing, ma4es the crime murder< treachery becomes a 9ualifying circumstance.
&n 4illing a spouse, there must be a valid subsisting marriage at the time of the 4illing. !lso, the information should allege the fact of such valid marriage between the
accused and the victim.
&n a ruling by the 5upreme Court, it was held that if the information did not allege that the accused was legally married to the victim, he could not be convicted of parricide
even if the marriage was established during the trial. &n such cases, relationship shall be appreciated as generic aggravating circumstance.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 219
The 5upreme
Court has also
ruled that
0uslim
husbands with
several wives
can be
convicted of
parricide only
in case the
first wife is
4illed. There
is no parricide
if the other
wives are
4illed although
their marriage
is recogni3ed
as valid. This
is so because
a Catholic
man can
commit the
crime only once. &f a 0uslim husband could commit this crime more than once, in effect, he is being punished for the marriage which the law itself authori3ed him to
contract.
That the mother 4illed her child in order to conceal her dishonor is not mitigating. This is immaterial to the crime of parricide, unli4e in the case of infanticide. &f the child is
less than three days old when 4illed, the crime is infanticide and intent to conceal her dishonor is considered mitigating.
Article 34). Deat, or %,#sical ID.ries I(licte$ .$er E?ce"tioal Circ.&staces
!lements
1. A legally married person1 or a parent1 surprises #is spouse or #is daug#ter1 t#e latter under 1' years of age and li&ing $it# #im1 in t#e act of committing se4ual
intercourse $it# anot#er person;
2. 5e or s#e 6ills any or 0ot# of t#em1 or inflicts upon any or 0ot# of t#em any serious p#ysical in?ury in t#e act or immediately t#ereafter;
3. 5e #as not promoted or facilitated t#e prostitution of #is $ife or daug#ter1 or t#at #e or s#e #as not consented to t#e infidelity of t#e ot#er spouse.


Two stages contemplated before the article will apply'
#(% .hen the offender surprised the other spouse with a paramour or mistress. The attac4 must ta4e place while the sexual intercourse is going on. &f the surprise
was before or after the intercourse, no matter how immediate it may be, !rticle "*? does not apply. The offender in this situation only gets the benefit of a
mitigating circumstance, that is, sufficient provocation immediately preceding the act.
#"% .hen the offender 4ills or inflicts serious physical injury upon the other spouse andJor paramour while in the act of intercourse, or immediately thereafter, that is,
after surprising.
Bou have to divide the stages because as far as the first stage is concerned, it does not admit of any situation less than sexual intercourse.
5o if the surprising too4 place before any actual sexual intercourse could be done because the parties are only in their preliminaries, the article cannot be invo4ed
anymore.
&f the surprising too4 place after the actual sexual intercourse was finished, even if the act being performed indicates no other conclusion but that sexual intercourse was
had, the article does not apply.
!s long as the surprising too4 place while the sexual intercourse was going on, the second stage becomes immaterial.
&t is either 4illing or inflicting physical injuries while in that act or immediately thereafter. &f the 4illing was done while in that act, no problem. &f the 4illing was done when
sexual intercourse is finished, a problem arises. 2irst, were they surprised in actual sexual intercourseO 5econd, were they 4illed immediately thereafterO
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 220
The phrase Eimmediately thereafterF has been interpreted to mean that between the surprising and the 4illing of the inflicting of the physical injury, there should be no
brea4 of time. &n other words, it must be a continuous process.
The article presumes that a legally married person who surprises his or her better half in actual sexual intercourse would be overcome by the obfuscation he felt when he
saw them in the act that he lost his head. The law, thus, affords protection to a spouse who is considered to have acted in a justified outburst of passion or a state of
mental dise9uilibrium. The offended spouse has no time to regain his selfcontrol.
&f there was already a brea4 of time between the sexual act and the 4illing or inflicting of the injury, the law presupposes that the offender regained his reason and
therefore, the article will not apply anymore.
!s long as the act is continuous, the article still applies.
.here the accused surprised his wife and his paramour in the act of illicit intercourse, as a result of which he went out to 4ill the paramour in a fit of passionate outburst.
!lthough about one hour had passed between the time the accused discovered his wife having sexual intercourse with the victim and the time the latter was
actually 4illed, it was held in Peo!le v. Abarca, 1$3 SCRA 73$, that !rticle "*? was applicable, as the shooting was a continuation of the pursuit of the victim by
the accused. Here, the accused, after the discovery of the act of infidelity of his wife, loo4ed for a firearm in Tacloban City.
!rticle "*? does not provide that the victim is to be 4illed instantly by the accused after surprising his spouse in the act of intercourse. .hat is re9uired is that the 4illing is
the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the accused upon the discovery of the infidelity of his spouse. The 4illing should have been actually motivated by the
same blind impulse.
&llustration'
! upon coming home, surprised his wife, :, together with C. The paramour was fast enough to jump out of the window. ! got the bolo and chased C but he disappeared
among the neighborhood. 5o ! started loo4ing around for about an hour but he could not find the paramour. ! gave up and was on his way home. =nfortunately, the
paramour, thin4ing that ! was no longer around, came out of hiding and at that moment, ! saw him and hac4ed him to death. There was a brea4 of time and !rticle "*?
does not apply anymore because when he gave up the search, it is a circumstance showing that his anger had already died down.
!rticle "*?, far from defining a felony merely grants a privilege or benefit, more of an exempting circumstance as the penalty is intended more for the protection of the
accused than a punishment. @eath under exceptional character can not be 9ualified by either aggravating or mitigating circumstances.
&n the case of Peo!le v. Abarca, 1$3 SCRA 73$, two persons suffered physical injuries as they were caught in the crossfire when the accused shot the victim. ! complex
crime of double frustrated murder was not committed as the accused did not have the intent to 4ill the two victims. Here, the accused did not commit murder when he
fired at the paramour of his wife. &nflicting death under exceptional circumstances is not murder. The accused was held liable for negligence under the first part, second
paragraph of !rticle 6-$, that is, less serious physical injuries through simple negligence. ,o aberratio ictus because he was acting lawfully.
! person who acts under !rticle "*? is not committing a crime. 5ince this is merely an exempting circumstance, the accused must first be charged with'
#(% Parricide + if the spouse is 4illed<
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 221
#"% 0urder
or
homici
de +
depen
ding
on
how
the
4illing
was
done
insofar
as the
param
our or
the
mistre
ss is
concer
ned<
#6%
Homici
de +
throug
h
simple
neglig
ence,
if a
third
party
is
4illed<
#*% Physical injuries + through rec4less imprudence, if a third party is injured.
&f death results or the physical injuries are serious, there is criminal liability although the penalty is only destierro. The banishment is intended more for the protection of
the offender rather than a penalty.
&f the crime committed is less serious physical injuries or slight physical injuries, there is no criminal liability.
The article does not apply where the wife was not surprised in flagrant adultery but was being abused by a man as in this case there will be defense of relation.
&f the offender surprised a couple in sexual intercourse, and believing the woman to be his wife, 4illed them, this article may be applied if the mista4e of facts is proved.
The benefits of this article do not apply to the person who consented to the infidelity of his spouse or who facilitated the prostitution of his wife.
The article is also made available to parents who shall surprise their daughter below (1 years of age in actual sexual intercourse while Eliving with them.F The act should
have been committed by the daughter with a seducer. The two stages also apply. The parents cannot invo4e this provision if, in a way, they have encouraged the
prostitution of the daughter.
The phrase Eliving with themF is understood to be in their own dwelling, because of the embarrassment and humiliation done not only to the parent but also to the parental
abode.
&f it was done in a motel, the article does not apply.
&llustration'
! abandoned his wife : for two years. To support their children, ! had to accept a relationship with another man. ! learned of this, and surprised them in the act of
sexual intercourse and 4illed :. ! is not entitled to !rticle "*1. Having abandoned his family for two years, it was natural for her to feel some affection for others, more so
of a man who could help her.
-omici"e committe" #n"er e!ceptiona circ#mstances, atho#gh p#nishe" with "estierro, is within the .#ris"iction of the /egiona Tria 0o#rt an" not
the 1T0 beca#se the crime charge" is homici"e or m#r"er. The e!ceptiona circ#mstances, not being eements of the crime b#t a matter of "efense,
are not pea"e". 2t practicay grants a pri$iege amo#nting to an e!emption for a"e3#ate p#nishment.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 222
Article 34/.
M.r$er
!lements
1. A
person $as
6illed;
2.
Accused 6illed
#im;
3. T#e
6illing
$as
attend
ed 0y
any of
t#e
follo$i
ng
3ualifyi
ng
circum
stance
s /
a. @it# treac#ery1 ta6ing ad&antage of superior strengt#1 $it# t#e aid or armed men1 or employing means to $a6en t#e defense1 or of means or persons to
insure or afford impunity;
0. %n consideration of a price1 re$ard or promise;
c. 7y means of inundation1 fire1 poison1 e4plosion1 s#ip$rec61 stranding of a &essel1 derailment or assault upon a railroad1 fall of an airs#ip1 0y means of motor
&e#icles1 or $it# t#e use of any ot#er means in&ol&ing great $aste and ruin;
d. .n occasion of any of t#e calamities enumerated in t#e preceding paragrap#1 or of an eart#3ua6e1 eruption of a &olcano1 destructi&e cyclone1 epidemic1 or
any ot#er pu0lic calamity;
e. @it# e&ident premeditation;
f. @it# cruelty1 0y deli0erately and in#umanly augmenting t#e suffering of t#e &ictim1 or outraging or scoffing at #is person or corpse.
4. T#e 6illing is not parricide or infanticide.
Homicide is 9ualified to murder if any of the 9ualifying circumstances under !rticle "*1 is present. &t is the unlawful 4illing of a person not constituting murder, parricide or
infanticide.
&n murder, any of the following 9ualifying circumstances is present'
#(% Treachery, ta4ing advantage of superior strength, aid or armed men, or employing means to wa4en the defense, or of means or persons to insure or afford
impunity<
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof that tend directly
and especially to insure its execution without ris4 to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might ma4e.
This circumstance involves means, methods, form in the execution of the 4illing which may actually be an aggravating circumstance also, in which case, the
treachery absorbs the same.
&llustration'
! person who is determined to 4ill resorted to the cover of dar4ness at nighttime to insure the 4illing. ,octurnity becomes a means that constitutes treachery and
the 4illing would be murder. :ut if the aggravating circumstance of nocturnity is considered by itself, it is not one of those which 9ualify a homicide to murder. >ne
might thin4 the 4illing is homicide unless nocturnity is considered as constituting treachery, in which case the crime is murder.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 223
The
essenc
e of
treach
ery is
that
the
offend
ed
party
was
denied
the
chanc
e to
defend
himself
becau
se of
the
means
,
metho
ds, form in executing the crime deliberately adopted by the offender. &t is a matter of whether or not the offended party was denied the chance of defending
himself.
&f the offended was denied the chance to defend himself, treachery 9ualifies the 4illing to murder. &f despite the means resorted to by the offender, the offended
was able to put up a defense, although unsuccessful, treachery is not available. &nstead, some other circumstance may be present. Consider now whether such
other circumstance 9ualifies the 4illing or not.
&llustration'
&f the offender used superior strength and the victim was denied the chance to defend himself, there is treachery. The treachery must be alleged in the
information. :ut if the victim was able to put up an unsuccessful resistance, there is no more treachery but the use of superior strength can be alleged and it also
9ualifies the 4illing to murder.
>ne attendant 9ualifying circumstance is enough. &f there are more than one 9ualifying circumstance alleged in the information for murder, only one circumstance
will 9ualify the 4illing to murder and the other circumstances will be ta4en as generic.
To be considered 9ualifying, the particular circumstance must be alleged in the information. &f what was alleged was not proven and instead another circumstance,
not alleged, was established during the trial, even if the latter constitutes a 9ualifying circumstance under !rticle "*1, the same can not 9ualify the 4illing to murder.
The accused can only be convicted of homicide.
/enerally, murder cannot be committed if at the beginning, the offended had no intent to 4ill because the 9ualifying circumstances must be resorted to with a view
of 4illing the offended party. 5o if the 4illing were at the Espur of the momentF, even though the victim was denied the chance to defend himself because of the
suddenness of the attac4, the crime would only be homicide. Treachery contemplates that the means, methods and form in the execution were consciously
adopted and deliberately resorted to by the offender, and were not merely incidental to the 4illing.
&f the offender may have not intended to 4ill the victim but he only wanted to commit a crime against him in the beginning, he will still be liable for murder if in the
manner of committing the felony there was treachery and as a conse9uence thereof the victim died. This is based on the rule that a person committing a felony
shall be liable for the conse9uences thereof although different from that which he intended.
&llustration'
The accused, three young men, resented the fact that the victim continued to visit a girl in their neighborhood despite the warning they gave him. 5o one evening,
after the victim had visited the girl, they sei3ed and tied him to a tree, with both arms and legs around the tree. They thought they would give him a lesson by
whipping him with branches of gumamela until the victim fell unconscious. The accused left not 4nowing that the victim died.
The crime committed was murder. The accused deprived the victim of the chance to defend himself when the latter was tied to a tree. Treachery is a
circumstance referring to the manner of committing the crime. There was no ris4 to the accused arising from the defense by the victim.
!lthough what was initially intended was physical injury, the manner adopted by the accused was treacherous and since the victim died as a conse9uence thereof,
the crime is murder although originally, there was no intent to 4ill.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 224
.hen
the
victim
is
alread
y
dead,
intent
to 4ill
becom
es
irrelev
ant. &t
is
import
ant
only if
the
victim
did not
die to
determ
ine if
the
felony
is
physic
al
injury
or
attemp
ted or
frustrat
ed
homici
de.
5o long as the means, methods and form in the execution is deliberately adopted, even if there was no intent to 4ill, there is treachery.
#"% &n consideration of price, reward or promises<
#6% &nundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwrec4, stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault upon a street car or locomotive, fall of an airship, by means of a motor
vehicle, or with the use of other means involving great waste and ruin<
The only problem insofar as the 4illing by fire is concerned is whether it would be arson with homicide, or murder.
.hen a person is 4illed by fire, the primordial criminal intent of the offender is considered. &f the primordial criminal intent of the offender is to 4ill and fire was only
used as a means to do so, the crime is only murder. &f the primordial criminal intent of the offender is to destroy property with the use of pyrotechnics and
incidentally, somebody within the premises is 4illed, the crime is arson with homicide. :ut this is not a complex crime under !rticle *1. This is single indivisible
crime penali3ed under !rticle 6"-, which is death as a conse9uence of arson. That somebody died during such fire would not bring about murder because there is
no intent to 4ill in the mind of the offender. He intended only to destroy property. However, a higher penalty will be applied.
&n Peo!le v. Pu%a. an# Sa0+on, 167 SCRA 139, there was a town fiesta and the two accused were at the town pla3a with their companions. !ll were
uproariously happy, apparently drenched with drin4. Then, the group saw the victim, a "$ year old retard wal4ing nearby and they made him dance by tic4ling his
sides with a piece of wood. The victim and the accused Pugay were friends and, at times, slept in the same place together. Having gotten bored with their form of
entertainment, accused Pugay went and got a can of gasoline and poured it all over the retard. Then, the accused 5amson lit him up, ma4ing him a fren3ied,
shrie4ing human torch. The retard died.
&t was held that Pugay was guilty of homicide through rec4less imprudence. 5amson only guilty of homicide, with the mitigating circumstance of no intention to
commit so grave a wrong. There was no animosity between the two accused and the victim such that it cannot be said that they resort to fire to 4ill him. &t was
merely a part of their fun ma4ing but because their acts were felonious, they are criminally liable.
#*% >n occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph c, or an earth9ua4e, eruption of volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic or any other
public calamity<
#$% )vident premeditation< and
#-% Cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse.
Cruelty includes the situation where the victim is already dead and yet, acts were committed which would decry or scoff the corpse of the victim. The crime
becomes murder.
Hence, this is not actually limited to cruelty. &t goes beyond that because even if the victim is already a corpse when the acts deliberately augmenting the wrong
done to him were committed, the 4illing is still 9ualified to murder although the acts done no longer amount to cruelty.
=nder !rticle (*, the generic aggravating circumstance of cruelty re9uires that the victim be alive, when the cruel wounds were inflicted and, therefore, must be
evidence to that effect. Bet, in murder, aside from cruelty, any act that would amount to scoffing or decrying the corpse of the victim will 9ualify the 4illing to
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 225
murder
.
&llustra
tion'
Two
people
engag
ed in a
9uarrel
and
they
hac4e
d each
other,
one
4illing
the
other.
=p to
that
point,
the
crime
is
homici
de.
Howev
er, if
the
4iller
tried to
disme
mber
the
differe
nt
parts
of the
body of the victim, indicative of an intention to scoff at or decry or humiliate the corpse of the victim, then what would have murder because this circumstance is
recogni3ed under !rticle "*1, even though it was inflicted or was committed when the victim was already dead.
The following are holdings of the 5upreme Court with respect to the crime of murder'
#(% Lilling of a child of tender age is murder 9ualified by treachery because the wea4ness of the child due to his tender age results in the absence of any danger to the
aggressor.
#"% )vident premeditation is absorbed in price, reward or promise, if without the premeditation the inductor would not have induced the other to commit the act but not
as regards the one induced.
#6 !buse of superior strength is inherent in and comprehended by the circumstance of treachery or forms part of treachery.
#*% Treachery is inherent in poison.
#$% .here one of the accused, who were charged with murder, was the wife of the deceased but here relationship to the deceased was not alleged in the information,
she also should be convicted of murder but the relationship should be appreciated as aggravating.
#-% Lilling of the victims hit by hand grenade thrown at them is murder 9ualified by explosion not by treachery.
#?% .here the accused housemaid gagged a three year old boy, son of her master, with stoc4ings, placed him in a box with head down and legs upward and covered
the box with some sac4s and other boxes, and the child instantly died because of suffocation, and then the accused demanded ransom from the parents, such did
not convert the offense into 4idnapping with murder. The accused was well aware that the child could be suffocated to death in a few minutes after she left.
Ransom was only a part of the diabolical scheme to murder the child, to conceal his body and then demand money before discovery of the body.
The essence of 4idnapping or serious illegal detention is the actual confinement or restraint of the victim or deprivation of his liberty. &f there is no showing that the
accused intended to deprive their victims of their liberty for some time and there being no appreciable interval between their being ta4en and their being shot, murder and
not 4idnapping with murder is committed.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 226
Article 341.
Ho&ici$e
!lements
1. A
person $as
6illed;
2.
.ffend
er
6illed
#im
$it#out
any
?ustifyi
ng
circum
stance
s;
3.
.ffend
er #ad
t#e
intentio
n to
6ill1
$#ic#
is
presu
med;
4. T#e 6illing $as not attended 0y any of t#e 3ualifying circumstances of murder1 or 0y t#at of parricide or infanticide.
Homicide is the unlawful 4illing of a person not constituting murder, parricide or infanticide.
@istinction between homicide and physical injuries'
&n attempted or frustrated homicide, there is intent to 4ill.
&n physical injuries, there is none. However, if as a result of the physical injuries inflicted, the victim died, the crime will be homicide because the law punishes the result,
and not the intent of the act.
The following are holdings of the 5upreme Court with respect to the crime of homicide'
#(% Physical injuries are included as one of the essential elements of frustrated homicide.
#"% &f the deceased received two wounds from two persons acting independently of each other and the wound inflicted by either could have caused death, both of
them are liable for the death of the victim and each of them is guilty of homicide.
#6% &f the injuries were mortal but were only due to negligence, the crime committed will be serious physical injuries through rec4less imprudence as the element of
intent to 4ill in frustrated homicide is incompatible with negligence or imprudence.
#*% .here the intent to 4ill is not manifest, the crime committed has been generally considered as physical injuries and not attempted or frustrated murder or
homicide.
#$% .hen several assailants not acting in conspiracy inflicted wounds on a victim but it cannot be determined who inflicted which would which caused the death of the
victim, all are liable for the victimDs death.
,ote that while it is possible to have a crime of homicide through rec4less imprudence, it is not possible to have a crime of frustrated homicide through rec4less
imprudence.
Article 3!1. Deat, Ca.se$ i A T.&.lt.o.s A((ra#
!lements
1. T#ere are se&eral persons;
2. T#ey do not compose groups organi:ed for t#e common purpose of assaulting and attac6ing eac# ot#er reciprocally;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 227
3. T#ese
se&eral
person
s
3uarrel
ed and
assault
ed one
anot#e
r in a
confus
ed and
tumult
uous
manne
r;
4.
<omeo
ne $as
6illed
in t#e
course
of t#e
affray;
5. %t can
not 0e
ascert
ained
$#o
actuall
y 6illed
t#e
deceas
ed;
. T#e person or persons $#o inflicted serious p#ysical in?uries or $#o used &iolence can 0e identified.
Tumultuous affray simply means a commotion in a tumultuous and confused manner, to such an extent that it would not be possible to identify who the 4iller is if death
results, or who inflicted the serious physical injury, but the person or persons who used violence are 4nown.
&t is not a tumultuous affray which brings about the crime< it is the inability to ascertain actual perpetrator. &t is necessary that the very person who caused the death can
not be 4nown, not that he can not be identified. :ecause if he is 4nown but only his identity is not 4nown, then he will be charged for the crime of homicide or murder
under a fictitious name and not death in a tumultuous affray. &f there is a conspiracy, this crime is not committed.
To be considered death in a tumultuous affray, there must be'
#(% a 9uarrel, a freeforall, which should not involve organi3ed group< and
#"% someone who is injured or 4illed because of the fight.
!s long as it cannot be determined who 4illed the victim, all of those persons who inflicted serious physical injuries will be collectively answerable for the death of that
fellow.
The Revised Penal Code sets priorities as to who may be liable for the death or physical injury in tumultuous affray'
#(% The persons who inflicted serious physical injury upon the victim<
#"% &f they could not be 4nown, then anyone who may have employed violence on that person will answer for his death.
#6% &f nobody could still be traced to have employed violence upon the victim, nobody will answer. The crimes committed might be disturbance of public order, or if
participants are armed, it could be tumultuous disturbance, or if property was destroyed, it could be malicious mischief.
The fight must be tumultuous. The participants must not be members of an organi3ed group. This is different from a rumble which involves organi3ed groups composed
of persons who are to attac4 others. &f the fight is between such groups, even if you cannot identify who, in particular, committed the 4illing, the adverse party composing
the organi3ed group will be collectively charged for the death of that person.
&llustration'
&f a fight ensued between "; 5igue5igue /ang men and "; :ahala,a /ang men, and in the course thereof, one from each group was 4illed, the crime would be
homicide or murder< there will be collective responsibility on both sides. ,ote that the person 4illed need not be a participant in the fight.
Article 3!3. %,#sical ID.ries I(licte$ i A T.&.lt.o.s A((ra#
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 228
!lements
1. T#ere
is a
tumultuous
affray;
2. A
particip
ant or
some
particip
ants
t#ereof
suffere
d
serious
p#ysic
al
in?uries
or
p#ysic
al
in?uries
of a
less
serious
nature
only;
3. T#e
person
respon
si0le
t#ereof
can
not 0e
identifi
ed;
4. All t#ose $#o appear to #a&e used &iolence upon t#e person of t#e offended party are 6no$n.
&f in the course of the tumultuous affray, only serious or less serious physical injuries are inflicted upon a participant, those who used violence upon the person of the
offended party shall be held liable.
&n physical injuries caused in a tumultuous affray, the conditions are also the same. :ut you do not have a crime of physical injuries resulting from a tumultuous affray if
the physical injury is only slight. The physical injury should be serious or less serious and resulting from a tumultuous affray. 5o anyone who may have employed
violence will answer for such serious or less serious physical injury.
&f the physical injury sustained is only slight, this is considered as inherent in a tumultuous affray. The offended party cannot complain if he cannot identify who inflicted
the slight physical injuries on him.
Article 3!8. Gi0i* Assistace to S.ici$e
Acts punis#ed
1. Assisting anot#er to commit suicide1 $#et#er t#e suicide is consummated or not;
2. Aending #is assistance to anot#er to commit suicide to t#e e4tent of doing t#e 6illing #imself.
/iving assistance to suicide means giving means #arms, poison, etc.% or whatever manner of positive and direct cooperation #intellectual aid, suggestions regarding the
mode of committing suicide, etc.%.
&n this crime, the intention must be for the person who is as4ing the assistance of another to commit suicide.
&f the intention is not to commit suicide, as when he just wanted to have a picture ta4en of him to impress upon the world that he is committing suicide because he is not
satisfied with the government, the crime is held to be inciting to sedition.
He becomes a coconspirator in the crime of inciting to sedition, but not of giving assistance to suicide because the assistance must be given to one who is really
determined to commit suicide.
&f the person does the 4illing himself, the penalty is similar to that of homicide, which is reclusion temporal. There can be no 9ualifying circumstance because the
determination to die must come from the victim. This does not contemplate euthanasia or mercy 4illing where the crime is homicide #if without consent< with consent,
covered by !rticle "$6%.
The following are holdings of the 5upreme Court with respect to this crime'
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 229
#(% The
crime
is
frustrat
ed if
the
offend
er
gives
the
assista
nce by
doing
the
4illing
himself
as
firing
upon
the
head
of the
victim
but
who
did not
die
due to
medic
al
assista
nce.
#"% The person attempting to commit suicide is not liable if he survives. The accused is liable if he 4ills the victim, his sweetheart, because of a suicide pact.
&n other penal codes, if the person who wanted to die did not die, there is liability on his part because there is public disturbance committed by him. >ur Revised Penal
Code is silent but there is no bar against accusing the person of disturbance of public order if indeed serious disturbance of public peace occurred due to his attempt to
commit suicide. &f he is not prosecuted, this is out of pity and not because he has not violated the Revised Penal Code.
&n mercy 4illing, the victim is not in a position to commit suicide. .hoever would heed his advice is not really giving assistance to suicide but doing the 4illing himself. &n
giving assistance to suicide, the principal actor is the person committing the suicide.
:oth in euthanasia and suicide, the intention to the end life comes from the victim himself< otherwise the article does not apply. The victim must persistently induce the
offender to end his life. &f there is only slight persuasion to end his life, and the offender readily assented thereto.
Article 3!4. Disc,ar*e o( Firear&s
1. .ffender disc#arges a firearm against or at anot#er person;
2. .ffender #ad no intention to 6ill t#at person.
This crime cannot be committed through imprudence because it re9uires that the discharge must be directed at another.
&f the firearm is directed at a person and the trigger was pressed but did not fire, the crime is frustrated discharge of firearm.
&f the discharge is not directed at a person, the crime may constitute alarm and scandal.
The following are holdings of the 5upreme Court with respect to this crime'
#(% &f serious physical injuries resulted from discharge, the crime committed is the complex crime of serious physical injury with illegal discharge of firearm, or if less
serious physical injury, the complex crime of less serious physical injury with illegal discharge of firearm will apply.
#"% 2iring a gun at a person even if merely to frighten him constitutes illegal discharge of firearm.
Article 3!!. I(atici$e
!lements
1. A c#ild $as 6illed 0y t#e accused;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 230
2. T#e
de
ce
as
ed
c#il
d
$a
s
les
s
t#a
n
"2
#o
urs
old
.
This is a crime
based on the
age of the
victim. The
victim should
be less than
three days
old.
The offender
may actually
be the parent
of the child. :ut you call the crime infanticide, not parricide, if the age of the victim is less than three days old. &f the victim is three days old or above, the crime is
parricide.
&llustration'
!n unmarried woman, !, gave birth to a child, :. To conceal her dishonor, ! conspired with C to dispose of the child. C agreed and 4illed the child : by burying the child
somewhere.
&f the child was 4illed when the age of the child was three days old and above already, the crime of ! is parricide. The fact that the 4illing was done to conceal her
dishonor will not mitigate the criminal liability anymore because concealment of dishonor in 4illing the child is not mitigating in parricide.
&f the crime committed by ! is parricide because the age of the child is three days old or above, the crime of the coconspirator C is murder. &t is not parricide because he
is not related to the victim.
&f the child is less than three days old when 4illed, both the mother and the stranger commits infanticide because infanticide is not predicated on the relation of the
offender to the offended party but on the age of the child. &n such a case, concealment of dishonor as a motive for the mother to have the child 4illed is mitigating.
Concealment of dishonor is not an element of infanticide. &t merely lowers the penalty. &f the child is abandoned without any intent to 4ill and death results as a
conse9uence, the crime committed is not infanticide but abandonment under !rticle "?-.
&f the purpose of the mother is to conceal her dishonor, infanticide through imprudence is not committed because the purpose of concealing the dishonor is incompatible
with the absence of malice in culpable felonies.
&f the child is born dead, or if the child is already dead, infanticide is not committed.
Article 3!'. Itetioal A9ortio
Acts punis#ed
1. 8sing any &iolence upon t#e person of t#e pregnant $oman;
2. Acting1 0ut $it#out using &iolence1 $it#out t#e consent of t#e $oman. (7y administering drugs or 0e&erages upon suc# pregnant $oman $it#out #er consent.)
3. Acting (0y administering drugs or 0e&erages)1 $it# t#e consent of t#e pregnant $oman.
!lements
1. T#ere is a pregnant $oman;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 231
2.
(iolenc
e is
e4erte
d1 or
drugs
or
0e&era
ges
admini
stered1
or t#at
t#e
accuse
d
ot#er$i
se acts
upon
suc#
pregna
nt
$oman
;
3. As a result of t#e use of &iolence or drugs or 0e&erages upon #er1 or any ot#er act of t#e accused1 t#e fetus dies1 eit#er in t#e $om0 or after #a&ing 0een e4pelled
t#erefrom;
4. T#e a0ortion is intended.
!bortion is the violent expulsion of a fetus from the maternal womb. &f the fetus has been delivered but it could not subsist by itself, it is still a fetus and not a person.
Thus, if it is 4illed, the crime committed is abortion not infanticide.
@istinction between infanticide and abortion
&t is infanticide if the victim is already a person less that three days old or ?" hours and is viable or capable of living separately from the motherDs womb.
&t is abortion if the victim is not viable but remains to be a fetus.
!bortion is not a crime against the woman but against the fetus. &f mother as a conse9uence of abortion suffers death or physical injuries, you have a complex crime of
murder or physical injuries and abortion.
&n intentional abortion, the offender must 4now of the pregnancy because the particular criminal intention is to cause an abortion. Therefore, the offender must have
4nown of the pregnancy for otherwise, he would not try an abortion.
&f the woman turns out not to be pregnant and someone performs an abortion upon her, he is liable for an impossible crime if the woman suffers no physical injury. &f she
does, the crime will be homicide, serious physical injuries, etc.
=nder the !rticle *; of the Civil Code, birth determines personality. ! person is considered born at the time when the umbilical cord is cut. He then ac9uires a personality
separate from the mother.
:ut even though the umbilical cord has been cut, !rticle *( of the Civil Code provides that if the fetus had an intrauterine life of less than seven months, it must survive at
least "* hours after the umbilical cord is cut for it to be considered born.
&llustration'
! mother delivered an offspring which had an intrauterine life of seven months. :efore the umbilical cord is cut, the child was 4illed.
&f it could be shown that had the umbilical cord been cut, that child, if not 4illed, would have survived beyond "* hours, the crime is infanticide because that conceived
child is already considered born.
&f it could be shown that the child, if not 4illed, would not have survived beyond "* hours, the crime is abortion because what was 4illed was a fetus only.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 232
&n abortion,
the
concealment
of dishonor as
a motive of
the mother to
commit the
abortion upon
herself is
mitigating. &t
will also
mitigate the
liability of the
maternal
grandparent
of the victim +
the mother of
the pregnant
woman + if
the abortion
was done with
the consent of
the pregnant
woman.
&f the abortion
was done by
the mother of the pregnant woman without the consent of the woman herself, even if it was done to conceal dishonor, that circumstance will not mitigate her criminal
liability.
:ut if those who performed the abortion are the parents of the pregnant woman, or either of them, and the pregnant woman consented for the purpose of concealing her
dishonor, the penalty is the same as that imposed upon the woman who practiced the abortion upon herself .
2rustrated abortion is committed if the fetus that is expelled is viable and, therefore, not dead as abortion did not result despite the employment of ade9uate and sufficient
means to ma4e the pregnant woman abort. &f the means are not sufficient or ade9uate, the crime would be an impossible crime of abortion. &n consummated abortion,
the fetus must be dead.
>ne who persuades her sister to abort is a coprincipal, and one who loo4s for a physician to ma4e his sweetheart abort is an accomplice. The physician will be punished
under !rticle "$8 of the Revised Penal Code.
Article 3!). Uitetioal A9ortio
1. T#ere is a pregnant $oman;
2. (iolence is used upon suc# pregnant $oman $it#out intending an a0ortion;
3. T#e &iolence is intentionally e4erted;
4. As a result of t#e &iolence1 t#e fetus dies1 eit#er in t#e $om0 or after #a&ing 0een e4pelled t#erefrom.
=nintentional abortion re9uires physical violence inflicted deliberately and voluntarily by a third person upon the person of the pregnant woman. 0ere intimidation is not
enough unless the degree of intimidation already approximates violence.
&f the pregnant woman aborted because of intimidation, the crime committed is not unintentional abortion because there is no violence< the crime committed is light
threats.
&f the pregnant woman was 4illed by violence by her husband, the crime committed is the complex crime of parricide with unlawful abortion.
=nintentional abortion may be committed through negligence as it is enough that the use of violence be voluntary.
&llustration'
! 9uarrel ensued between !, husband, and :, wife. ! became so angry that he struc4 :, who was then pregnant, with a soft drin4 bottle on the hip. !bortion resulted and
: died.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 233
&n 3S v.
,e**r., 1$
Phil. 391, the
5upreme
Court said
that
4nowledge of
pregnancy of
the offended
party is not
necessary. &n
Peo!le v.
Carna+o,
#eci#e# on
A!ril 7, 1961,
however, the
5upreme
Court held
that
4nowledge of
pregnancy is
re9uired in
unintentional
abortion.
Criticism'
=nder !rticle
*, paragraph
( of the
Revised Penal
Code, any
person
committing a
felony is
criminally
liable for all
the direct,
natural, and
logical
conse9uences of his felonious acts although it may be different from that which is intended. The act of employing violence or physical force upon the woman is already a
felony. &t is not material if offender 4new about the woman being pregnant or not.
&f the act of violence is not felonious, that is, act of selfdefense, and there is no 4nowledge of the womanDs pregnancy, there is no liability. &f the act of violence is not
felonious, but there is 4nowledge of the womanDs pregnancy, the offender is liable for unintentional abortion.
&llustration'
The act of pushing another causing her to fall is a felonious act and could result in physical injuries. Correspondingly, if not only physical injuries were sustained but
abortion also resulted, the felonious act of pushing is the proximate cause of the unintentional abortion.
6.estios 7 As+ers
1. A pregnant $oman decided to commit suicide. <#e ?umped out of a $indo$ of a 0uilding 0ut s#e landed on a passer0y. <#e did not die 0ut an a0ortion
follo$ed. %s s#e lia0le for unintentional a0ortion=
,o. .hat is contemplated in unintentional abortion is that the force or violence must come from another. &f it was the woman doing the violence upon herself, it
must be to bring about an abortion, and therefore, the crime will be intentional abortion. &n this case, where the woman tried to commit suicide, the act of trying to commit
suicide is not a felony under the Revised Penal Code. The one penali3ed in suicide is the one giving assistance and not the person trying to commit suicide.
2. %f t#e a0orti&e drug used in a0ortion is a pro#i0ited drug or regulated drug under -residential 9ecree Co. 425 (T#e 9angerous 9rugs Act of 1)"2)1 as
amended1 $#at are t#e crimes committed=
The crimes committed are #(% intentional abortion< and #"% violation of the @angerous @rugs !ct of (8?".
Article 3!/. A9ortio %ractice$ 9# t,e Wo&a Hersel( or 9# Her %arets
!lements
1. T#ere is a pregnant $oman $#o #as suffered an a0ortion;
2. T#e a0ortion is intended;
3. A0ortion is caused 0y /
a. T#e pregnant $oman #erself;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 234
0. Any
ot#er
person
1 $it#
#er
consen
t; or
c. Any of
#er
parent
s1 $it#
#er
consen
t for
t#e
purpos
e of
concea
ling
#er
dis#on
or.
Article 3!1.
A9ortio
%ractice$ 9#
A %,#sicia
or Mi$+i(e
a$
Dis"esi*
o( A9orti0es
!lements
1. T#ere is a pregnant $oman $#o #as suffered an a0ortion;
2. T#e a0ortion is intended;
3. .ffender1 $#o must 0e a p#ysician or mid$ife1 caused or assisted in causing t#e a0ortion;
4. <aid p#ysician or mid$ife too6 ad&antage of #is or #er scientific 6no$ledge or s6ill.
&f the abortion is produced by a physician to save the life of the mother, there is no liability. This is 4nown as a therapeutic abortion. :ut abortion without medical
necessity to warrant it is punishable even with the consent of the woman or her husband.
&llustration'
! woman who is pregnant got sic4. The doctor administered a medicine which resulted in !bortion. The crime committed was unintentional abortion through negligence
or imprudence.
6.estio 7 As+er
@#at is t#e lia0ility of a p#ysician $#o a0orts t#e fetus to sa&e t#e life of t#e mot#er=
,one. This is a case of therapeutic abortion which is done out of a state of necessity. Therefore, the re9uisites under !rticle ((, paragraph *, of the Revised Penal
Code must be present. There must be no other practical or less harmful means of saving the life of the mother to ma4e the 4illing justified.
Article 3'4. Res"osi9ilit# o( %artici"ats i A D.el
Acts punis#ed
1. Jilling oneEs ad&ersary in a duel;
2. %nflicting upon suc# ad&ersary p#ysical in?uries;
3. Ma6ing a com0at alt#oug# no p#ysical in?uries #a&e 0een inflicted.
-ersons lia0le
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 235
1. T#e
person
$#o
6illed
or
inflicte
d
p#ysic
al
in?uries
upon
#is
ad&ers
ary1 or
0ot#
com0a
tants in
any
ot#er
case1
as
princip
als.
2. T#e
seconds1 as
accomplices.
There is no such crime nowadays because people hit each other even without entering into any preconceived agreement. This is an obsolete provision.
! duel may be defined as a formal or regular combat previously consented to by two parties in the presence of two or more seconds of lawful age on each side, who
ma4e the selection of arms and fix all the other conditions of the fight to settle some antecedent 9uarrel.
&f these are not the conditions of the fight, it is not a duel in the sense contemplated in the Revised Penal Code. &t will be a 9uarrel and anyone who 4illed the other will be
liable for homicide or murder, as the case may be.
The concept of duel under the Revised Penal Code is a classical one.
Article 3'1. C,alle*i* to A D.el
Acts punis#ed
1. C#allenging anot#er to a duel;
2. %nciting anot#er to gi&e or accept a c#allenge to a duel;
3. <coffing at or decrying anot#er pu0licly for #a&ing refused to accept a c#allenge to fig#t a duel.
&llustration'
&f one challenges another to a duel by shouting ECome down, >lympia, let us measure your prowess. .e will see whose intestines will come out. Bou are a coward if you
do not come downF, the crime of challenging to a duel is not committed. .hat is committed is the crime of light threats under !rticle "1$, paragraph ( of the Revised
Penal Code.
Article 3'3. M.tilatio
Acts punis#ed
1. %ntentionally mutilating anot#er 0y depri&ing #im1 eit#er totally or partially1 of some essential organ for reproduction;
!lements
1. T#ere 0e a castration1 t#at is1 mutilation of organs necessary for generation1 suc# as t#e penis or o&arium;
2. T#e mutilation is caused purposely and deli0erately1 t#at is1 to depri&e t#e offended party of some essential organ for reproduction
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 236
2.
%ntenti
onally
ma6ing
ot#er
mutilati
on1
t#at is1
0y
lopping
or
clippin
g off
any
part of
t#e
0ody
of t#e
offend
ed
party1
ot#er
t#an
t#e
essenti
al
organ
for
reprod
uction1
to
depri&
e #im
of t#at
part of
#is
0ody.
0utilation is the lopping or clipping off of some part of the body.
The intent to deliberately cut off the particular part of the body that was removed from the offended party must be established. &f there is no intent to deprive victim of
particular part of body, the crime is only serious physical injury.
The common mista4e is to associate this with the reproductive organs only. 0utilation includes any part of the human body that is not susceptible to grow again.
&f what was cut off was a reproductive organ, the penalty is much higher than that for homicide.
This cannot be committed through criminal negligence.
Article 3'8. Serio.s %,#sical ID.ries
5o$ committed
1. 7y $ounding;
2. 7y 0eating;
3. 7y assaulting; or
4. 7y administering in?urious su0stance.
&n one case, the accused, while conversing with the offended party, drew the latterDs bolo from its scabbard. The offended party caught hold of the edge of the blade of
his bolo and wounded himself. &t was held that since the accused did not wound, beat or assault the offended party, he can not be guilty of serious physical injuries.
<erious p#ysical in?uries
1. @#en t#e in?ured person 0ecomes insane1 im0ecile1 impotent or 0lind in conse3uence of t#e p#ysical in?uries inflicted;
2. @#en t#e in?ured person /
a. Aoses t#e use of speec# or t#e po$er to #ear or to smell1 or loses an eye1 a #and1 afoot1 an arm1 or a leg;
0. Aoses t#e use of any suc# mem0er; or
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 237
c.
7ecom
es
incapa
citated
for t#e
$or6 in
$#ic#
#e $as
t#ereto
fore
#a0itu
ally
engag
ed1 in
conse3
uence
of t#e
p#ysic
al
in?uries
inflicte
d;
3. @#en
t#e person
in?ured /
a.
7ecomes
deformed; or
0. Aoses any ot#er mem0er of #is 0ody; or
c. Aoses t#e use t#ereof; or
d. 7ecomes ill or incapacitated for t#e performance of t#e $or6 in $#ic# #e $as #a0itually engaged for more t#an )* days in conse3uence of t#e p#ysical
in?uries inflicted;
4. @#en t#e in?ured person 0ecomes ill or incapacitated for la0or for more t#an 3* days (0ut must not 0e more t#an )* days)1 as a result of t#e p#ysical in?uries
inflicted.
The crime of physical injuries is a crime of result because under our laws the crime of physical injuries is based on the gravity of the injury sustained. 5o this crime is
always consummated, notwithstanding the opinion of 5panish commentators li4e Cuello Calon, 7iada, etc., that it can be committed in the attempted or frustrated stage.
&f the act does not give rise to injuries, you will not be able to say whether it is attempted slight physical injuries, attempted less serious physical injuries, or attempted
serious physical injuries unless the result is there.
The reason why there is no attempted or frustrated physical injuries is because the crime of physical injuries is determined on the gravity of the injury. !s long as the
injury is not there, there can be no attempted or frustrated stage thereof.
Classification of physical injuries'
#(% :etween slight physical injuries and less serious physical injuries, you have a duration of one to nine days if slight physical injuries< or (; days to "; days if less
serious physical injuries. Consider the duration of healing and treatment.
The significant part here is between slight physical injuries and less serious physical injuries. Bou will consider not only the healing duration of the injury but also
the medical attendance re9uired to treat the injury. 5o the healing duration may be one to nine days, but if the medical treatment continues beyond nine days, the
physical injuries would already 9ualify as less serious physical injuries. The medical treatment may have lasted for nine days, but if the offended party is still
incapacitated for labor beyond nine days, the physical injuries are already considered less serious physical injuries.
#"% :etween less serious physical injuries and serious physical injuries, you do not consider the period of medical treatment. Bou only consider the period when the
offended party is rendered incapacitated for labor.
&f the offended party is incapacitated to wor4 for less than 6; days, even though the treatment continued beyond 6; days, the physical injuries are only considered
less serious because for purposes of classifying the physical injuries as serious, you do not consider the period of medical treatment. Bou only consider the period
of incapacity from wor4.
#6% .hen the injury created a deformity upon the offended party, you disregard the healing duration or the period of medical treatment involved. !t once, it is
considered serious physical injuries.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 238
5o
even
though
the
deform
ity may
not
have
incapa
citated
the offended party from wor4, or even though the medical treatment did not go beyond nine days, that deformity will bring about the crime of serious physical
injuries.
@eformity re9uires the concurrence of the following conditions'
#(% The injury must produce ugliness<
#"% &t must be visible<
#6% The ugliness will not disappear through natural healing process.
&llustration'
Aoss of molar tooth + This is not deformity as it is not visible.
Aoss of permanent front tooth + This is deformity as it is visible and permanent.
Aoss of mil4 front tooth + This is not deformity as it is visible but will be naturally replaced.
6.estio 7 As+er
T#e offender t#re$ acid on t#e face of t#e offended party. @ere it not for timely medical attention1 a deformity $ould #a&e 0een produced on t#e face of t#e &ictim.
After t#e plastic surgery1 t#e offended party $as more #andsome t#an 0efore t#e in?ury. @#at crime $as committed= %n $#at stage $as it committed=
The crime is serious physical injuries because the problem itself states that the injury would have produced a deformity. The fact that the plastic surgery removed
the deformity is immaterial because in law what is considered is not the artificial treatment but the natural healing process.
&n a case decided by the 5upreme Court, accused was charged with serious physical injuries because the injuries produced a scar. He was convicted under !rticle "-6
#*%. He appealed because, in the course of the trial, the scar disappeared. &t was held that accused can not be convicted of serious physical injuries. He is liable only for
slight physical injuries because the victim was not incapacitated, and there was no evidence that the medical treatment lasted for more than nine days.
5erious physical injuries is punished with higher penalties in the following cases'
#(% &f it is committed against any of the persons referred to in the crime of parricide under !rticle "*-<
#"% &f any of the circumstances 9ualifying murder attended its commission.
Thus, a father who inflicts serious physical injuries upon his son will be liable for 9ualified serious physical injuries.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 239
Re".9lic Act
No. /441 :T,e
Ati;HaHi*
La+>
5a:ing BB T#is
is any
initiation rite or
practice $#ic#
is a
prere3uisite
for admission
into
mem0ers#ip
in a fraternity
or sorority or
any
organi:ation
$#ic# places
t#e neop#yte
or applicant in
some
em0arrassing
or #umiliating
situations or
ot#er$ise
su0?ecting #im
to p#ysical or
psyc#ological
suffering of
in?ury. T#ese
do not include
any p#ysical1
mental1
psyc#ological testing and training procedure and practice to determine and en#ance t#e p#ysical and psyc#ological fitness of t#e prospecti&e regular mem0ers of t#e
0elo$.
.rgani:ations include any clu0 or A+-1 -C-1 -MA or officer or cadet corps of t#e CMT or CAT.

<ection 2 re3uires a $ritten notice to sc#ool aut#orities from t#e #ead of t#e organi:ation se&en days prior to t#e rites and s#ould not e4ceed t#ree days in duration.
<ection 3 re3uires super&ision 0y #ead of t#e sc#ool or t#e organi:ation of t#e rites.

<ection 4 3ualifies t#e crime if rape1 sodomy or mutilation results t#erefrom1 if t#e person 0ecomes insane1 an im0ecile1 or impotent or 0lind 0ecause of suc#1 if t#e person
loses t#e use of speec# or t#e po$er to #ear or smell or an eye1 a foot1 an arm or a leg1 or t#e use of any suc# mem0er or any of t#e serious p#ysical in?uries or t#e less
serious p#ysical in?uries. Also if t#e &ictim is 0elo$ 121 or 0ecomes incapacitated for t#e $or6 #e #a0itually engages in for 3*1 1*1 1B) days.
%t #olds t#e parents1 sc#ool aut#orities $#o consented or $#o #ad actual 6no$ledge if t#ey did not#ing to pre&ent it1 officers and mem0ers $#o planned1 6no$ingly
cooperated or $ere present1 present alumni of t#e organi:ation1 o$ner of t#e place $#ere suc# occurred lia0le.
Ma6es presence a prima facie presumption of guilt for suc#.
Article 3'4. A$&iisteri* ID.rio.s S.9staces or Ae0era*es
!lements
1. .ffender inflicted upon anot#er any serious p#ysical in?ury;
2. %t $as done 0y 6no$ingly administering to #im any in?urious su0stance or 0e&erages or 0y ta6ing ad&antage of #is $ea6ness of mind or credulity;
3. 5e #ad no intent to 6ill.
Article 3'!. Less Serio.s %,#sical ID.ries
Matters to 0e noted in t#is crime
1. .ffended party is incapacitated for la0or for 1* days or more (0ut not more t#an 3* days)1 or needs medical attendance for t#e same period of time;
2. T#e p#ysical in?uries must not 0e t#ose descri0ed in t#e preceding articles.
Dualified as to penalty
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 240
1. A fine
not
e4ceed
ing -
5**.**
1 in
additio
n to
arresto
mayor1
s#all
0e
impose
d for
less
serious
p#ysic
al
in?uries
$#en /
a. T#ere
is a
manife
st
intent
to
insult
or
offend
t#e
in?ured
person
; or
0. T#ere are circumstances adding ignominy to t#e offense.
2. A #ig#er penalty is imposed $#en t#e &ictim is eit#er /
a. T#e offenderEs parents1 ascendants1 guardians1 curators or teac#ers; or
0. -ersons of ran6 or person in aut#ority1 pro&ided t#e crime is not direct assault.
&f the physical injuries do not incapacitate the offended party nor necessitate medical attendance, slight physical injuries is committed. :ut if the physical injuries heal after
6; days, serious physical injuries is committed under !rticle "-6, paragraph *.
!rticle "-$ is an exception to !rticle *1 in relation to complex crimes as the latter only ta4es place in cases where the Revised Penal Code has no specific provision
penali3ing the same with a definite, specific penalty. Hence, there is no complex crime of slander by deed with less serious physical injuries but only less serious physical
injuries if the act which was committed produced the less serious physical injuries with the manifest intent to insult or offend the offended party, or under circumstances
adding ignominy to the offense.
Article 3''. Sli*,t %,#sical ID.ries a$ Maltreat&et
Acts punis#ed
1. -#ysical in?uries incapacitated t#e offended party for la0or from one to nine days1 or re3uired medical attendance during t#e same period;
2. -#ysical in?uries $#ic# did not pre&ent t#e offended party from engaging in #is #a0itual $or6 or $#ic# did not re3uire medical attendance;
3. %llBtreatment of anot#er 0y deed $it#out causing any in?ury.
This involves even illtreatment where there is no sign of injury re9uiring medical treatment.
5lapping the offended party is a form of illtreatment which is a form of slight physical injuries.
:ut if the slapping is done to cast dishonor upon the person slapped, the crime is slander by deed. &f the slapping was done without the intention of casting dishonor, or to
humiliate or embarrass the offended party out of a 9uarrel or anger, the crime is still illtreatment or slight physical injuries.
&llustration'
&f Hillary slaps 0onica and told her EBou choose your seconds . Aet us meet behind the Muirino /randstand and see who is the better and more beautiful between the two
of usF, the crime is not illtreatment, slight physical injuries or slander by deed< it is a form of challenging to a duel. The criminal intent is to challenge a person to a duel.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 241
The crime is
slight physical
injury if there
is no proof as
to the period
of the
offended
partyDs
incapacity for
labor or of the
re9uired
medical
attendance.
Re".9lic Act
No. )'14
:S"ecial
%rotectio o(
C,il$re
a*aist C,il$
A9.se@
E?"loitatio
a$
Discri&iatio
Act>@ in
relation to
murder1
mutilation or
in?uries to a
c#ild
T#e last
paragrap# of
Article (% of
2epu0lic Act
Co. "1*1
pro&ides>
H+or purposes of t#is Act1 t#e penalty for t#e commission of acts punis#a0le under Articles 24'1 24)1 22 (2) and 23 (1) of Act Co 3'151 as amended of t#e 2e&ised
-enal Code for t#e crimes of murder1 #omicide1 ot#er intentional mutilation1 and serious p#ysical in?uries1 respecti&ely1 s#all 0e reclusion perpetua $#en t#e &ictim is under
t$el&e years of age.I
T#e pro&isions of 2epu0lic Act Co. "1* modified t#e pro&isions of t#e 2e&ised -enal Code in so far as t#e &ictim of t#e felonies referred to is under 12 years of age. T#e
clear intention is to punis# t#e said crimes $it# a #ig#er penalty $#en t#e &ictim is a c#ild of tender age. %ncidentally1 t#e reference to Article 24) of t#e Code $#ic#
defines and penali:es t#e crime of #omicide $ere t#e &ictim is under 12 years old is an error. Jilling a c#ild under 12 is murder1 not #omicide1 0ecause t#e &ictim is under
no position to defend #imself as #eld in t#e case of Peo!le v. (anohon, 196 SCRA 131.

+or murder1 t#e penalty pro&ided 0y t#e Code1 as amended 0y 2epu0lic Act Co. "5)1 is reclusion perpetua to deat# / #ig#er t#an $#at 2epu0lic Act no. "1* pro&ides.
Accordingly1 insofar as t#e crime is murder1 Article 24' of t#e Code1 as amended1 s#all go&ern e&en if t#e &ictim $as under 12 years of age. %t is only in respect of t#e
crimes of intentional mutilation in paragrap# 2 of Article 22 and of serious p#ysical in?uries in paragrap# 1 of Article 23 of t#e Code t#at t#e 3uoted pro&ision of 2epu0lic
Act Co. "1* may 0e applied for t#e #ig#er penalty $#en t#e &ictim is under 12 years old.
Article 3'';A. Ra"e@ W,e a$ Ho+ Co&&itte$
!lements under paragrap# 1
1. .ffender is a man;
2. .ffender #ad carnal 6no$ledge of a $oman;
3. <uc# act is accomplis#ed under any of t#e follo$ing circumstances>
a. 7y using force or intimidation;
0. @#en t#e $oman is depri&ed of reason or ot#er$ise unconscious;
c. 7y means of fraudulent mac#ination or gra&e a0use of aut#ority; or
d. @#en t#e $oman is under 12 years of age or demented.
!lements under paragrap# 2
1. .ffender commits an act of se4ual assault;
2. T#e act of se4ual assault is committed 0y any of t#e follo$ing means>
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 242
a. 7y
insertin
g #is
penis
into
anot#e
r
person,
s
mout#
or anal
orifice;
or
0. 7y
insertin
g any
instru
ment
or
o0?ect
into
t#e
genital
or anal
orifice
of
anot#e
r
person
;
3. T#e act of se4ual assault is accomplis#ed under any of t#e follo$ing circumstances>
a. 7y using force or intimidation; or
0. @#en t#e $oman is depri&ed of reason or ot#er$ise unconscious; or
c. 7y means of fraudulent mac#ination or gra&e a0use of aut#ority; or
d. @#en t#e $oman is under 12 years of age or demented.
Re".9lic Act No. /8!8 :A Act E?"a$i* t,e De(iitio o( t,e Cri&e o( Ra"e@ Reclassi(#i* t,e Sa&e as A Cri&e a*aist %ersos@ A&e$i* (or t,e %.r"ose
t,e Re0ise$ %eal Co$e> repealed Article335 on rape and added a c#apter on 2ape under Title '.
Classification of rape
(1) Traditional concept under Article 335 / carnal 6no$ledge $it# a $oman against #er $ill. T#e offended party is al$ays a $oman and t#e offender is al$ays a man.
(2) <e4ual assault B committed $it# an instrument or an o0?ect or use of t#e penis $it# penetration of mout# or anal orifice. T#e offended party or t#e offender can
eit#er 0e man or $oman1 t#at is1 if a $oman or a man uses an instrument on anal orifice of male1 s#e or #e can 0e lia0le for rape.
2ape is committed $#en a man #as carnal 6no$ledge of a $oman under t#e follo$ing circumstances>
(1) @#ere intimidation or &iolence is employed $it# a &ie$ to #a&e carnal 6no$ledge of a $oman;
(2) @#ere t#e &ictim is depri&ed of reason or ot#er$ise unconscious;
(3) @#ere t#e rape $as made possi0le 0ecause of fraudulent mac#ination or a0use of aut#ority; or
(4) @#ere t#e &ictim is under 12 years of age1 or demented1 e&en t#oug# no intimidation nor &iolence is employed.
<e4ual assault is committed under t#e follo$ing circumstances>
(1) @#ere t#e penis is inserted into t#e anal or oral orifice; or
(2) @#ere an instrument or o0?ect is inserted into t#e genital or oral orifice.
%f t#e crime of rape O se4ual assault is committed $it# t#e follo$ing circumstances1 t#e follo$ing penalties are imposed>
(1) Reclusion perpetua to deat#O prision mayor to reclusion temporal BB
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 243

(a) @#ere
rape is
perpetr
ated
0y t#e
accuse
d $it#
a
deadly
$eapo
n; or
(0) @#ere
it is
commit
ted 0y
t$o or
more
person
s.
(2)
Reclus
ion
perpet
ua to
deat#O
reclusi
on
tempor
al BB
(a) @#ere t#e &ictim of t#e rape #as 0ecome insane; or
(0) @#ere t#e rape is attempted 0ut a 6illing $as committed 0y t#e offender on t#e occasion or 0y reason of t#e rape.
(3) 9eat# O reclusion perpetua BB
@#ere #omicide is committed 0y reason or on occasion of a consummated rape.
(4) 9eat#Oreclusion temporal BB
(a) @#ere t#e &ictim is under 1' years of age and t#e offender is #er ascendant1 stepfat#er1 guardian1 or relati&e 0y affinity or consanguinity $it#in t#e 3rd ci&il
degree1 or t#e common la$ #us0and of t#e &ictimEs mot#er; or
(0) @#ere t#e &ictim $as under t#e custody of t#e police or military aut#orities1 or ot#er la$ enforcement agency;
(c) @#ere t#e rape is committed in full &ie$ of t#e &ictimEs #us0and1 t#e parents1 any of t#e c#ildren or relati&es 0y consanguinity $it#in t#e 3rd ci&il degree;
(d) @#ere t#e &ictim is a religious1 t#at is1 a mem0er of a legitimate religious &ocation and t#e offender 6no$s t#e &ictim as suc# 0efore or at t#e time of t#e
commission of t#e offense;
(e) @#ere t#e &ictim is a c#ild under " yrs of age;
(f) @#ere t#e offender is a mem0er of t#e A+-1 its paramilitary arm1 t#e -C-1 or any la$ enforcement agency and t#e offender too6 ad&antage of #is position;
(g) @#ere t#e offender is afflicted $it# A%9< or ot#er se4ually transmissi0le diseases1 and #e is a$are t#ereof $#en #e committed t#e rape1 and t#e disease
$as transmitted;
(#) @#ere t#e &ictim #as suffered permanent p#ysical mutilation;
(i) @#ere t#e pregnancy of t#e offended party is 6no$n to t#e rapist at t#e time of t#e rape; or
(?) @#ere t#e rapist is a$are of t#e &ictimEs mental disa0ility1 emotional distur0ance or p#ysical #andicap.
Prior to the amendment of the law on rape, a complaint must be filed by the offended woman. The persons who may file the same in behalf of the offended woman if she
is a minor or if she was incapacitated to file, were as follows' a parent< in default of parents, a grandparent< in default or grandparent, the judicial guardian.
5ince rape is not a private crime anymore, it can be prosecuted even if the woman does not file a complaint.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 244
&f carnal
4nowledge
was made
possible
because of
fraudulent
machinations
and grave
abuse of
authority, the
crime is rape.
This absorbs
the crime of
9ualified and
simple
seduction
when no force
or violence
was used, but
the offender
abused his
authority to
rape the
victim.
=nder !rticle
"--C, the
offended
woman may
pardon the
offender
through a
subse9uent
valid
marriage, the
effect of which
would be the
extinction of
the offenderDs
liability.
5imilarly, the legal husband may be pardoned by forgiveness of the wife provided that the marriage is not void ab initio. >bviously, under the new law, the husband may
be liable for rape if his wife does not want to have sex with him. &t is enough that there is indication of any amount of resistance as to ma4e it rape.
&ncestuous rape was coined in 5upreme Court decisions. &t refers to rape committed by an ascendant of the offended woman. &n such cases, the force and intimidation
need not be of such nature as would be re9uired in rape cases had the accused been a stranger. Conversely, the 5upreme Court expected that if the offender is not
4nown to woman, it is necessary that there be evidence of affirmative resistance put up by the offended woman. 0ere Eno, noF is not enough if the offender is a stranger,
although if the rape is incestuous, this is enough.
The new rape law also re9uires that there be a physical overt act manifesting resistance, if the offended party was in a situation where he or she is incapable of giving
valid consent, this is admissible in evidence to show that carnal 4nowledge was against his or her will.
.hen the victim is below (" years old, mere sexual intercourse with her is already rape. )ven if it was she who wanted the sexual intercourse, the crime will be rape.
This is referred to as statutory rape.
&n other cases, there must be force, intimidation, or violence proven to have been exerted to bring about carnal 4nowledge or the woman must have been deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious.
.here the victim is over (" years old, it must be shown that the carnal 4nowledge with her was obtained against her will. &t is necessary that there be evidence of some
resistance put up by the offended woman. &t is not, however, necessary that the offended party should exert all her efforts to prevent the carnal intercourse. &t is enough
that from her resistance, it would appear that the carnal intercourse is against her will.
0ere initial resistance, which does not indicate refusal on the part of the offended party to the sexual intercourse, will not be enough to bring about the crime of rape.
,ote that it has been held that in the crime of rape, conviction does not re9uire medicolegal finding of any penetration on the part of the woman. ! medicolegal
certificate is not necessary or indispensable to convict the accused of the crime of rape.
&t has also been held that although the offended woman who is the victim of the rape failed to adduce evidence regarding the damages to her by reason of the rape, the
court may ta4e judicial notice that there is such damage in crimes against chastity. The standard amount given now is P 6;,;;;.;;, with or without evidence of any moral
damage. :ut there are some cases where the court awarded only P ";,;;;.;;.
!n accused may be convicted of rape on the sole testimony of the offended woman. &t does not re9uire that testimony be corroborated before a conviction may stand.
This is particularly true if the commission of the rape is such that the narration of the offended woman would lead to no other conclusion except that the rape was
committed.
&llustration'
@aughter accuses her own father of having raped her.
!llegation of several accused that the woman consented to their sexual intercourse with her is a proposition which is revolting to reason that a woman would allow more
than one man to have sexual intercourse with her in the presence of the others.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 245
&t has also
been ruled
that rape can
be committed
in a standing
position
because
complete
penetration is
not necessary.
The slightest
penetration +
contact with
the labia + will
consummate
the rape.
>n the other
hand, as long
as there is an
intent to effect
sexual
cohesion,
although
unsuccessful,
the crime
becomes
attempted
rape.
However, if
that intention
is not proven,
the offender
can only be
convicted of
acts of
lasciviousness
.
T#e main distinction 0et$een t#e crime of attempted rape and acts of lasci&iousness is t#e intent to lie $it# t#e offended $oman.
&n a case where the accused jumped upon a woman and threw her to the ground, although the accused raised her s4irts, the accused did not ma4e any effort to remove
her underwear. &nstead, he removed his own underwear and placed himself on top of the woman and started performing sexual movements. Thereafter, when he was
finished, he stood up and left. The crime committed is only acts of lasciviousness and not attempted rape. The fact that he did not remove the underwear of the victim
indicates that he does not have a real intention to effect a penetration. &t was only to satisfy a lewd design.
&s there a complex crime under !rticle *1 of 4idnapping with rapeO Read 4idnapping.
TITLE IG. CRIMES AGAINST %ERSONAL LIAERTY AND SECURITY
Crimes against li0erty
1. Jidnapping and serious illegal detention (Art. 2");
2. <lig#t illegal detention (Art. 2');
3. 8nla$ful arrest (Art. 2));
4. Jidnapping and failure to return a minor (Art. 2"*);
5. %nducing a minor to a0andon #is #ome (Art. 2"1);
. <la&ery (Art. 2"2);
". !4ploitation of c#ild la0or (Art. 2"3);
'. <er&ices rendered under compulsion in payment of de0ts (Art. 2"4).
Crimes against security
1. A0andonment of persons in danger and a0andonment of one,s o$n &ictim (Art. 2"5);
2. A0andoning a minor (Art. 2");
3. A0andonment of minor 0y person entrusted $it# #is custody; indifference of parents (Art. 2"");
4. !4ploitation of minors (Art. 2"');
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 246
5.
Trespass to
d$elling (Art.
2'*);
. .t#er
forms of
trespass (Art.
2'1);
". ;ra&e
t#reats (Art.
2'2);
'. Aig#t
t#reats (Art.
2'3);
). .t#er
lig#t t#reats
(Art. 2'5);
1*. ;ra&e
coercions (Art.
2');
11. Aig#t
coercions (Art.
2'");
12. .t#er
similar
coercions (Art.
2'');
13. +ormation1 maintenance and pro#i0ition of com0ination of capital or la0or t#roug# &iolence or t#reats (Art. 2'));
14. 9isco&ering secrets t#roug# sei:ure of correspondence (Art. 2)*);
15. 2e&ealing secrets $it# a0us of office (Art. 2)1);
1. 2e&ealing of industrial secrets (Art. 2)2).
Article 3'). Fi$a""i* a$ Serio.s Ille*al Detetio
!lements
1. .ffender is a pri&ate indi&idual;
2. 5e 6idnaps or detains anot#er1 or in any ot#er manner depri&es t#e latter of #is li0erty;
3. T#e act of detention or 6idnapping must 0e illegal;
4. %n t#e commission of t#e offense1 any of t#e follo$ing circumstances is present>
a. T#e 6idnapping lasts for more t#an 3 days;
0. %t is committed simulating pu0lic aut#ority;
c. Any serious p#ysical in?uries are inflicted upon t#e person 6idnapped or detained or t#reats to 6ill #im are made; or
d. T#e person 6idnapped or detained is a minor1 female1 or a pu0lic officer.
&f there is any crime under Title &C which has no corresponding provision with crimes under Title &&, then, the offender may be a public officer or a private person. &f there is
a corresponding crime under Title &&, the offender under Title &C for such similar crime is a private person.
.hen a public officer conspires with a private person in the commission of any of the crimes under Title &C, the crime is also one committed under this title and not under
Title &&.
&llustration'
&f a private person commits the crime of 4idnapping or serious illegal detention, even though a public officer conspires therein, the crime cannot be arbitrary detention. !s
far as that public officer is concerned, the crime is also illegal detention.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 247
&n the actual
essence of
the crime,
when one
says
4idnapping,
this connotes
the idea of
transporting
the offended
party from one
place to
another.
.hen you
thin4 illegal
detention, it
connotes the
idea that one
is restrained
of his liberty
without
necessarily
transporting
him from one
place to
another.
The crime of
4idnapping is
committed if
the purpose of
the offender is
to extort
ransom either
from the
victim or from
any other
person. :ut if a person is transported not for ransom, the crime can be illegal detention. =sually, the offended party is brought to a place other than his own, to detain
him there.
.hen one thin4s of 4idnapping, it is not only that of transporting one person from one place to another. >ne also has to thin4 of the criminal intent.
2orcible abduction &f a woman is transported from one place to another by virtue of restraining her of her liberty, and that act is coupled with lewd designs.
5erious illegal detention + &f a woman is transported just to restrain her of her liberty. There is no lewd design or lewd intent.
/rave coercion + &f a woman is carried away just to brea4 her will, to compel her to agree to the demand or re9uest by the offender.

&n a decided case, a suitor, who cannot get a favorable reply from a woman, invited the woman to ride with him, purportedly to ta4e home the woman from class. :ut
while the woman is in his car, he drove the woman to a far place and told the woman to marry him. >n the way, the offender had repeatedly touched the private parts of
the woman. &t was held that the act of the offender of touching the private parts of the woman could not be considered as lewd designs because he was willing to marry
the offended party. The 5upreme Court ruled that when it is a suitor who could possibly marry the woman, merely 4issing the woman or touching her private parts to
EcompelF her to agree to the marriage, such cannot be characteri3ed as lewd design. &t is considered merely as the Epassion of a loverF. :ut if the man is already married,
you cannot consider that as legitimate but immoral and definitely amounts to lewd design.
&f a woman is carried against her will but without lewd design on the part of the offender, the crime is grave coercion.
&llustration'
Tom Cru3 invited ,icole Chi3mac4s for a snac4. They drove along Roxas :oulevard, along the Coastal Road and to Cavite. The woman was already crying and wanted
to be brought home. Tom imposed the condition that ,icole should first marry him. ,icole found this as, simply, a mission impossible. The crime committed in this case is
grave coercion. :ut if after they drove to Cavite, the suitor placed the woman in a house and would not let her out until she agrees to marry him, the crime would be
serious illegal detention.
&f the victim is a woman or a public officer, the detention is always serious + no matter how short the period of detention is.
Circumstances which ma4e illegal detention serious
(1) @#en t#e illegal detention lasted for t#ree days1 regardless of $#o t#e offended party is;
(2) @#en t#e offended party is a female1 e&en if t#e detention lasted only for minutes;
(3) %f t#e offended party is a minor or a pu0lic officer1 no matter #o$ long or #o$ s#ort t#e detention is;
(4) @#en t#reats to 6ill are made or serious p#ysical in?uries #a&e 0een inflicted; and
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 248
(5) %f it
s#all
#a&e
0een
commit
ted
simulat
ing
pu0lic
aut#ori
ty.

@istinction
betw
een
illega
l
deten
tion
and
arbitr
ary
deten
tion
&llegal
detention is
committed by
a private
person who
4idnaps,
detains, or
otherwise
deprives
another of his
liberty.
!rbitrary detention is committed by a public officer who detains a person without legal grounds.
The penalty for 4idnapping is higher than for forcible abduction. This is wrong because if the offender 4new about this, he would perform lascivious acts upon the woman
and be charged only for forcible abduction instead of 4idnapping or illegal detention. He thereby benefits from this absurdity, which arose when Congress amended
!rticle "-?, increasing the penalty thereof, without amending !rticle 6*" on forcible abduction.
!rticle "-? has been modified by Re!ublic Ac) 4o. 76$9 in the following respects'
(1) %llegal detention 0ecomes serious $#en it s#all #a&e lasted for more t#an t#ree days1 instead of fi&e days as originally pro&ided;
(2) %n paragrap# 41 if t#e person 6idnapped or detained $as a minor and t#e offender $as anyone of t#e parents1 t#e latter #as 0een e4pressly e4cluded from t#e
pro&ision. T#e lia0ility of t#e parent is pro&ided for in t#e last paragrap# of Article 2"1;
(3) A paragrap# $as added to Article 2"1 $#ic# states>
@#en t#e &ictim is 6illed or dies as a conse3uence of t#e detention or is raped1 or is su0?ected to torture1 or de#umani:ing acts1 t#e ma4imum
penalty s#all 0e imposed.
T#is amendment 0rings a0out a composite crime of 6idnapping $it# #omicide $#en it is t#e &ictim of t#e 6idnapping $#o $as 6illed1 or dies as a conse3uence of
t#e detention and1 t#us1 only one penalty is imposed $#ic# is deat#.
!rticle *1, on complex crimes, does not govern in this case. :ut !rticle *1 will govern if any other person is 4illed aside, because the provision specifically refers to
EvictimF. !ccordingly, the rulings in cases of Peo!le v. Parulan, Peo!le v. (in% Sa0, and other similar cases where the accused were convicted for the complex crimes
of 4idnapping with murder have become academic.
&n the composite crime of 4idnapping with homicide, the term EhomicideF is used in the generic sense and, thus, covers all forms of 4illing whether in the nature of murder
or otherwise. &t does not matter whether the purpose of the 4idnapping was to 4ill the victim or not, as long as the victim was 4illed, or died as a conse9uence of the
4idnapping or detention. There is no more separate crime of 4idnapping and murder if the victim was 4idnapped not for the purpose of 4illing her.
&f the victim was raped, this brings about the composite crime of 4idnapping with rape. :eing a composite crime, not a complex crime, the same is regarded as a single
indivisible offense as in fact the law punishes such acts with only a single penalty. &n a way, the amendment depreciated the seriousness of the rape because no matter
how many times the victim was raped, there will only be one 4idnapping with rape. This would not be the conse9uence if rape were a separate crime from 4idnapping
because each act of rape would be a distinct count.
However for the crime to be 4idnapping with rape, the offender should not have ta4en the victim with lewd designs as otherwise the crime would be forcible abduction<
and if the victim was raped, the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape would be committed. &f the ta4ing was forcible abduction, and the woman was raped
several times, there would only be one crime of forcible abduction with rape, and each of the other rapes would constitute distinct counts of rape. This was the ruling in
the case of Peo!le v. -acal+o.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 249
&n Peo!le v.
Lac)ao,
#eci#e# on
5c)ober 9,
1993, the
5upreme
Court
stressed that
the crime is
serious illegal
detention if
the purpose
was to deprive
the offended
party of her
liberty. !nd if
in the course
of the illegal
detention, the
offended party
was raped, a
separate
crime of rape
would be
committed.
This is so
because there
is no complex
crime of
serious illegal
detention with
rape since the
illegal
detention was
not a
necessary
means to the
commission of
rape.
&n Peo!le v. -ernal, 131 SCRA 1, the appellants were held guilty of separate crimes of serious illegal detention and of multiple rapes. .ith the amendment by Republic
!ct ,o. ?-$8 ma4ing rape a 9ualifying circumstance in the crime of 4idnapping and serious illegal detention, the jurisprudence is superseded to the effect that the rape
should be a distinct crime. !rticle *1 on complex crimes may not apply when serious illegal detention and rape are committed by the same offender. The offender will be
charged for the composite crime of serious illegal detention with rape as a single indivisible offense, regardless of the number of times that the victim was raped.
!lso, when the victim of the 4idnapping and serious illegal detention was subjected to torture and sustained physical injuries, a composite crime of 4idnapping with
physical injuries is committed.
Article 3'/. Sli*,t Ille*al Detetio
!lements
1. .ffender is a pri&ate indi&idual;
2. 5e 6idnaps or detains anot#er1 or in any ot#er manner depri&es #im of #is li0erty.
3. T#e act of 6idnapping or detention is illegal;
4. T#e crime is committed $it#out t#e attendance of any of t#e circumstances enumerated in Article 2".
This felony is committed if any of the five circumstances in the commission of 4idnapping or detention enumerated in !rticle "-? is not present.
The penalty is lowered if +
#(% The offended party is voluntarily released within three days from the start of illegal detention<
#"% .ithout attaining the purpose<
#6% :efore the institution of the criminal action.
>ne should 4now the nature of the illegal detention to 4now whether the voluntary release of the offended party will affect the criminal liability of the offender.
.hen the offender voluntarily releases the offended party from detention within three days from the time the restraint of liberty began, as long as the offender has not
accomplished his purposes, and the release was made before the criminal prosecution was commenced, this would serve to mitigate the criminal liability of the offender,
provided that the 4idnapping or illegal detention is not serious.
&f the illegal detention is serious, however, even if the offender voluntarily released the offended party, and such release was within three days from the time the detention
began, even if the offender has not accomplished his purpose in detaining the offended party, and even if there is no criminal prosecution yet, such voluntary release will
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 250
not mitigate
the criminal
liability of the
offender.
>ne who
furnishes the
place where
the offended
party is being
held generally
acts as an
accomplice.
:ut the
criminal
liability in
connection
with the
4idnapping
and serious
illegal
detention, as
well as the
slight illegal
detention, is
that of the
principal and
not of the
accomplice.
:efore, in
Peo!le v.
Salien)e, if
the offended
party
subjected to
serious illegal
detention was
voluntarily
released by the accused in accordance with the provisions of !rticle "-1 #6%, the crime, which would have been serious illegal detention, became slight illegal detention
only.
The prevailing rule now is A+i+)io v. ,u#%e, which provides that voluntary release will only mitigate criminal liability if crime was slight illegal detention. &f serious, it has
no effect.
&n 4idnapping for ransom, voluntary release will not mitigate the crime. This is because, with the reimposition of the death penalty, this crime is penali3ed with the extreme
penalty of death.
.hat is ransomO &t is the money, price or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a captured person or persons, a payment that releases a person from
captivity.
The definition of ransom under the Aindberg law of the =.5. has been adopted in our jurisprudence in Peo!le v. Akiran, 18 SCRA 39, 1, such that when a creditor
detains a debtor and releases the latter only upon the payment of the debt, such payment of the debt, which was made a condition for the release is ransom, under this
article.
&n the case of Peo!le v. Roluna, #eci#e# 6arch 9, 1991, witnesses saw a person being ta4en away with hands tied behind his bac4 and was not heard from for six
years. 5upreme Court reversed the trial court ruling that the men accused were guilty of 4idnapping with murder. The crime is only slight illegal detention under !rticle
"-1, aggravated by a band, since none of the circumstances in !rticle "-? has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact that the victim has been missing for six
years raises a presumption of death, but from this disputable presumption of death, it should not be further presumed that the persons who were last seen with the
absentee is responsible for his disappearance.
Article 3'1. Ula+(.l Arrest
!lements
1. .ffender arrests or detains anot#er person;
2. T#e purpose of t#e offender is to deli&er #im to t#e proper aut#orities;
3. T#e arrest or detention is not aut#ori:ed 0y la$ or t#ere is no reasona0le ground t#erefor.
This felony consists in ma4ing an arrest or detention without legal or reasonable ground for the purpose of delivering the offended party to the proper authorities.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 251
The offended
party may
also be
detained but
the crime is
not illegal
detention
because the
purpose is to
prosecute the
person
arrested. The
detention is
only
incidental< the
primary
criminal
intention of
the offender is
to charge the
offended party
for a crime he
did not
actually
commit.
/enerally, this
crime is
committed by
incriminating
innocent persons by the offenderDs planting evidence to justify the arrest + a complex crime results, that is, unlawful arrest through incriminatory machinations under
!rticle 6-6.
&f the arrest is made without a warrant and under circumstances not allowing a warrantless arrest, the crime would be unla$ful arrest.
&f the person arrested is not delivered to the authorities, the private individual ma4ing the arrest incurs criminal liability for illegal detention under !rticle "-? or "-1.
&f the offender is a public officer, the crime is arbitrary detention under !rticle ("*.
&f the detention or arrest is for a legal ground, but the public officer delays delivery of the person arrested to the proper judicial authorities, then !rticle ("$ will apply.
,ote that this felony may also be committed by public officers.
Article 3)4. Fi$a""i* a$ Fail.re to Ret.r A Mior
!lements
1. .ffender is entrusted $it# t#e custody of a minor person ($#et#er o&er or under se&en years 0ut less t#an 21 years of age);
2. 5e deli0erately fails to restore t#e said minor to #is parents or guardians.
&f any of the foregoing elements is absent, the 4idnapping of the minor will then fall under !rticle "-?.
&f the accused is any of the parents, !rticle "-? does not apply< !rticles "?; and "?( apply.
&f the ta4ing is with the consent of the parents, the crime in !rticle "?; is committed.
&n Peo!le v. (enero+a, it was held that deliberate failure to return a minor under oneDs custody constitutes deprivation of liberty. Lidnapping and failure to return a minor
is necessarily included in 4idnapping and serious illegal detention of a minor under !rticle "-?#*%.
&n Peo!le v. 6en#oza, where a minor child was ta4en by the accused without the 4nowledge and consent of his parents, it was held that the crime is 4idnapping and
serious illegal detention under !rticle "-?, not 4idnapping and failure to return a minor under !rticle "?;.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 252
Article 3)1.
I$.ci* A
Mior to
A9a$o His
Ho&e
!lements
1. A
minor
($#et#
er o&er
or
under
se&en
years
of age)
is
li&ing
in t#e
#ome
of #is
parent
s or
guardi
ans or
t#e
person
entrust
ed $it#
#is
custod
y;
2. .ffender induces said minor to a0andon suc# #ome.
Article 3)3. Sla0er#
!lements
1. .ffender purc#ases1 sells1 6idnaps or detains a #uman 0eing;
2. T#e purpose of t#e offender is to ensla&e suc# #uman 0eing.
This is committed if anyone shall purchase, 4idnap, or detain a human being for the purpose of enslaving him. The penalty is increased if the purpose of the offender is to
assign the offended party to some immoral traffic.
This is distinguished from illegal detention by the purpose. &f the purpose of the 4idnapping or detention is to enslave the offended party, slavery is committed.
The crime is slavery if the offender is not engaged in the business of prostitution. &f he is, the crime is white slave trade under !rticle 6*(.
Article 3)8. E?"loitatio o( C,il$ La9or
!lements
1. .ffender retains a minor in #is ser&ices;
2. %t is against t#e $ill of t#e minor;
3. %t is under t#e prete4t of reim0ursing #imself of a de0t incurred 0y an ascendant1 guardian or person entrusted $it# t#e custody of suc# minor.
Article 3)4. Ser0ices Re$ere$ .$er Co&".lsio i %a#&et o( De9t
!lements
1. .ffender compel a de0tor to $or6 for #im1 eit#er as #ouse#old ser&ant or farm la0orer;
2. %t is against t#e de0torEs $ill;
3. T#e purpose is to re3uire or enforce t#e payment of a de0t.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 253
Article 3)!.
A9a$o&e
t o( %ersos
i Da*er
a$
A9a$o&e
t o( OeIs
O+ 2icti&
Acts punis#ed
1. +ailing
to
render
assista
nce to
any
person
$#om
t#e
offend
er
finds in
an
unin#a
0ited
place $ounded or in danger of dying $#en #e can render suc# assistance $it#out detriment to #imself1 unless suc# omission s#all constitute a more serious
offense.
!lements
1. T#e place is not in#a0ited;
2. Accused found t#ere a person $ounded or in danger of dying;
3. Accused can render assistance $it#out detriment to #imself;
4. Accused fails to render assistance.
2. +ailing to #elp or render assistance to anot#er $#om t#e offender #as accidentally $ounded or in?ured;
3. 7y failing to deli&er a c#ild1 under se&en years of age1 $#om t#e offender #as found a0andoned1 to t#e aut#orities or to #is family1 or 0y failing to ta6e #im to a safe
place.
=nder the first act, the offender is liable only when he can render such assistance without detriment to himself, unless such omission shall constitute a more serious
offense. .here the person is already wounded and already in danger of dying, there is an obligation to render assistance only if he is found in an uninhabited place. &f
the mortally wounded, dying person is found in a place not uninhabited in legal contemplation, abandonment will not bring about this crime. !n uninhabited place is
determined by possibility of person receiving assistance from another. )ven if there are many houses around, the place may still be uninhabited if possibility of receiving
assistance is remote.
&f what happened was an accident at first, there would be no liability pursuant to !rticle (" #*% of the Civil Code + damnum abs9ue injuria. :ut if you abandon your victim,
you will be liable under !rticle "?$. Here, the character of the place is immaterial. !s long as the victim was injured because of the accident caused by the offender, the
offender would be liable for abandonment if he would not render assistance to the victim.
Article 3)'. A9a$oi* A Mior
!lements
1. .ffender #as t#e custody of a c#ild;
2. T#e c#ild is under se&en years of age;
3. 5e a0andons suc# c#ild;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 254
4. 5e #as
no
intent
to 6ill
t#e
c#ild
$#en
t#e
latter is
a0and
oned.
Circumstance
s 3ualifying
t#e offense
1. @#en
t#e
deat#
of t#e
minor
resulte
d from
suc#
a0and
onmen
t; or
2. %f t#e life of t#e minor $as in danger 0ecause of t#e a0andonment.
Article 3)). A9a$o&et o( Mior 9# %erso Etr.ste$ +it, His C.sto$#C I$i((erece o( %arets
Acts punis#ed
1. 9eli&ering a minor to a pu0lic institution or ot#er persons $it#out t#e consent of t#e one $#o entrusted suc# minor to t#e care of t#e offender or1 in t#e a0sence of
t#at one1 $it#out t#e consent of t#e proper aut#orities;
!lements
1. .ffender #as c#arge of t#e rearing or education of a minor;
2. 5e deli&ers said minor to a pu0lic institution or ot#er persons;
3. T#e one $#o entrusted suc# c#ild to t#e offender #as not consented to suc# act; or if t#e one $#o entrusted suc# c#ild to t#e offender is a0sent1 t#e proper
aut#orities #a&e not consented to it.
2. Ceglecting #is (offenderEs) c#ildren 0y not gi&ing t#em t#e education $#ic# t#eir station in life re3uires and financial condition permits.
!lements>
1. .ffender is a parent;
2. 5e neglects #is c#ildren 0y not gi&ing t#em education;
3. 5is station in life re3uires suc# education and #is financial condition permits it.
Article 3)/. E?"loitatio o( Miors
Acts punis#ed
1. Causing any 0oy or girl under 1 years of age to perform any dangerous feat of 0alancing1 p#ysical strengt# or contortion1 t#e offender 0eing any person;
2. !mploying c#ildren under 1 years of age $#o are not t#e c#ildren or descendants of t#e offender in e4#i0itions of acro0at1 gymnast1 ropeB$al6er1 di&er1 or $ildB
animal tamer1 t#e offender 0eing an acro0at1 etc.1 or circus manager or engaged in a similar calling;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 255
3.
!mplo
ying
any
descen
dant
under
12
years
of age
in
danger
ous
e4#i0iti
ons
enume
rated
in t#e
ne4t
preced
ing
paragr
ap#1
t#e
offend
er
0eing
engag
ed in
any of
t#e
said
calling
s;
4.
9eli&er
ing a
c#ild under 1 years of age gratuitously to any person follo$ing any of t#e callings enumerated in paragrap# 21 or to any #a0itual &agrant or 0eggar1 t#e offender
0eing an ascendant1 guardian1 teac#er or person entrusted in any capacity $it# t#e care of suc# c#ild; and
5. %nducing any c#ild under 1 years of age to a0andon t#e #ome of its ascendants1 guardians1 curators or teac#ers to follo$ any person engaged in any of t#e
callings mentioned in paragrap# 2 or to accompany any #a0itual &agrant or 0eggar1 t#e offender 0eing any person.
The offender is engaged in a 4ind of business that would place the life or limb of the minor in danger, even though wor4ing for him is not against the will of the minor.
,ature of the :usiness + This involves circuses which generally attract children so they themselves may enjoy wor4ing there unaware of the danger to their own lives and
limbs.
!ge + 0ust be below (- years. !t this age, the minor is still growing.
&f the employer is an ascendant, the crime is not committed, unless the minor is less than (" years old. :ecause if the employer is an ascendant, the law regards that he
would loo4 after the welfare and protection of the child< hence, the age is lowered to (" years. :elow that age, the crime is committed.
:ut remember Republic !ct ,o. ?-(; #5pecial Protection of Children against Child !buse, )xploitation and @iscrimination !ct%. &t applies to minors below (1 years old,
not (- years old as in the Revised Penal Code. !s long as the employment is inimical + even though there is no physical ris4 + and detrimental to the childDs interest +
against moral, intellectual, physical, and mental development of the minor + the establishment will be closed.
!rticle "?1 has no application if minor is (- years old and above. :ut the exploitation will be dealt with by Republic !ct ,o. ?-(;.
&f the minor so employed would suffer some injuries as a result of a violation of !rticle "?1, !rticle "?8 provides that there would be additional criminal liability for the
resulting felony.
&llustration'
The owner of a circus employed a child under (- years of age to do a balancing act on the tightrope. The crime committed is exploitation of minors #unless the employer
is the ascendant of the minor who is not below (" years of age%. &f the child fell and suffered physical injuries while wor4ing, the employer shall be liable for said physical
injuries in addition to his liability for exploitation of minors.
Article 3/4. 6.ali(ie$ Tres"ass to D+elli*
! lements
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 256
1.
.ffender is a
pri&ate
person;
2. 5e
enters
t#e
d$ellin
g of
anot#e
r;
3. <uc#
entran
ce is
against
t#e
latterEs
$ill.
T$o forms of
trespass
1.
Dualifi
ed
trespa
ss to
d$ellin
g /
T#is
may
0e
commit
ted 0y
any pri&ate person $#o s#all enter t#e d$elling of anot#er against t#e latterEs $ill. T#e #ouse must 0e in#a0ited at t#e time of t#e trespass alt#oug# t#e occupants
are out. .r offender 0rea6s in $it# force and &iolence (Article 2'*).
2. Trespass to property B .ffender enters t#e closed premises or fenced estate of anot#er; suc# close premises or fenced estate is unin#a0ited; t#ere is a manifest
pro#i0ition against entering suc# closed premises or fenced estate; and offender #as not secured t#e permission of t#e o$ner or careta6er t#ereof (Article 2'1).
(<ee also -residential 9ecree Co. 122" regarding unla$ful entry into any military 0ase in t#e -#ilippines.)
@welling + This is the place that a person inhabits. &t includes the dependencies which have interior communication with the house. &t is not necessary that it be the
permanent dwelling of the person. 5o, a personDs room in a hotel may be considered a dwelling. &t also includes a room where one resides as a boarder.
&f the purpose in entering the dwelling is not shown, trespass is committed. &f the purpose is shown, it may be absorbed in the crime as in robbery with force upon things,
the trespass yielding to the more serious crime. :ut if the purpose is not shown and while inside the dwelling he was found by the occupants, one of whom was injured by
him, the crime committed will be trespass to dwelling and frustrated homicide, physical injuries, or if there was no injury, unjust vexation.
&f the entry is made by a way not intended for entry, that is presumed to be against the will of the occupant #example, entry through a window%. &t is not necessary that
there be a brea4ing.
E!gainst the willF This means that the entrance is, either expressly or impliedly, prohibited or the prohibition is presumed. 2raudulent entrance may constitute trespass.
The prohibition to enter may be made at any time and not necessarily at the time of the entrance.
To prove that an entry is against the will of the occupant, it is not necessary that the entry should be preceded by an express prohibition, provided that the opposition of
the occupant is clearly established by the circumstances under which the entry is made, such as the existence of enmity or strained relations between the accused and
the occupant.
>n violence, Cuello Calon opines that violence may be committed not only against persons but also against things. 5o, brea4ing the door or glass of a window or door
constitutes acts of violence. >ur 5upreme Court followed this view in Peo!le v. 'a.a%. 7iolence or intimidation must, however, be anterior or coetaneous with
the entrance and must not be posterior. :ut if the violence is employed immediately after the entrance without the consent of the owner of the house, trespass
is committed. &f there is also violence or intimidation, proof of prohibition to enter is no longer necessary.
@istinction between 9ualified trespass to dwelling and violation of domicile
=nli4e 9ualified trespass to dwelling, violation of domicile may be committed only by a public officer or employee and the violation may consist of any of the three acts
mentioned in !rticle ("1 + #(% entering the dwelling against the will of the owner without judicial order< #"% searching papers or other effects found in such dwelling without
the previous consent of the owner thereof< and #6% refusing to leave the dwelling when so re9uested by the owner thereof, after having surreptitiously entered such
dwelling.
Cases when !rticle "1; does not apply'
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 257
#(% .hen
the
purpos
e of
the
entran
ce is to
preven
t
seriou
s harm
to
himself
, the
occup
ant or
third
person
s<
#"% .hen
the
purpos
e of
the
offend
er in
enterin
g is to
render
some
service
to
human
ity or
justice<
#6% !nyone who shall enter cafes, taverns, inns and other public houses while they are open .
Pursuant to 5ection -, Rule ((6 of the Rules of Court, a person who believes that a crime has been committed against him has every right to go after the culprit and
arrest him without any warrant even if in the process he enters the house of another against the latterDs will.
Article 3/1. Ot,er (or&s o( tres"ass
!lements
1. .ffender enters t#e closed premises or t#e fenced estate of anot#er;
2. T#e entrance is made $#ile eit#er of t#em is unin#a0ited;
3. T#e pro#i0ition to enter is manifest;
4. T#e trespasser #as not secured t#e permission of t#e o$ner or t#e careta6er t#ereof.
Article 3/3. Gra0e T,reats
Acts punis#ed>
1. T#reatening anot#er $it# t#e infliction upon #is person1 #onor or property or t#at of t#is family of any $rong amounting to a crime and demanding money or
imposing any ot#er condition1 e&en t#oug# not unla$ful1 and t#e offender attained #is purpose;
2. Ma6ing suc# t#reat $it#out t#e offender attaining #is purpose;
3. T#reatening anot#er $it# t#e infliction upon #is person1 #onor or property or t#at of #is family of any $rong amounting to a crime1 t#e t#reat not 0eing su0?ect to a
condition.
Threat is a declaration of an intention or determination to injure another by the commission upon his person, honor or property or upon that of his family of some wrong
which may or may not amount to a crime'
#(% /rave threats + when the wrong threatened to be inflicted amounts to a crime. The case falls under !rticle "1".
#"% Aight threats + if it does not amount to a crime. The case falls under !rticle "16.
:ut even if the harm intended is in the nature of a crime, if made orally and in the heat of anger and after the oral threat, the issuer of the threat did not pursue the act, the
crime is only other light threats under !rticle "1$.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 258
To constitute
grave threats,
the threats
must refer to a
future wrong
and is
committed by
acts or
through words
of such
efficiency to
inspire terror
or fear upon
another. &t is,
therefore,
characteri3ed
by moral
pressure that
produces
dis9uietude or
alarm.
The greater
perversity of
the offender is
manifested
when the
threats are
made
demanding
money or
imposing any
condition,
whether lawful
or not, and the
offender shall
have attained
his purpose.
5o the law
imposes upon
him the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed for the crime threatened to be committed. :ut if the purpose is not attained, the penalty lower by two degrees is
imposed. The maximum period of the penalty is imposed if the threats are made in writing or through a middleman as they manifest evident premeditation.
@istinction between threat and coercion'
The essence of coercion is violence or intimidation. There is no condition involved< hence, there is no futurity in the harm or wrong done.
&n threat, the wrong or harm done is future and conditional. &n coercion, it is direct and personal.
@istinction between threat and robbery'
#(% !s to intimidation + &n robbery, the intimidation is actual and immediate< in threat, the intimidation is future and conditional.
#"% !s to nature of intimidation + &n robbery, the intimidation is personal< in threats, it may be through an intermediary.
#6% !s to subject matter + Robbery refers to personal property< threat may refer to the person, honor or property.
#*% !s to intent to gain + &n robbery, there is intent to gain< in threats, intent to gain is not an essential element.
#$% &n robbery, the robber ma4es the danger involved in his threats directly imminent to the victim and the obtainment of his gain immediate, thereby also ta4ing rights
to his person by the opposition or resistance which the victim might offer< in threat, the danger to the victim is not instantly imminent nor the gain of the culprit
immediate.
Article 3/8. Li*,t T,reats
!lements
1. .ffender ma6es a t#reat to commit a $rong;
2. T#e $rong does not constitute a crime;
3. T#ere is a demand for money or t#at ot#er condition is imposed1 e&en t#oug# not unla$ful;
4. .ffender #as attained #is purpose or1 t#at #e #as not attained #is purpose.
&n order to convict a person of the crime of light threats, the harm threatened must not be in the nature of crime and there is a demand for money or any other condition is
imposed, even though lawful.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 259
6.estio 7
As+er
7lac6
mailing
constitutes
$#at crime=
&t is a
crime of light
threat under
!rticle "16 if
there is no
threat to
publish any
libelous or
slanderous
matter against
the offended
party. &f there
is such a
threat to ma4e
a slanderous
or libelous
publication
against the
offended
party, the
crime will be
one of libel,
which is
penali3ed
under !rticle 6$-. 2or example, a person threatens to expose the affairs of married man if the latter does not give him money. There is intimidation done under a
demand.
The law imposes the penalty of bond for good behavior only in case of grave and light threats. &f the offender can not post the bond, he will be banished by way of
destierro to prevent him from carrying out his threat.
Article 3/!. Ot,er Li*,t T,reats
Acts punis#ed
1. T#reatening anot#er $it# a $eapon1 or 0y dra$ing suc# $eapon in a 3uarrel1 unless it 0e in la$ful selfBdefense;
2. .rally t#reatening anot#er1 in t#e #eat of anger1 $it# some #arm constituting a crime1 $it#out persisting in t#e idea in&ol&ed in #is t#reat;
3. .rally t#reatening to do anot#er any #arm not constituting a felony.
Article 3/'. Gra0e Coercios
Acts punis#ed
1. -re&enting anot#er1 0y means of &iolence1 t#reats or intimidation1 from doing somet#ing not pro#i0ited 0y la$;
2. Compelling anot#er1 0y means of &iolence1 t#reats or intimidation1 to do somet#ing against #is $ill1 $#et#er it 0e rig#t or $rong.
!lements
1. A person pre&ented anot#er from doing somet#ing not pro#i0ited 0y la$1 or t#at #e compelled #im to do somet#ing against #is $ill; 0e it rig#t or $rong;
2. T#e pre&ention or compulsion 0e effected 0y &iolence1 t#reats or intimidation; and
3. T#e person t#at restrained t#e $ill and li0erty of anot#er #ad not t#e aut#ority of la$ or t#e rig#t to do so1 or in ot#er $ords1 t#at t#e restraint s#all not 0e made
under aut#ority of la$ or in t#e e4ercise of any la$ful rig#t.
/rave coercion arises only if the act which the offender prevented another to do is not prohibited by law or ordinance. &f the act prohibited was illegal, he is not liable for
grave coercion.
&f a person prohibits another to do an act because the act is a crime, even though some sort of violence or intimidation is employed, it would not give rise to grave
coercion. &t may only give rise to threat or physical injuries, if some injuries are inflicted. However, in case of grave coercion where the offended party is being compelled
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 260
to do
something
against his
will, whether it
be wrong or
not, the crime
of grave
coercion is
committed if
violence or
intimidation is
employed in
order to
compel him to
do the act.
,o person
shall ta4e the
law into his
own hands.
&llustration'
Compelling
the debtor to
deliver some
of his
properties to
pay a creditor
will amount to
coercion
although the
creditor may
have a right to
collect
payment from
the debtor,
even if the
obligation is
long over due.
The violence employed in grave coercion must be immediate, actual, or imminent. &n the absence of actual or imminent force or violence, coercion is not committed. The
essence of coercion is an attac4 on individual liberty.
The physical violence is exerted to #(% prevent a person from doing something he wants to do< or #"% compel him to do something he does not want to do.
&llustration'
&f a man compels another to show the contents of the latterDs poc4ets, and ta4es the wallet, this is robbery and not grave coercion. The intimidation is a means of
committing robbery with violence or intimidation of persons. 7iolence is inherent in the crime of robbery with violence or intimidation upon persons and in usurpation of
real properties because it is the means of committing the crime.
)xception to the rule that physical violence must be exerted' where intimidation is so serious that it is not a threat anymore + it approximates violence.
&n Lee v. CA, &1 SCAR 1&$, it was held that neither the crime of threats nor coercion is committed although the accused, a branch manager of a ban4 made the
complainant sign a withdrawal slip for the amount needed to pay the spurious dollar chec4 she had encashed, and also made her execute an affidavit regarding
the return of the amount against her better sense and judgment. !ccording to the court, the complainant may have acted reluctantly and with hesitation, but still, it
was voluntary. &t is different when a complainant refuses absolutely to act such an extent that she becomes a mere automaton and acts mechanically only, not of
her own will. &n this situation, the complainant ceases to exits as an independent personality and the person who employs force or intimidation is, in the eyes of
the law, the one acting< while the hand of the complainant sign, the will that moves it is the hand of the offender.
Article 3/). Li*,t Coercios
!lements
1. .ffender must 0e a creditor;
2. 5e sei:es anyt#ing 0elonging to #is de0tor>
3. T#e sei:ure of t#e t#ing 0e accomplis#ed 0y means of &iolence or a display of material force producing intimidation;
4. T#e purpose of t#e offender is to apply t#e same to t#e payment of t#e de0t.
The

first paragraph deals with light coercions wherein violence is employed by the offender who is a creditor in sei3ing anything belonging to his debtor for the purpose of
applying the same to the payment of the debt.
&n the other light coercions or unjust vexation embraced in the second paragraph, violence is absent.
&n unjust vexation, any act committed without violence, but which unjustifiably annoys or vexes an innocent person amounts to light coercion.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 261
!s a
punishable
act, unjust
vexation
should include
any human
conduct
which,
although not
productive of
some physical
or material
harm would,
however,
unjustifiably
annoy or vex
an innocent
person.
&t is
distinguished
from grave
coercion
under the first
paragraph by
the absence
of violence.
&llustration'
Persons stoning someone elseDs house. 5o long as stoning is not serious and it is intended to annoy, it is unjust vexation. &t disturbs the peace of mind.
The main purpose of the statute penali3ing coercion and unjust vexation is precisely to enforce the principle that no person may ta4e the law into his hands and that our
government is one of laws, not of men. The essence of the crimes is the attac4 on individual liberty.
Article 3//. Ot,er Si&ilar Coercios
Acts punis#ed>
1. +orcing or compelling1 directly or indirectly1 or 6no$ingly permitting t#e forcing or compelling of t#e la0orer or employee of t#e offender to purc#ase merc#andise of
commodities of any 6ind from #im;
!lements>
1. .ffender is any person1 agent or officer of any association or corporation;
2. 5e or suc# firm or corporation #as employed la0orers or employees;
3. 5e forces or compels1 directly or indirectly1 or 6no$ingly permits to 0e forced or compelled1 any of #is or its la0orers or employees to purc#ase merc#andise
or commodities of any 6ind from #im or from said firm or corporation.
2. -aying t#e $ages due #is la0orer or employee 0y means of to6ens or o0?ect ot#er t#an t#e legal tender currency of t#e -#ilippines1 unless e4pressly re3uested 0y
suc# la0orer or employee.
!lements>
1. .ffender pays t#e $ages due a la0orer or employee employed 0y #im 0y means of to6ens or o0?ect;
1. T#ose to6ens or o0?ects are ot#er t#an t#e legal tender currency of t#e -#ilippines;
3. <uc# employee or la0orer does not e4pressly re3uest t#at #e 0e paid 0y means of to6ens or o0?ects.
Article 3/1. For&atio@ Maiteace@ a$ %ro,i9itio o( Co&9iatio o( Ca"ital or La9or t,ro.*, 2iolece or T,reats
!lements
1. .ffender employs &iolence or t#reats1 in suc# a degree as to compel or force t#e la0orers or employers in t#e free and legal e4ercise of t#eir industry or $or6;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 262
2. T#e
purpos
e is to
organi
:e1
maintai
n or
pre&en
t
coalitio
ns of
capital
or
la0or1
stri6e
of
la0orer
s or
loc6out
of
employ
ers.
Article 314.
Disco0eri*
Secrets
t,ro.*,
SeiH.re o(
Corres"o$e
ce
!lements
1. .ffender is a pri&ate indi&idual or e&en a pu0lic officer not in t#e e4ercise of #is official function;
2. 5e sei:es t#e papers or letters of anot#er;
3. T#e purpose is to disco&er t#e secrets of suc# anot#er person;
4. .ffender is informed of t#e contents of t#e papers or letters sei:ed.
This is a crime against the security of oneDs papers and effects. The purpose must be to discover its effects. The act violates the privacy of communication.
According to .rtega1 it is not necessary t#at t#e offender s#ould actually disco&er t#e contents of t#e letter. 2eyes1 citing Peo!le v. Sin%h, CA, 1& 5(, Su!!l. $, 3$,
0elie&es ot#er$ise.
The last paragraph of !rticle "8; expressly ma4es the provision of the first and second paragraph thereof inapplicable to parents, guardians, or persons entrusted with the
custody of minors placed under their care or custody, and to the spouses with respect to the papers or letters of either of them. The teachers or other persons entrusted
with the care and education of minors are included in the exceptions.
&n a case decided by the 5upreme Court, a spouse who rummaged and found love letters of husband to mistress does not commit this crime, but the letters are
inadmissible in evidence because of unreasonable search and sei3ure. The ruling held that the wife should have applied for a search warrant.
@istinction from estafa, damage to property, and unjust vexation'
&f the act had been executed with intent of gain, it would be estafa<
&f, on the other hand, the purpose was not to defraud, but only to cause damage to anotherDs, it would merit the 9ualification of damage to property<
&f the intention was merely to cause vexation preventing another to do something which the law does not prohibit or compel him to execute what he does not want, the act
should be considered as unjust vexation.
Revelation of secrets discovered not an element of the crime but only increases the penalty.
Article 311. Re0eali* Secrets +it, A9.se o( O((ice
!lements
1. .ffender is a manager1 employee or ser&ant;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 263
2. 5e
learns
t#e
secrets
of #is
princip
al or
master
in suc#
capacit
y;
3. 5e
re&eals suc#
secrets.
!n employee,
manager, or
servant who
came to 4now
of the secret
of his master
or principal in
such capacity
and reveals
the same shall
also be liable
regardless of
whether or not
the principal
or master
suffered
damages.
The essence
of this crime is
that the
offender
learned of the secret in the course of his employment. He is enjoying a confidential relation with the employer or master so he should respect the privacy of matters
personal to the latter.
&f the matter pertains to the business of the employer or master, damage is necessary and the agent, employee or servant shall always be liable. Reason' no one has a
right to the personal privacy of another.
Article 313. Re0elatio o( I$.strial Secrets
!lements
1. .ffender is a person in c#arge1 employee or $or6man of a manufacturing or industrial esta0lis#ment;
2. T#e manufacturing or industrial esta0lis#ment #as a secret of t#e industry $#ic# t#e offender #as learned;
3. .ffender re&eals suc# secrets;
4. -re?udice is caused to t#e o$ner.
! business secret must not be 4nown to other business entities or persons. &t is a matter to be discovered, 4nown and used by and must belong to one person or entity
exclusively. >ne who merely copies their machines from those already existing and functioning cannot claim to have a business secret, much less, a discovery within the
contemplation of !rticle "8".
TITLE G. CRIMES AGAINST %RO%ERTY
Crimes against property
1. 2o00ery $it# &iolence against or intimidation of persons (Art. 2)4);
2. Attempted and frustrated ro00ery committed under certain circumstances (Art. 2)");
3. !4ecution of deeds 0y means of &iolence or intimidation (Art. 2)');
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 264
4.
2o00e
ry in
an
in#a0it
ed
#ouse
or
pu0lic
0uildin
g or
edifice
de&ote
d to
$ors#i
p (Art.
2)));
5.
2o00e
ry in
an
in#a0it
ed
place
or in a
pri&ate
0uildin
g (Art.
3*2);
. -ossession of pic6loc6s or similar tools (Art. 3*4);
". 7rigandage (Art. 3*);
'. Aiding and a0etting a 0and of 0rigands (Art. 3*");
). T#eft (Art. 3*');
1*. Dualified t#eft (Art. 31*);
11. T#eft of t#e property of t#e Cational Ai0rary and Cational Museum (Art. 311);
12. .ccupation of real property or usurpation of real rig#ts in property (Art. 312);
13. Altering 0oundaries or landmar6s (Art. 313);
14. +raudulent insol&ency (Art. 314);
15. <$indling (Art. 315);
1. .t#er forms of s$indling (Art. 31);
1". <$indling a minor (Art. 31");
1'. .t#er deceits (Art. 31');
1). 2emo&al1 sale or pledge of mortgaged property (Art. 31));
2*. 9estructi&e arson (Art. 32*);
21. .t#er forms of arson (Art. 321);
22. Arson of property of small &alue (Art. 323);
23. Crimes in&ol&ing destruction (Art. 324);
24. 7urning oneEs o$n property as means to commit arson (Art. 325);
25. <etting fire to property e4clusi&ely o$ned 0y t#e offender (Art. 32);
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 265
2.
Malicious
misc#ief (Art.
32");
2".
<pecia
l case
of
malicio
us
misc#i
ef (Art.
32');
2'.
9amag
e and
o0stru
ction to
means
of
comm
unicati
on
(Art.
33*);
2). 9estroying or damaging statues1 pu0lic monuments or paintings (Art. 331).
Article 318. W,o Are G.ilt# o( Ro99er#
2o00ery / T#is is t#e ta6ing or personal property 0elonging to anot#er1 $it# intent to gain1 0y means of &iolence against1 or intimidation of any person1 or using force upon
anyt#ing.
!lements of ro00ery in general
1. T#ere is personal property 0elonging to anot#er;
2. T#ere is unla$ful ta6ing of t#at property;
3. T#e ta6ing must 0e $it# intent to gain; and
4. T#ere is &iolence against or intimidation of any person1 or force upon anyt#ing.
Article 314. Ro99er# +it, 2iolece a*aist or Iti&i$atio o( %ersos
Acts punis#ed
1. @#en 0y reason or on occasion of t#e ro00ery (ta6ing of personal property 0elonging to anot#er $it# intent to gain)1 t#e crime of #omicide is committed;
2. @#en t#e ro00ery is accompanied 0y rape or intentional mutilation or arson;
3. @#en 0y reason of on occasion of suc# ro00ery1 any of t#e p#ysical in?uries resulting in insanity1 im0ecility1 impotency or 0lindness is inflicted;
4. @#en 0y reason or on occasion of ro00ery1 any of t#e p#ysical in?uries resulting in t#e loss of t#e use of speec# or t#e po$er to #ear or to smell1 or t#e loss of an
eye1 a #and1 a foot1 an arm1 or a leg or t#e loss of t#e use of any suc# mem0er or incapacity for t#e $or6 in $#ic# t#e in?ured person is t#eretofore #a0itually
engaged is inflicted;
5. %f t#e &iolence or intimidation employed in t#e commission of t#e ro00ery is carried to a degree unnecessary for t#e commission of t#e crime;
. @#en in t#e course of its e4ecution1 t#e offender s#all #a&e inflicted upon any person not responsi0le for t#e commission of t#e ro00ery any of t#e p#ysical in?uries
in conse3uence of $#ic# t#e person in?ured 0ecomes deformed or loses any ot#er mem0er of #is 0ody or loses t#e sue t#ereof or 0ecomes ill or incapacitated for
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 266
t#e
perfor
mance
of t#e
$or6 in
$#ic#
#e is
#a0itu
ally
engag
ed for
more
t#an
)*
days
or t#e
person
in?ured
0ecom
es ill or
incapa
citated
for
la0or
for
more
t#an
3*
days;
". %f t#e &iolence employed 0y t#e offender does not cause any of t#e serious p#ysical in?uries defined in Article 231 or if t#e offender employs intimidation only.
7iolence or intimidation upon persons may result in death or mutilation or rape or serious physical injuries.
&f death results or even accompanies a robbery, the crime will be robbery with homicide provided that the robbery is consummated.
This is a crime against property, and therefore, you contend not with the 4illing but with the robbery.
!s long as there is only one #(% robbery, regardless of the persons 4illed, the crime will only be one #(% count of robbery with homicide. The fact that there are multiple
4illings committed in the course of the robbery will be considered only as aggravating so as to call for the imposition of the maximum penalty prescribed by law.
&f, on the occasion or by reason of the robbery, somebody is 4illed, and there are also physical injuries inflicted by reason or on the occasion of the robbery, donDt thin4
that those who sustained physical injuries may separately prosecute the offender for physical injuries. Those physical injuries are only considered aggravating
circumstances in the crime of robbery with homicide.
This is not a complex crime as understood under !rticle *1, but a single indivisible crime. This is a special complex crime because the specific penalty is provided in the
law.
&n 4a!oli+ v. CA, it was held that when violence or intimidation and force upon things are both present in the robbery, the crime is complex under !rticle *1.
&n robbery with violence of intimidation, the ta4ing is complete when the offender has already the possession of the thing even if he has no opportunity to dispose of it.
&n robbery with force upon things, the things must be brought outside the building for consummated robbery to be committed.
5n robber. 7i)h ho0ici#e
The term EhomicideF is used in the generic sense, and the complex crime therein contemplated comprehends not only robbery with homicide in its restricted sense, but
also with robbery with murder. 5o, any 4ind of 4illing by reason of or on the occasion of a robbery will bring about the crime of robbery with homicide even if the person
4illed is less than three days old, or even if the person 4illed is the mother or father of the 4iller, or even if on such robbery the person 4illed was done by treachery or any
of the 9ualifying circumstances. &n short, there is no crime of robbery with parricide, robbery with murder, robbery with infanticide + any and all forms of 4illing is referred
to as homicide.

&llustration'
The robbers enter the house. &n entering through the window, one of the robbers stepped on a child less than three days old. The crime is not robbery with infanticide
because there is no such crime. The word homicide as used in defining robbery with homicide is used in the generic sense. &t refers to any 4ind of death.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 267
!lthough it is
a crime
against
property and
treachery is
an
aggravating
circumstance
that applies
only to crimes
against
persons, if the
4illing in a
robbery is
committed
with treachery,
the treachery
will be
considered a
generic
aggravating
circumstance
because of
the homicide.
.hen two or
more persons
are 4illed
during the
robbery, such
should be
appreciated
as an
aggravating
circumstance.
!s long as
there is only
one robbery, regardless of the persons 4illed, you only have one crime of robbery with homicide. ,ote, however, that Eone robberyF does not mean there is only one
ta4ing.
&llustration'
Robbers decided to commit robbery in a house, which turned out to be a boarding house. Thus, there were different boarders who were offended parties in the robbery.
There is only one count of robbery. &f there were 4illings done to different boarders during the robbery being committed in a boarderDs 9uarter, do not consider that as
separate counts of robbery with homicide because when robbers decide to commit robbery in a certain house, they are only impelled by one criminal intent to rob and
there will only be one case of robbery. &f there were homicide or death committed, that would only be part of a single robbery. That there were several 4illings done would
only aggravate the commission of the crime of robbery with homicide.
&n Peo!le v. 2ui8one+, 183 SCRA 717, it was held that there is no crime of robbery with multiple homicides. The charge should be for robbery with homicide only
because the number of persons 4illed is immaterial and does not increase the penalty prescribed in !rticle "8*. !ll the 4illings are merged in the composite
integrated whole that is robbery with homicide so long as the 4illings were by reason or on occasion of the robbery.
&n another case, a band of robbers entered a compound, which is actually a sugar mill. .ithin the compound, there were 9uarters of the laborers. They robbed each of
the 9uarters. The 5upreme Court held that there was only one count of robbery because when they decided and determined to rob the compound, they were only
impelled by one criminal intent to rob.
.ith more reason, therefore, if in a robbery, the offender too4 away property belonging to different owners, as long as the ta4ing was done at one time, and in one place,
impelled by the same criminal intent to gain, there would only be one count of robbery.
&n robbery with homicide as a single indivisible offense, it is immaterial who gets 4illed. )ven though the 4illing may have resulted from negligence, you will still designate
the crime as robbery with homicide.
&llustration'
>n the occasion of a robbery, one of the offenders placed his firearm on the table. .hile they were ransac4ing the place, one of the robbers bumped the table. !s a
result, the firearm fell on the floor and discharged. >ne of the robbers was the one 4illed. )ven though the placing of the firearm on the table where there is no safety
precaution ta4en may be considered as one of negligence or imprudence, you do not separate the homicide as one of the product of criminal negligence. &t will still be
robbery with homicide, whether the person 4illed is connected with the robbery or not. He need not also be in the place of the robbery.
&n one case, in the course of the struggle in a house where the robbery was being committed, the owner of the place tried to wrest the arm of the robber. ! person
several meters away was the one who got 4illed. The crime was held to be robbery with homicide.
,ote that the person 4illed need not be one who is identified with the owner of the place where the robbery is committed or one who is a stranger to the robbers. &t is
enough that the homicide was committed by reason of the robbery or on the occasion thereof.
&llustration'
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 268
There are two
robbers who
bro4e into a
house and
carried away
some
valuables.
!fter they left
such house
these two
robbers
decided to cut
or divide the
loot already
so that they
can go of
them. 5o
while they are
dividing the
loot the other
robber noticed
that the one
doing the
division is
trying to cheat
him and so he
immediately
boxed him.
,ow this
robber who
was boxed
then pulled
out his gun
and fired at
the other one
4illing the
latter. .ould
that bring
about the
crime of
robbery with homicideO Bes. )ven if the robbery was already consummated, the 4illing was still by reason of the robbery because they 9uarreled in dividing the loot that
is the subject of the robbery.
&n Peo!le v. /o0in%o, 181 SCRA 1&9, on the occasion of the robbery, the storeowner, a septuagenarian, suffered a stro4e due to the extreme fear which directly caused
his death when the robbers pointed their guns at him. &t was held that the crime committed was robbery with homicide. &t is immaterial that death supervened as a
mere accident as long as the homicide was produced by reason or on the occasion of the robbery, because it is only the result which matters, without reference to
the circumstances or causes or persons intervening in the commission of the crime which must be considered.
Remember also that intent to rob must be proved. :ut there must be an allegation as to the robbery not only as to the intention to rob.
&f the motive is to 4ill and the ta4ing is committed thereafter, the crimes committed are homicide and theft. &f the primordial intent of the offender is to 4ill and not to rob but
after the 4illing of the victims a robbery was committed, then there are will be two separate crimes.
&llustration'
&f a person had an enemy and 4illed him and after 4illing him, saw that he had a beautiful ring and too4 this, the crime would be not robbery with homicide because the
primary criminal intent is to 4ill. 5o, there will be two crimes' one for the 4illing and one for the ta4ing of the property after the victim was 4illed. ,ow this would bring
about the crime of theft and it could not be robbery anymore because the person is already dead.
2or robbery with homicide to exist, homicide must be committed by reason or on the occasion of the robbery, that is, the homicide must be committed Ein the course or
because of the robbery.F Robbery and homicide are separate offenses when the homicide is not committed Eon the occasionF or Eby reasonF of the robbery.
.here the victims were 4illed, not for the purpose of committing robbery, and the idea of ta4ing the money and other personal property of the victims was conceived by
the culprits only after the 4illing, it was held in Peo!le v. /o0in%o, 181 SCRA 1&9, that the culprits committed two separate crimes of homicide or murder
#9ualified by abuse of superior strength% and theft.
The victims were 4illed first then their money was ta4en the money from their dead bodies. This is robbery with homicide. &t is important here that the intent to commit
robbery must precede the ta4ing of human life in robbery with homicide. The offender must have the intent to ta4e personal property before the 4illing.
&t must be conclusively shown that the homicide was committed for the purpose of robbing the victim. &n Peo!le v. "ernan#ez, appellants had not thought of robbery prior
to the 4illing. The thought of ta4ing the victimDs wristwatch was conceived only after the 4illing and throwing of the victim in the canal. !ppellants were convicted of
two separate crimes of homicide and theft as there is absent direct relation and intimate connection between the robbery and the 4illing.
5n robber. 7i)h ra!e
This is another form of violence or intimidation upon person. The rape accompanies the robbery. &n this case where rape and not homicide is committed, there is only a
crime of robbery with rape if both the robbery and the rape are consummated. &f during the robbery, attempted rape were committed, the crimes would be separate, that
is, one for robbery and one for the attempted rape.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 269
The rape
committed on
the occasion
of the robbery
is not
considered a
private crime
because the
crime is
robbery, which
is a crime
against
property. 5o,
even though
the robber
may have
married the
woman raped,
the crime
remains
robbery with
rape. The
rape is not
erased. This
is because the
crime is
against
property
which is a
single
indivisible
offense.
&f the woman,
who was
raped on the
occasion of
the robbery,
pardoned the
rapist who is one of the robbers, that would not erase the crime of rape. The offender would still be prosecuted for the crime of robbery with rape, as long as the rape is
consummated.
&f the rape is attempted, since it will be a separate charge and the offended woman pardoned the offender, that would bring about a bar to the prosecution of the
attempted rape. &f the offender married the offended woman, that would extinguish the criminal liability because the rape is the subject of a separate prosecution.
The intention must be to commit robbery and even if the rape is committed before the robbery, robbery with rape is committed. :ut if the accused tried to rape the
offended party and because of resistance, he failed to consummate the act, and then he snatched the vanity case from her hands when she ran away, two crimes are
committed' attempted rape and theft.
There is no complex crime under !rticle *1 because a single act is not committed and attempted rape is not a means necessary to commit theft and viceversa.
The Revised Penal Code does not differentiate whether rape was committed before, during or after the robbery. &t is enough that the robbery accompanied the rape.
Robbery must not be a mere accident or afterthought.
&n Peo!le v. 9lore+, 19$ SCRA 9$, although the offenders plan was to get the victimDs money, rape her and 4ill her, but in the actual execution of the crime, the thoughts
of depriving the victim of her valuables was relegated to the bac4ground and the offenderDs prurient desires surfaced. They persisted in satisfying their lust. They would
have forgotten about their intent to rob if not for the accidental touching of the victimDs ring and wristwatch. The ta4ing of the victimDs valuables turned out to be an
afterthought. &t was held that two distinct crimes were committed' rape with homicide and theft.
&n Peo!le v. /inola, 183 SCRA 193, it was held that if the original criminal design of the accused was to commit rape and after committing the rape, the accused
committed robbery because the opportunity presented itself, two distinct crimes + rape and robbery were committed + not robbery with rape. &n the latter, the criminal
intent to gain must precede the intent to rape.
5n robber. 7i)h !h.+ical in:urie+
To be considered as such, the physical injuries must always be serious. &f the physical injuries are only less serious or slight, they are absorbed in the robbery. The crime
becomes merely robbery. :ut if the less serious physical injuries were committed after the robbery was already consummated, there would be a separate charge for the
less serious physical injuries. &t will only be absorbed in the robbery if it was inflicted in the course of the execution of the robbery. The same is true in the case of slight
physical injuries.
&llustration'
!fter the robbery had been committed and the robbers were already fleeing from the house where the robbery was committed, the owner of the house chased them and
the robbers fought bac4. &f only less serious physical injuries were inflicted, there will be separate crimes' one for robbery and one for less serious physical injuries.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 270
:ut if after the
robbery was
committed
and the
robbers were
already
fleeing from
the house
where the
robbery was
committed,
the owner or
members of
the family of
the owner
chased them,
and they
fought bac4
and
somebody
was 4illed, the
crime would
still be
robbery with
homicide. :ut
if serious
physical
injuries were
inflicted and
the serious
physical
injuries
rendered the
victim
impotent or
insane or the
victim lost the
use of any of
his senses or
lost a part of
his body, the crime would still be robbery with serious physical injuries. The physical injuries #serious% should not be separated regardless of whether they retorted in the
course of the commission of the robbery or even after the robbery was consummated.
%n !rticle "88, it is only when the physical injuries resulted in the deformity or incapacitated the offended party from labor for more than 6; days that the law re9uires such
physical injuries to have been inflicted in the course of the execution of the robbery, and only upon persons who are not responsible in the commission of the robbery.
:ut if the physical injuries inflicted are those falling under subdivision ( and " of !rticle "-6, even though the physical injuries were inflicted upon one of the robbers
themselves, and even though it had been inflicted after the robbery was already consummated, the crime will still be robbery with serious physical injuries. There will only
be one count of accusation.
&llustration'
!fter the robbers fled from the place where the robbery was committed, they decided to divide the spoils and in the course of the division of the spoils or the loot, they
9uarreled. They shot it out and one of the robbers was 4illed. The crime is still robbery with homicide even though one of the robbers was the one 4illed by one of them.
&f they 9uarreled and serious physical injuries rendered one of the robbers impotent, blind in both eyes, or got insane, or he lost the use of any of his senses, lost the use
of any part of his body, the crime will still be robbery with serious physical injuries.
&f the robbers 9uarreled over the loot and one of the robbers hac4ed the other robber causing a deformity in his face, the crime will only be robbery and a separate charge
for the serious physical injuries because when it is a deformity that is caused, the law re9uires that the deformity must have been inflicted upon one who is not a
participant in the robbery. 0oreover, the physical injuries which gave rise to the deformity or which incapacitated the offended party from labor for more than 6; days,
must have been inflicted in the course of the execution of the robbery or while the robbery was ta4ing place.

&f it was inflicted when the thievesJrobbers are already dividing the spoils, it cannot be considered as inflicted in the course of execution of the robbery and hence, it will
not give rise to the crime of robbery with serious physical injuries. Bou only have one count of robbery and another count for the serious physical injuries inflicted.
&f, during or on the occasion or by reason of the robbery, a 4illing, rape or serious physical injuries too4 place, there will only be one crime of robbery with homicide
because all of these + 4illing, rape, serious physical injuries are contemplated by law as the violence or intimidation which characteri3es the ta4ing as on of robbery.
Bou charge the offenders of robbery with homicide. The rape or physical injuries will only be appreciated as aggravating circumstance and is not the subject of a separate
prosecution. They will only call for the imposition of the penalty in the maximum period.
&f on the occasion of the robbery with homicide, robbery with force upon things was also committed, you will not have only one robbery but you will have a complex crime
of robbery with homicide and robbery with force upon things #see 4a!oli+ v. CA%. This is because robbery with violence or intimidation upon persons is a separate crime
from robbery with force upon things.
Robbery with homicide, robbery with intentional mutilation and robbery with rape are not 9ualified by band or uninhabited place. These aggravating circumstances only
9ualify robbery with physical injuries under subdivision ", 6, and * of !rticle "88.
.hen it is robbery with homicide, the band or uninhabited place is only a generic aggravating circumstance. &t will not 9ualify the crime to a higher degree of penalty.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 271
&n Peo!le v.
Salvilla, it
was held that
if in a robbery
with serious
physical
injuries, the
offenders
herded the
women and
children into
an office and
detained them
to compel the
offended party
to come out
with the
money, the
crime of
serious illegal
detention was
a necessary
means to
facilitate the
robbery< thus,
the complex
crimes of
robbery with
serious
physical
injuries and
serious illegal
detention.
:ut if the victims were detained because of the timely arrival of the police, such that the offenders had no choice but to detain the victims as hostages in exchange for
their safe passage, the detention is absorbed by the crime of robbery and is not a separate crime. This was the ruling in Peo!le v. A+)or.
5n robber. 7i)h ar+on
!nother innovation of Republic !ct ,o. ?-$8 is the composite crime of robbery with arson if arson is committed by reason of or on occasion of the robbery. The
composite crime would only be committed if the primordial intent of the offender is to commit robber and there is no 4illing, rape, or intentional mutilation committed by the
offender during the robbery. >therwise, the crime would be robbery with homicide, or robbery with rape, or robbery with intentional mutilation, in that order, and the arson
would only be an aggravating circumstance. &t is essential that robbery precedes the arson, as in the case of rape and intentional mutilation, because the amendment
included arson among the rape and intentional mutilation which have accompanied the robbery.
0oreover, it should be noted that arson has been made a component only of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons in said !rticle "8*, but not of robbery
by the use of force upon things in !rticles "88 and 6;".
5o, if the robbery was by the use of force upon things and therewith arson was committed, two distinct crimes are committed.
Article 31!. Ro99er# +it, %,#sical ID.ries@ Co&&itte$ i A Ui,a9ite$ %lace a$ 9# A Aa$
2o00ery $it# &iolence against or intimidation of person 3ualified is 3ualified if it is committed
1. %n an unin#a0ited place;
2. 7y a 0and;
3. 7y attac6ing a mo&ing train1 street car1 motor &e#icle1 or airs#ip;

4. 7y entering t#e passengersE compartments in a train1 or in any manner ta6ing t#e passengers t#ereof 0y surprise in t#e respecti&e con&eyances; or
5. .n a street1 road1 #ig#$ay or alley1 and t#e intimidation is made $it# t#e use of firearms1 t#e offender s#all 0e punis#ed 0y t#e ma4imum periods of t#e proper
penalties prescri0ed in Article 2)4.
Article 31' defines a ro00ery 0y a 0and as follo$s> $#en at least four armed malefactors ta6e part in t#e commission of a ro00ery.
2e3uisites for lia0ility for t#e acts of t#e ot#er mem0ers of t#e 0and
1. 5e $as a mem0er of t#e 0and;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 272
2. 5e
$as
presen
t at t#e
commi
ssion
of a
ro00er
y 0y
t#at
0and;
3. T#e
ot#er
mem0
ers of
t#e
0and
commit
ted an
assault
;
4. 5e did
not
attemp
t to
pre&en
t t#e
assault
.
Article 31/.
E?ec.tio o(
Dee$s 9#
Meas o(
2iolece or
iti&i$atio
!lements
1. .ffender #as intent to defraud anot#er;
2. .ffender compels #im to sign1 e4ecute1 or deli&er any pu0lic instrument or document.
3. T#e compulsion is 0y means of &iolence or intimidation.
Article 311. Ro99er# i A I,a9ite$ Ho.se or %.9lic A.il$i* or E$i(ice De0ote$ to Wors,i"
!lements under su0di&ision (a)
1. .ffender entered an in#a0ited #ouse1 pu0lic 0uilding
2. T#e entrance $as effected 0y any of t#e follo$ing means>
a. T#roug# an opening not intended for entrance or egress;
0. 7y 0rea6ing any $all1 roof or floor1 or 0rea6ing any door or $indo$;
c. 7y using false 6eys1 pic6loc6s or similar tools; or
d. 7y using any fictitious name or pretending t#e e4ercise of pu0lic aut#ority.
3. .nce inside t#e 0uilding1 offender too6 personal property 0elonging to anot#er $it# intent to gain.
!lements under su0di&ision (0)>
1. .ffender is inside a d$elling #ouse1 pu0lic 0uilding1 or edifice de&oted to religious $ors#ip1 regardless of t#e circumstances under $#ic# #e entered it;
2. .ffender ta6es personal property 0elonging to anot#er1 $it# intent to gain1 under any of t#e follo$ing circumstances>
a. 7y t#e 0rea6ing of doors1 $ardro0es1 c#ests1 or any ot#er 6ind of loc6ed or sealed furniture or receptacle; or
0. 7y ta6ing suc# furniture or o0?ects a$ay to 0e 0ro6en or forced open outside t#e place of t#e ro00ery.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 273
K2orce upon
thingsK has a
technical
meaning in
law. ,ot any
4ind of force
upon things
will
characteri3e
the ta4ing as
one of
robbery. The
force upon
things
contemplated
re9uires some
element of
trespass into
the
establishment
where the
robbery was
committed. &n
other words,
the offender
must have
entered the
premises
where the
robbery was
committed. &f no entry was effected, even though force may have been employed actually in the ta4ing of the property from within the premises, the crime will only be
theft.
Two predicates that will give rise to the crime as robbery'
(. :y mere entering alone, a robbery will be committed if any personal property is ta4en from within<
". The entering will not give rise to robbery even if something is ta4en inside. &t is the brea4ing of the receptacle or closet or cabinet where the personal property is
4ept that will give rise to robbery, or the ta4ing of a sealed, loc4ed receptacle to be bro4en outside the premises.
&f by the mere entering, that would already 9ualify the ta4ing of any personal property inside as robbery, it is immaterial whether the offender stays inside the premises.
The brea4ing of things inside the premises will only be important to consider if the entering by itself will not characteri3e the crime as robbery with force upon things.
0odes of entering that would give rise to the crime of robbery with force upon things if something is ta4en inside the premises' entering into an opening not intended for
entrance or egress, under !rticle "88 #a%.
&llustration'
The entry was made through a fire escape. The fire escape was intended for egress. The entry will not characteri3e the ta4ing as one of robbery because it is an
opening intended for egress, although it may not be intended for entrance. &f the entering were done through the window, even if the window was not bro4en, that would
characteri3e the ta4ing of personal property inside as robbery because the window is not an opening intended for entrance.
&llustration'
>n a sarisari store, a vehicle bumped the wall. The wall collapsed. There was a small opening there. !t night, a man entered through that opening without brea4ing the
same. The crime will already be robbery if he ta4es property from within because that is not an opening intended for the purpose.
)ven of there is a brea4ing of wall, roof, floor or window, but the offender did not enter, it would not give rise to robbery with force upon things.
:rea4ing of the door under !rticle"88 #b% + >riginally, the interpretation was that in order that there be a brea4ing of the door in contemplation of law, there must be some
damage to the door.
:efore, if the door was not damaged but only the loc4 attached to the door was bro4en, the ta4ing from within is only theft. :ut the ruling is now abandoned because the
door is considered useless without the loc4. )ven if it is not the door that was bro4en but only the loc4, the brea4ing of the loc4 renders the door useless and it is
therefore tantamount to the brea4ing of the door. Hence, the ta4ing inside is considered robbery with force upon things.
&f the entering does not characteri3e the ta4ing inside as one of robbery with force upon things, it is the conduct inside that would give rise to the robbery if there would be
a brea4ing of sealed, loc4ed or closed receptacles or cabinet in order to get the personal belongings from within such receptacles, cabinet or place where it is 4ept.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 274
&f in the
course of
committing
the robbery
within the
premises
some interior
doors are
bro4en, the
ta4ing from
inside the
room where
the door leads
to will only
give rise to
theft. The
brea4ing of
doors
contemplated
in the law
refers to the
main door of
the house and
not the interior
door.
:ut if it is the
door of a
cabinet that is
bro4en and
the valuable
inside the
cabinet was
ta4en, the
brea4ing of the cabinet door would characteri3e the ta4ing as robbery. !lthough that particular door is not included as part of the house, the cabinet 4eeps the contents
thereof safe.
=se of pic4loc4s or false 4eys refers to the entering into the premises + &f the pic4loc4 or false 4ey was used not to enter the premises because the offender had already
entered but was used to unloc4 an interior door or even a receptacle where the valuable or personal belonging was ta4en, the use of false 4ey or pic4loc4 will
not give rise to the robbery with force upon things because these are considered by law as only a means to gain entrance, and not to extract personal
belongings from the place where it is being 4ept.
The law classifies robbery with force upon things as those committed in'
#(% an inhabited place<
#"% public buildings<
#6% a place devoted to religious worship.
The law also considers robbery committed not in an inhabited house or in a private building.
,ote that the manner of committing the robbery with force upon things is not the same.
.hen the robbery is committed in a house which is inhabited, or in a public building or in a place devoted to religious worship, the use of fictitious name or pretension to
possess authority in order to gain entrance will characteri3e the ta4ing inside as robbery with force upon things.
6.estio 7 As+er
Certain men pretended to 0e from t#e -rice Control Commission and $ent to a $are#ouse o$ned 0y a pri&ate person. T#ey told t#e guard to open t#e $are#ouse
purportedly to see if t#e pri&ate person is #oarding essential commodities t#ere. T#e guard o0liged. T#ey $ent inside and 0ro6e in . T#ey loaded some of t#e
merc#andise inside claiming t#at it is t#e product of #oarding and t#en dro&e a$ay. @#at crime $as committed=
&t is only theft because the premises where the simulation of public authority was committed is not an inhabited house, not a public building, and not a place
devoted to religious worship. .here the house is a private building or is uninhabited, even though there is simulation of public authority in committing the ta4ing or even if
he used a fictitious name, the crime is only theft.
,ote that in the crime of robbery with force upon things, what should be considered is the means of entrance and means of ta4ing the personal property from within. &f
those means do not come within the definition under the Revised Penal Code, the ta4ing will only give rise to theft.
Those means must be employed in entering. &f the offender had already entered when these means were employed, anything ta4en inside, without brea4ing of any
sealed or closed receptacle, will not give rise to robbery.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 275
&llustration'
! found :
inside his #!Ds%
house. He
as4ed : what
the latter was
doping there.
: claimed he
is an inspector
from the local
city
government to
loo4 after the
electrical
installations.
!t the time :
was chanced
upon by !, he
has already
entered. 5o
anything he
too4 inside
without
brea4ing of
any sealed or
closed
receptacle will
not give rise
to robbery
because the
simulation of
public
authority was
made not in
order to enter
but when he
has already
entered.
Article 841 defines an in#a0ited #ouse1 pu0lic 0uilding1 or 0uilding dedicated to religious $ors#ip and t#eir dependencies1 t#us>
%n#a0ited #ouse / Any s#elter1 s#ip1 or &essel constituting t#e d$elling of one or more persons1 e&en t#oug# t#e in#a0itants t#ereof s#all temporarily 0e a0sent t#erefrom
$#en t#e ro00ery is committed.
-u0lic 0uilding / %ncludes e&ery 0uilding o$ned 0y t#e go&ernment or 0elonging to a pri&ate person 0ut used or rented 0y t#e go&ernment1 alt#oug# temporarily
unoccupied 0y t#e same.
9ependencies of an in#a0ited #ouse1 pu0lic 0uilding1 or 0uilding dedicated to religious $ors#ip / All interior courts1 corrals1 $are#ouses1 granaries1 0arns1 coac##ouses1
sta0les1 or ot#er departments1 or enclosed interior entrance connected t#ere$it# and $#ic# form part of t#e $#ole. .rc#ards and ot#er lands used for culti&ation or
production are not included1 e&en if closed1 contiguous to t#e 0uilding1 and #a&ing direct connection t#ere$it#.
Article 843. Ro99er# i A Ui,a9ite$ %lace or i A %ri0ate A.il$i*
!lements
1. .ffender entered an unin#a0ited place or a 0uilding $#ic# $as not a d$elling #ouse1 not a pu0lic 0uilding1 or not an edifice de&oted to religious $ors#ip;
2. Any of t#e follo$ing circumstances $as present>
a. T#e entrance $as effected t#roug# an opening not intended for entrance or egress;

0. A $all1 roof1 floor1 or outside door or $indo$ $as 0ro6en;
c. T#e entrance $as effected t#roug# t#e use of false 6eys1 pic6loc6s or ot#er similar tools;
d. A door1 $ardro0e1 c#est1 or any sealed or closed furniture or receptacle $as 0ro6en; or
e. A closed or sealed receptacle $as remo&ed1 e&en if t#e same 0e 0ro6en open else$#ere.
3. .ffender too6 t#erefrom personal property 0elonging to anot#er $it# intent to gain.
8nder Article 8481 if t#e ro00ery under Article 2)) and 3*2 consists in t#e ta6ing of cereals1 fruits1 or fire$ood1 t#e penalty imposa0le is lo$er.
Article 844. %ossessio o( %ic=loc= or Si&ilar Tools
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 276
!lements
1.
.ffend
er #as
in #is
posses
sion
pic6loc
6s or
similar
tools;
2. <uc#
pic6loc
6 or
similar
tools
are
especi
ally
adopte
d to
t#e
commi
ssion
of
ro00er
y;
3. .ffender does not #a&e la$ful cause for suc# possession.
Article 84! defines false 6eys to include t#e follo$ing>
1. Tools mentioned in Article 3*4;
2. ;enuine 6eys stolen from t#e o$ner;
3. Any 6ey ot#er t#an t#ose intended 0y t#e o$ner for use in t#e loc6 forci0ly opened 0y t#e offender.
7rigandage / T#is is a crime committed 0y more t#an t#ree armed persons $#o form a 0and of ro00ers for t#e purpose of committing ro00ery in t#e #ig#$ay or
6idnapping persons for t#e purpose of e4tortion or to o0tain ransom1 or for any ot#er purpose to 0e attained 0y means of force and &iolence.
Article 84'. W,o Are Ari*a$s
!lements of 0rigandage
1. T#ere are least four armed persons;
2. T#ey formed a 0and of ro00ers;
2. T#e purpose is any of t#e follo$ing>
a. To commit ro00ery in t#e #ig#$ay;
0. To 6idnap persons for t#e purpose of e4tortion or to o0tain ransom; or
c. To attain 0y means of force and &iolence any ot#er purpose.
Article 84). Ai$i* a$ A9etti* A Aa$ o( Ari*a$s
!lements
1. T#ere is a 0and of 0rigands;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 277
2.
.ffend
er
6no$s
t#e
0and
to 0e
of
0rigan
ds;
3.
.ffend
er
does
any of
t#e
follo$i
ng
acts>
a. 5e in
any
manne
r aids1
a0ets
or
protect
s suc#
0and
of
0rigan
ds;
0. 5e gi&es t#em information of t#e mo&ements of t#e police or ot#er peace officers of t#e go&ernment; or
c. 5e ac3uires or recei&es t#e property ta6en 0y suc# 0rigands.
@istinction between brigandage under the Revised Penal Code and highway robberyJbrigandage under Pre+i#en)ial /ecree 4o. $3;
#(% :rigandage as a crime under the Revised Penal Code refers to the formation of a band of robbers by more than three armed persons for the purpose of
committing robbery in the highway, 4idnapping for purposes of extortion or ransom, or for any other purpose to be attained by force and violence. The mere
forming of a band, which re9uires at least four armed persons, if for any of the criminal purposes stated in !rticle 6;-, gives rise to brigandage.
#"% Highway robberyJbrigandage under Presidential @ecree ,o. $6" is the sei3ure of any person for ransom, extortion or for any other lawful purposes, or the ta4ing
away of the property of another by means of violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon things or other unlawful means committed by any person on
any Philippine highway.
:rigandage under Presidential @ecree ,o. $6" refers to the actual commission of the robbery on the highway and can be committed by one person alone. &t is this
brigandage which deserves some attention because not any robbery in a highway is brigandage or highway robbery. ! distinction should be made between highway
robberyJbrigandage under the decree and ordinary robbery committed on a highway under the Revised Penal Code.
&n Peo!le v. Puno, #eci#e# 9ebruar. 17, 1993, the trial court convicted the accused of highway robberyJ brigandage under Presidential @ecree ,o. $6" and sentenced
them to reclusion perpetua. >n appeal, the 5upreme Court set aside the judgment and found the accused guilty of simple robbery as punished in !rticle "8* #$%,
in relation to !rticle "8$, and sentenced them accordingly. The 5upreme Court pointed out that the purpose of brigandage Eis, inter alia, indiscriminate highway
robbery. !nd that P@ $6" punishes as highway robbery or :rigandage only acts of robbery perpetrated by outlaws indiscriminately against any person or persons
on a Philippine highway as defined therein, not acts committed against a predetermined or particular victimF. ! single act of robbery against a particular person
chosen by the offender as his specific victim, even if committed on a highway, is not highway robbery or brigandage.
&n 3S v. 9eliciano, 3 Phil. 1, it was pointed out that highway robbery or brigandage is more than ordinary robbery committed on a highway. The purpose of brigandage
is indiscriminate robbery in highways. &f the purpose is only a particular robbery, the crime is only robbery or robbery in band, if there are at least four armed participants.
Presidential @ecree ,o. $6" introduced amendments to !rticle 6;- and 6;? by increasing the penalties. &t does not re9uire at least four armed persons forming a band of
robbers. &t does not create a presumption that the offender is a brigand when he an unlicensed firearm is used unli4e the Revised Penal Code. :ut the essence of
brigandage under the Revised Penal Code is the same as that in the Presidential @ecree, that is, crime of depredation wherein the unlawful acts are directed not only
against specific, intended or preconceived victims, but against any and all prospective victims anywhere on the highway and whoever they may potentially be.
Article 84/. W,o Are Lia9le (or T,e(t
-ersons lia0le
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 278
1. T#ose
$#o
$it#
intent
to
gain1
0ut
$it#out
&iolenc
e
against
or
intimid
ation
of
person
s nor
force
upon
t#ings1
ta6e
person
al
propert
y of
anot#e
r
$it#out
t#e
latterEs
consen
t;
2. T#ose $#o #a&ing found lost property1 fails to deli&er t#e same to t#e local aut#orities or to its o$ner;
3. T#ose $#o1 after #a&ing maliciously damaged t#e property of anot#er1 remo&e or ma6e use of t#e fruits or o0?ects of t#e damage caused 0y t#em;
4. T#ose $#o enter an enclosed estate or a field $#ere trespass is for0idden or $#ic# 0elongs to anot#er and1 $it#out t#e consent of its o$ner1 #unt or fis# upon t#e
same or gat#er fruits1 cereals or ot#er forest or farm products.
!lements
1. T#ere is ta6ing of personal property;
2. T#e property ta6en 0elongs to anot#er;
3. T#e ta6ing $as done $it# intent to gain;
4. T#e ta6ing $as done $it#out t#e consent of t#e o$ner;
5. T#e ta6ing is accomplis#ed $it#out t#e use of &iolence against or intimidation of persons of force upon t#ings.
2encing under Pre+i#en)ial /ecree 4o. 161 is a distinct crime from theft and robbery. &f the participant who profited is being prosecuted with person who robbed, the
person is prosecuted as an accessory. &f he is being prosecuted separately, the person who partoo4 of the proceeds is liable for fencing.
&n Peo!le v. ,u#%e #e (uz0an, it was held that fencing is not a continuing offense. Nurisdiction is with the court of the place where the personal property subject of the
robbery or theft was possessed, bought, 4ept, or dealt with. The place where the theft or robbery was committed was inconse9uential.
5ince 5ection $ of Presidential @ecree ,o. (-(" expressly provides that mere possession of anything of value which has been subject of theft or robbery shall be prima
facie evidence of fencing, it follows that a possessor of stolen goods is presumed to have 4nowledge that the goods found in his possession after the fact of theft
or robbery has been established. The presumption does not offend the presumption of innocence in the fundamental law. This was the ruling in Pa0in)uan v.
Peo!le, #eci#e# on ,ul. 11, 1991.
:urden of proof is upon fence to overcome presumption< if explanation insufficient or unsatisfactory, court will convict. This is a malum prohibitum so intent is not material.
:ut if prosecution is under the Revised Penal Code, as an accessory, the criminal intent is controlling.
.hen there is notice to person buying, there may be fencing such as when the price is way below ordinary prices< this may serve as notice. He may be liable for fencing
even if he paid the price because of the presumption.
Cattle Rustling and Mualified Theft of Aarge Cattle + The crime of cattlerustling is defined and punished under Pre+i#en)ial /ecree 4o. $33, the !ntiCattle Rustling law
of (8?*, as the ta4ing by any means, method or scheme, of any large cattle, with or without intent to gain and whether committed with or without violence against or
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 279
intimidation of
person or
force upon
things, so long
as the ta4ing
is without the
consent of the
ownerJbreed
thereof. The
crime includes
the 4illing or
ta4ing the
meat or hide
of large cattle
without the
consent of the
owner.
5ince the
intent to gain
is not
essential, the
4illing or
destruction of
large cattle,
even without
ta4ing any
part thereof, is
not a crime of
malicious
mischief but
cattlerustling.
The
Presidential
@ecree,
however, does
not supersede
the crime of
9ualified theft
of large cattle under !rticle 6(; of the Revised Penal Code, but merely modified the penalties provided for theft of large cattle and, to that extent, amended !rticles 6;8
and 6(;. ,ote that the overt act that gives rise to the crime of cattlerustling is the ta4ing or 4illing of large cattle. .here the large cattle was not ta4en, but received by
the offender from the ownerJoverseer thereof, the crime is not cattlerustling< it is 9ualified theft of large cattle.
.here the large cattle was received by the offender who thereafter misappropriated it, the crime is 9ualified theft under !rticle 6(; if only physical or material possession
thereof was yielded to him. &f both material and juridical possession thereof was yielded to him who misappropriated the large cattle, the crime would be estafa under
!rticle 6($ #(b%.
Presidential @ecree ,o. $66 is not a special law in the context of !rticle (; of the Revised Penal Code. &t merely modified the penalties provided for theft of large cattle
under the Revised Penal Code and amended !rticle 6;8 and 6(;. This is explicit from 5ection (; of the Presidential @ecree. Conse9uently, the trial court should
not have convicted the accused of frustrated murder separately from cattlerustling, since the former should have been absorbed by cattlerustling as 4illing was a
result of or on the occasion of cattlerustling. &t should only be an aggravating circumstance. :ut because the information did not allege the injury, the same can
no longer be appreciated< the crime should, therefore be only, simple cattlerustling. <Peo!le v. 6ar)ina#a, 9ebruar. 13, 1991=
Article 814. 6.ali(ie$ T,e(t
T#eft is 3ualified if
1. Committed 0y a domestic ser&ant;
2. Committed $it# gra&e a0use of confidence;
3. T#e property stolen is a motor &e#icle1 mail matter1 or large cattle;
4. T#e property stolen consists of coconuts ta6en from t#e premises of a plantation;
5. T#e property stolen is fis# ta6en from a fis#pond or fis#ery; or
. %f property is ta6en on t#e occasion of fire1 eart#3ua6e1 typ#oon1 &olcanic eruption1 or any ot#er calamity1 &e#icular accident1 or ci&il distur0ance.
Article 811. T,e(t o( t,e %ro"ert# o( t,e Natioal Li9rar# or Natioal M.se.&
%f t#e property stolen is any property of t#e Cational Ai0rary or of t#e Cational Museum
Article 813. Occ."atio o( Real %ro"ert# or Us.r"atio o( Real Ri*,ts i %ro"ert#
Acts punis#ed>
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 280
1. Ta6ing
posses
sion of
any
real
propert
y
0elongi
ng to
anot#e
r 0y
means
of
&iolenc
e
against
or
intimid
ation
of
person
s;
2. 8surping any real rig#ts in property 0elonging to anot#er 0y means of &iolence against or intimidation of persons.
!lements
1. .ffender ta6es possession of any real property or usurps any real rig#ts in property;
2. T#e real property or real rig#ts 0elong to anot#er;
3. (iolence against or intimidation of persons is used 0y t#e offender in occupying real property or usurping real rig#ts in property;
4. T#ere is intent to gain.
=se the degree of intimidation to determine the degree of the penalty to be applied for the usurpation.
=surpation under !rticle 6(" is committed in the same way as robbery with violence or intimidation of persons. The main difference is that in robbery, personal property is
involved< while in usurpation of real rights, it is real property. <Peo!le v. ,u#%e Al*eche, ,ul. 3, 199=
=surpation of real rights and property should not be complexed using !rticle *1 when violence or intimidation is committed. There is only a single crime, but a twotiered
penalty is prescribed to be determined on whether the acts of violence used is a4in to that in robbery in !rticle "8*, grave threats or grave coercion and an incremental
penalty of fine based on the value of the gain obtained by the offender.
Therefore, it is not correct to state that the threat employed in usurping real property is absorbed in the crime< otherwise, the additional penalty would be meaningless.
The complainant must be the person upon whom violence was employed. &f a tenant was occupying the property and he was threatened by the offender, but it was the
owner who was not in possession of the property who was named as the offended party, the same may be 9uashed as it does not charge an offense. The owner would,
at most, be entitled to civil recourse only.
5n carna!!in% an# )he*) o* 0o)or vehicle
The ta4ing with intent to gain of a motor vehicle belonging to another, without the latterDs consent, or by means of violence or intimidation of persons, or by using force
upon things is penali3ed as carnapping under Re!ublic Ac) 4o. 6$39 <An Ac) Preven)in% an# Penalizin% Carna!!in%=, as amended. The overt act which is being
punished under this law as carnapping is also the ta4ing of a motor vehicle under circumstances of theft or robbery. &f the motor vehicle was not ta4en by the offender but
was delivered by the owner or the possessor to the offender, who thereafter misappropriated the same, the crime is either 9ualified theft under !rticle 6(; of the Revised
Penal Code or estafa under !rticle 6($ #b% of the Revised Penal Code. Mualified theft of a motor vehicle is the crime if only the material or physical possession was
yielded to the offender< otherwise, if juridical possession was also yielded, the crime is estafa.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 281
5n +>ua))in%
According to
t#e Ur9a
De0elo"&et
a$ Ho.si*
Act1 t#e
follo$ing are
s3uatters>
1. T#ose
$#o
#a&e
t#e
capacit
y or
means
to pay
rent or
for
legitim
ate
#ousin
g 0ut
are
s3uatti
ng
any$a
y;
2. Also t#e persons $#o $ere a$arded lots 0ut sold or lease t#em out;
3. %ntruders of lands reser&ed for sociali:ed #ousing1 preBempting possession 0y occupying t#e same.
Article 818. Alteri* Ao.$aries or La$&ar=s
!lements
1. T#ere are 0oundary mar6s or monuments of to$ns1 pro&inces1 or estates1 or any ot#er mar6s intended to designate t#e 0oundaries of t#e same;
2. .ffender alters said 0oundary mar6s.
Article 814. Fra.$.let Isol0ec#
!lements
1. .ffender is a de0tor1 t#at is1 #e #as o0ligations due and paya0le;
2. 5e a0sconds $it# #is property;
3. T#ere is pre?udice to #is creditors.
Article 81!. S+i$li* :Esta(a>
!lements in general
1. Accused defrauded anot#er 0y a0use of confidence or 0y means of deceit; and
T#is co&ers t#e t#ree different $ays of committing estafa under Article 315; t#us1 estafa is committed /
a. @it# unfait#fulness or a0use of confidence;
0. 7y means of false pretenses or fraudulents acts; or
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 282
c.
T#roug
#
fraudul
ent
means
.
(T#e
first
form
under su0di&ision 1 is 6no$n as estafa $it# a0use of confidence; and t#e second and t#ird forms under su0di&isions 2 and 3 co&er co&er estafa 0y means of
deceit.)
2. 9amage or pre?udice capa0le of pecuniary estimation is caused to t#e offended party or t#ird person.
!lements of estafa $it# unfait#fulness of a0use of confidence under Article 315 (1)
8nder paragrap# (a)
1. .ffender #as an onerous o0ligation to deli&er somet#ing of &alue;
2. 5e alters its su0stance1 3uantity1 or 3uality;
3. 9amage or pre?udice is caused to anot#er.
8nder paragrap# (0)
1. Money1 goods1 or ot#er personal property is recei&ed 0y t#e offender is trust1 or on commission1 or for administration1 or under any ot#er o0ligation in&ol&ing t#e
duty to ma6e deli&ery of1 or to return1 t#e same;
2. T#ere is misappropriation or con&ersion of suc# money or property 0y t#e offender1 or denial on #is part of suc# receipt;
3. <uc# misappropriation or con&ersion or denial is to t#e pre?udice of anot#er; and
4. T#ere is a demand made 0y t#e offended party to t#e offender.
(T#e fourt# element is not necessary $#en t#ere is e&idence of misappropriation of t#e goods 0y t#e defendant. JT.99 0. %eo"le@ et al.@ 141 %,il. 114K ).
=nder Pre+i#en)ial /ecree 4o. 11$, the failure of the entrustee to turn over the proceeds of the sale of the goods, documents, or instruments covered by a trust receipt,
to the extent of the amount owing to the entruster, or as appearing in the trust receipt< or the failure to return said goods, documents, or instruments if they were not sold
or disposed of in accordance with the terms of the trust receipt constitute estafa.
8nder paragrap# (c)
1. T#e paper $it# t#e signature of t#e offended party is in 0lan6;
2. .ffended party deli&ered it to t#e offender;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 283
3. A0o&e
t#e
signatu
re of
t#e
offend
ed
party1 a
docum
ent is
$ritten
0y t#e
offend
er
$it#out
aut#ori
ty to
do so;
4. T#e
docum
ent so
$ritten
create
s a
lia0ility
of1 or
causes
damag
e to1
t#e
offend
ed
party
or any
t#ird
person
.
!lements of estafa 0y means of false pretenses or fraudulent acts under Article 315 (2)
Acts punis#ed under paragrap# (a)
1. 8sing fictitious name;
2. +alsely pretending to possess po$er1 influence1 3ualifications1 property1 credit1 agency1 0usiness or imaginary transactions; or
3. 7y means of ot#er similar deceits.
8nder paragrap# (0)
Altering t#e 3uality1 fineness1 or $eig#t of anyt#ing pertaining to #is art or 0usiness.
8nder paragrap# (c)
-retending to #a&e 0ri0ed any go&ernment employee1 $it#out pre?udice to t#e action for calumny $#ic# t#e offended party may deem proper to 0ring against t#e offender.
8nder paragrap# (d)
1. .ffender postdated a c#ec61 or issued a c#ec6 in payment of an o0ligation;
2. <uc# postdating or issuing a c#ec6 $as done $#en t#e offender #ad no funds in t#e 0an61 or #is funds deposited t#erein $ere not sufficient to co&er t#e amount of
t#e c#ec6.
,ote that this only applies if +
#(% The obligation is not preexisting<
#"% The chec4 is drawn to enter into an obligation<
#Remember that it is the chec4 that is supposed to be the sole consideration for the other party to have entered into the obligation. 2or example, Rose wants to
purchase a bracelet and draws a chec4 without insufficient funds. The jeweler sells her the bracelet solely because of the consideration in the chec4.%
#6% &t does not cover chec4s where the purpose of drawing the chec4 is to guarantee a loan as this is not an obligation contemplated in this paragraph
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 284
The chec4
must be
genuine. &f
the chec4 is
falsified and is
cashed with
the ban4 or
exchanged for
cash, the
crime is estafa
thru
falsification of
a commercial
document.
The general
rule is that the
accused must
be able to
obtain
something
from the
offended party
by means of
the chec4 he
issued and
delivered.
)xception'
when the
chec4 is
issued not in
payment of an
obligation.
&t must not be
promissory
notes, or
guaranties.
/ood faith is a defense.
&f the chec4s were issued by the defendant and he received money for them, then stopped payment and did not return the money, and he had an intention to stop
payment when he issued the chec4, there is estafa.
@eceit is presumed if the drawer fails to deposit the amount necessary to cover the chec4 within three days from receipt of notice of dishonor or insufficiency of funds in
the ban4.
Aatas %a&9asa Al*. 33
5o$ &iolated
A. 1. A person ma6es or dra$s and issues any c#ec6;
2. T#e c#ec6 is made or dra$n and issued to apply on account or for &alue;
T#us1 it can apply to preBe4isting o0ligations1 too.
3. T#e person $#o ma6es or dra$s and issued t#e c#ec6 6no$s at t#e time of issue t#at #e does not #a&e sufficient funds in or credit $it# t#e dra$ee 0an6
for t#e payment of suc# c#ec6 in full upon its presentment;
3. T#e c#ec6 is su0se3uently dis#onored 0y t#e dra$ee 0an6 for insufficiency of funds or credit1 or $ould #a&e 0een dis#onored for t#e same reason #ad not t#e
dra$er1 $it#out any &alid reason1 ordered t#e 0an6 to stop payment.
7. 1. A person #as sufficient funds in or credit $it# t#e dra$ee 0an6 $#en #e ma6es or dra$s and issues a c#ec6;
2. 5e fails to 6eep sufficient funds or to maintain a credit to co&er t#e full amount of t#e c#ec6 if presented $it#in )* days from t#e date appearing;
3. T#e c#ec6 is dis#onored 0y t#e dra$ee 0an6.
@istinction between estafa under !rticle 6($ #"% #d% of the Revised Penal Code and violation of :atas Pambansa :lg. ""'
#(% =nder both !rticle 6($ #"% #d% and :atas Pambansa :lg. "", there is criminal liability if the chec4 is drawn for nonpreexisting obligation.
&f the chec4 is drawn for a preexisting obligation, there is criminal liability only under :atas Pambansa :lg. "".
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 285
#"% )stafa
under
!rticle
6($ #"%
#d% is a
crime
agains
t
propert
y while
:atas
Pamba
nsa
:lg. ""
is a
crime against public interest. The gravamen for the former is the deceit employed, while in the latter, it is the issuance of the chec4. Hence, there is no double
jeopardy.
#6% &n the estafa under !rticle 6($ #"% #d%, deceit and damage are material, while in :atas Pambansa :lg. "", they are immaterial.
#*% &n estafa under !rticle 6($ #"% #d%, 4nowledge by the drawer of insufficient funds is not re9uired, while in :atas Pambansa :lg. "", 4nowledge by the drawer of
insufficient funds is re9ired.
@#en is t#ere prima facie e&idence of 6no$ledge of insufficient funds=
T#ere is a prima facie e&idence of 6no$ledge of insufficient funds $#en t#e c#ec6 $as presented $it#in )* days from t#e date appearing on t#e c#ec6 and $as
dis#onored.
!4ceptions
1. @#en t#e c#ec6 $as presented after )* days from date;
2. @#en t#e ma6er or dra$er BB
a. -ays t#e #older of t#e c#ec6 t#e amount due $it#in fi&e 0an6ing days after recei&ing notice t#at suc# c#ec6 #as not 0een paid 0y t#e dra$ee;
0. Ma6es arrangements for payment in full 0y t#e dra$ee of suc# c#ec6 $it#in fi&e 0an6ing days after notice of nonBpayment
T#e dra$ee must cause to 0e $ritten or stamped in plain language t#e reason for t#e dis#onor.
%f t#e dra$ee 0an6 recei&ed an order of stopBpayment from t#e dra$er $it# no reason1 it must 0e stated t#at t#e funds are insufficient to 0e prosecuted #ere.
T#e unpaid or dis#onored c#ec6 $it# t#e stamped information re> refusal to pay is prima facie e&idence of (1) t#e ma6ing or issuance of t#e c#ec6; (2) t#e due
presentment to t#e dra$ee for payment R t#e dis#onor t#ereof; and (3) t#e fact t#at t#e c#ec6 $as properly dis#onored for t#e reason stamped on t#e c#ec6.
Acts punis#ed under paragrap# (e)
1. a. .0taining food1 refres#ment1 or accommodation at a #otel1 inn1 restaurant1 0oarding #ouse1 lodging #ouse1 or apartment #ouse;
0. @it#out paying t#erefor;
c. @it# intent to defraud t#e proprietor or manager.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 286
2. a.
.0taining
credit at
a
n
y

o
f

t
#
e

e
s
t
a
0
l
i
s
#
m
e
n
t
s
;
0.
8sing
false
pretense;
3. a.
A0andoning or
surreptitiously remo&ing any part of #is 0aggage in t#e esta0lis#ment;
0. After o0taining credit1 food1 refres#ment1 accommodation;
c. @it#out paying.
!stafa t#roug# any of t#e follo$ing fraudulent means under Article 315 (3)
8nder paragrap# (a)
1. .ffender induced t#e offended party to sign a document;
2. 9eceit $as employed to ma6e #im sign t#e document;
3. .ffended party personally signed t#e document;
4. -re?udice $as caused.
8nder paragrap# (0)
2esorting to some fraudulent practice to insure success in a gam0ling game;
8nder paragrap# (c)
1. .ffender remo&ed1 concealed or destroyed;
2. Any court record1 office files1 documents or any ot#er papers;
3. @it# intent to defraud anot#er.
&n ?i0 v. Peo!le, 193 SCRA 311, it was held that if an employee receives cash advance from his employer to defray his travel expenses, his failure to return unspent
amount is not estafa through misappropriation or conversion because ownership of the money was transferred to employee and no fiduciary relation was created
in respect to such advance. The money is a loan. The employee has no legal obligation to return the same money, that is, the same bills and coins received.
&n Sa##ul ,r. v. CA, 19 SCRA 77, it was held that the act of using or disposing of anotherDs property as if it were oneDs own, or of devoting it to a purpose or use
different from that agreed upon, is a misappropriation and conversion to the prejudice of the owner. Conversion is unauthori3ed assumption an exercise of the right of
ownership over goods and chattels belonging to another, resulting in the alteration of their condition or exclusion of the ownerDs rights.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 287
&n Allie# -ank Cor!ora)ion v. Secre)ar. 5r#onez, 19 SCRA 16, i) 7a+ hel# )ha) under 5ection (6 of Presidential @ecree ,o. (($, the failure of an entrustee to turn
over the proceeds of sale of the goods covered by the Trust Receipt, or to return said goods if they are not sold, is punishable as estafa !rticle 6($ #(% #b%.
5n i++uance o* a bouncin% check
The issuance of chec4 with insufficient funds may be held liable for estafa and :atas Pambansa :lg. "". :atas Pambansa :lg. "" expressly provides that prosecution
under said law is without prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision in the Revised Penal Code. @ouble Neopardy may not be invo4ed because a violation of
:atas Pambansa :lg. "" is a malum prohibitum and is being punished as a crime against the public interest for undermining the ban4ing system of the country, while
under the RevisedPenal Code, the crime is malum in se which re9uires criminal intent and damage to the payee and is a crime against property.
&n estafa, the chec4 must have been issued as a reciprocal consideration for parting of goods #4aliwaan%. There must be concomitance. The deceit must be prior to or
simultaneous with damage done, that is, seller relied on chec4 to part with goods. &f it is issued after parting with goods as in credit accommodation only, there is no
estafa. &f the chec4 is issued for a preexisting obligation, there is no estafa as damage had already been done. The drawer is liable under :atas Pambansa :lg. "".
2or criminal liability to attach under :atas Pambansa :lg. "", it is enough that the chec4 was issued to Kapply on account or for valueK and upon its presentment it was
dishonored by the drawee ban4 for insufficiency of funds, provided that the drawer had been notified of the dishonor and inspite of such notice fails to pay the holder of
the chec4 the full amount due thereon within five days from notice.
=nder :atas Pambansa :lg. "", a drawer must be given notice of dishonor and given five ban4ing days from notice within which to deposit or pay the amount stated in
the chec4 to negate the presumtion that drawer 4new of the insufficiency. !fter this period, it is conclusive that drawer 4new of the insufficiency, thus there is no more
defense to the prosecution under :atas Pambansa :lg. "".
The mere issuance of any 4ind of chec4 regardless of the intent of the parties, whether the chec4 is intended to serve merely as a guarantee or as a deposit, ma4es the
drawer liable under :atas Pambansa :lg. "" if the chec4 bounces. !s a matter of public policy, the issuance of a worthless chec4 is a public nuisance and must be
abated.
&n /e Villa v. CA, #eci#e# A!ril 18, 1991, it was held that under :atas Pambansa :lg. "", there is no distinction as to the 4ind of chec4 issued. !s long as it is delivered
within Philippine territory, the Philippine courts have jurisdiction. )ven if the chec4 is only presented to and dishonored in a Philippine ban4, :atas Pambansa :lg. ""
applies. This is true in the case of dollar or foreign currency chec4s. .here the law ma4es no distinction, none should be made.
&n Peo!le v. 4i)a*an, it was held that as long as instrument is a chec4 under the negotiable instrument law, it is covered by :atas Pambansa :lg. "". ! memorandum
chec4 is not a promissory note, it is a chec4 which have the word Ememo,F EmemF, EmemorandumF written across the face of the chec4 which signifies that if the holder
upon maturity of the chec4 presents the same to the drawer, it will be paid absolutely. :ut there is no prohibition against drawer from depositing memorandum chec4 in a
ban4. .hatever be the agreement of the parties in respect of the issuance of a chec4 is inconse9uential to a violation to :atas Pambansa :lg. "" where the chec4
bounces.
:ut overdraft or credit arrangement may be allowed by ban4s as to their preferred clients and :atas Pambansa :lg. "" does not apply. &f chec4 bounces, it is because
ban4 has been remiss in honoring agreement.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 288
The chec4
must be
presented for
payment
within a 8;
day period. &f
presented for
payment
beyond the 8;
day period
and the
drawerDs
funds are
insufficient to
cover it, there
is no :atas
Pambansa
:lg. ""
violation.
.here chec4 was issued prior to !ugust 1, (81*, when Circular ,o. (" of the @epartment of the Nustice too4 effect, and the drawer relied on the then prevailing Circular
,o. * of the 0inistry of Nustice to the effect that chec4s issued as part of an arrangementJagreement of the parties to guarantee or secure fulfillment of an
obligation are not covered by :atas Pambansa :lg. "", no criminal liability should be incurred by the drawer. Circular should not be given retroactive effect.
#Lazaro v. CA, 4ove0ber 11, 1993, ci)in% Peo!le v. Alber)o, 5c)ober 8, 1993%
Article 81'. Ot,er For&s o( S+i$li*
8nder paragrap# 1 / 7y con&eying1 selling1 encum0ering1 or mortgaging any real property1 pretending to 0e t#e o$ner of t#e same
!lements
1. T#ere is an immo&a0le1 suc# as a parcel of land or a 0uilding;
2. .ffender $#o is not t#e o$ner represents #imself as t#e o$ner t#ereof;
3. .ffender e4ecutes an act of o$ners#ip suc# as selling1 leasing1 encum0ering or mortgaging t#e real property;
4. T#e act is made to t#e pre?udice to t#e o$ner or a t#ird person.
8nder paragrap# 2 / 0y disposing of real property as free from encum0rance1 alt#oug# suc# encum0rance 0e not recorded
!lements
1. T#e t#ing disposed is a real property>
2. .ffender 6ne$ t#at t#e real property $as encum0ered1 $#et#er t#e encum0rance is recorded or not;
3. T#ere must 0e e4press representation 0y offender t#at t#e real property is free from encum0rance;
4. T#e act of disposing of t#e real property is made to t#e damage of anot#er.
8nder paragrap# 3 / 0y $rongfully ta6ing 0y t#e o$ner of #is personal property from its la$ful possessor
!lements
1. .ffender is t#e o$ner of personal property;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 289
2. <aid
person
al
propert
y is in
t#e
la$ful
posses
sion of
anot#e
r;
3.
.ffend
er
$rongf
ully
ta6es it
from
its
la$ful
posses
sor;
4.
-re?udi
ce is
t#ere0
y
caused
to t#e
posses
sor or
t#ird
person
.
8nder paragrap# 4 / 0y e4ecuting any fictitious contract to t#e pre?udice of anot#er
8nder paragrap# 5 / 0y accepting any compensation for ser&ices not rendered or for la0or not performed
8nder paragrap# / 0y selling1 mortgaging or encum0ering real property or properties $it# $#ic# t#e offender guaranteed t#e fulfillment of #is o0ligation as surety
!lements
1. .ffender is a surety in a 0ond gi&en in a criminal or ci&il action;
2. 5e guaranteed t#e fulfillment of suc# o0ligation $it# #is real property or properties;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 290
3. 5e
sells1
mortga
ges1 or
in any
manne
r
encum
0ers
said
real
propert
y;
4. <uc# sale1 mortgage or encum0rance is $it#out e4press aut#ority from t#e court1 or made 0efore t#e cancellation of #is 0ond1 or 0efore 0eing relie&ed from t#e
o0ligation contracted 0y #im.
Article 81). S+i$li* A Mior
!lements
1. .ffender ta6es ad&antage of t#e ine4perience or emotions or feelings of a minor;
2. 5e induces suc# minor to assume an o0ligation or to gi&e release or to e4ecute a transfer of any property rig#t;
3. T#e consideration is some loan of money1 credit or ot#er personal property;
4. T#e transaction is to t#e detriment of suc# minor.
Article 81/. Ot,er $eceits
Acts punis#ed
1. 9efrauding or damaging anot#er 0y any ot#er deceit not mentioned in t#e preceding articles;
2. %nterpreting dreams1 0y ma6ing forecasts1 0y telling fortunes1 or 0y ta6ing ad&antage or t#e credulity of t#e pu0lic in any ot#er similar manner1 for profit or gain.

Article 811. Re&o0al@ Sale or %le$*e o( Mort*a*e$ %ro"ert#
Acts punis#ed
1. Jno$ingly remo&ing any personal property mortgaged under t#e C#attel Mortgage la$ to any pro&ince or city ot#er t#an t#e one in $#ic# it $as located at t#e time
of e4ecution of t#e mortgage1 $it#out t#e $ritten consent of t#e mortgagee or #is e4ecutors1 administrators or assigns;
!lements>
1. -ersonal property is mortgaged under t#e C#attel Mortgage Aa$;
2. .ffender 6no$s t#at suc# property is so mortgaged;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 291
3.
.ffend
er
remo&
es
suc#
mortga
ged
person
al
propert
y to
any
pro&inc
e or
city
ot#er
t#an
t#e
one in
$#ic#
it $as
located
at t#e
time of
t#e
e4ecuti
on of
t#e
mortga
ge;
4. T#e
remo&
al is
perma
nent;
5. T#ere is no $ritten consent of t#e mortgagee or #is e4ecutors1 administrators or assigns to suc# remo&al.
2. <elling or pledging personal property already pledged1 or any part t#ereof1 under t#e terms of t#e C#attel Mortgage Aa$1 $it#out t#e consent of t#e mortgagee
$ritten on t#e 0ac6 of t#e mortgage and noted on t#e record t#ereof in t#e office of t#e register of deeds of t#e pro&ince $#ere suc# property is located.
!lements>
1. -ersonal property is already pledged under t#e terms of t#e C#attel Mortgage Aa$;
2. .ffender1 $#o is t#e mortgagor of suc# property1 sells or pledges t#e same or any part t#ereof;
3. T#ere is no consent of t#e mortgagee $ritten on t#e 0ac6 of t#e mortgage and noted on t#e record t#ereof in t#e office of t#e register of deeds.
Arso
Jinds of arson
1. Arson1 under <ection 1 of %resi$etial Decree No. 1'18;
2. 9estructi&e arson1 under Article 834 of t#e 2e&ised -enal Code1 as amended 0y 2epu0lic Act Co. "5);
3. .t#er cases of arson1 under Sectio 8 o( %resi$etial Decree No. 1'18.
Article 83). W,o Are Lia9le (or Malicio.s Misc,ie(
!lements
1. .ffender deli0erately caused damage to t#e property of anot#er;
2. <uc# act does not constitute arson or ot#er crimes in&ol&ing destruction;
3. T#e act of damaging anot#erEs property $as committed merely for t#e sa6e of damaging it;
There is destruction of the property of another but there is no misappropriation. >therwise, it would be theft if he gathers the effects of destruction.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 292
Article 83/.
S"ecial Case
o( Malicio.s
Misc,ie(
Acts punis#ed
1.
Causin
g
damag
e to
o0stru
ct t#e
perfor
mance
of
pu0lic
functio
ns;
2. 8sing
any
poison
ous or
corrosi
&e
su0sta
nce;
3. <preading any infection or contagion among cattle;
4. Causing damage to t#e property of t#e Cational Museum or Cational Ai0rary1 or to any arc#i&e or registry1 $ater$or6s1 road1 promenade1 or any ot#er t#ing used is
common 0y t#e pu0ic.
Article 831. Ot,er Misc,ie(s
All ot#er misc#iefs not included in t#e ne4t preceding article
Article 884. Da&a*e a$ O9str.ctio to Meas o( Co&&.icatio
T#is is committed 0y damaging any rail$ay1 telegrap# or telep#one lines.
Article 881. Destro#i* or Da&a*i* Stat.es@ %.9lic Mo.&ets@ or %aiti*s
Article 883. %ersos E?e&"t (ro& Cri&ial Lia9ilit#
Crimes in&ol&ed in t#e e4emption
1. T#eft;
2. !stafa; and
3. Malicious misc#ief.
-ersons e4empted from criminal lia0ility
1. <pouse1 ascendants and descendants1 or relati&es 0y affinity in t#e same line;
2. @ido$ed spouse $it# respect to t#e property $#ic# 0elonged to t#e deceased spouse 0efore t#e same passed into t#e possession of anot#er
3. 7rot#ers and sisters and 0rot#ersBinBla$ and sistersBinBla$1 if li&ing toget#er.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 293
>nly the
relatives
enumerated
incur no
liability if the
crime relates
to theft #not
robbery%,
swindling, and
malicious
mischief.
Third parties
who
participate are
not exempt.
The
relationship
between the
spouses is not
limited to
legally
married
couples< the
provision
applies to live
in partners.
)stafa should
not be
complexed
with any other
crime in order
for exemption
to operate.
TITLE GI.
CRIMES
AGAINST
CHASTITY
Crimes against c#astity
1. Adultery (Art. 333);
2. Concu0inage (Art. 334);
3. Acts of lasci&iousness (Art. 33);
4. Dualified seduction (Art. 33");
5. <imple seduction (Art. 33');
. Acts of lasci&iousness $it# t#e consent of t#e offended party (Art. 33));
". Corruption of minors (Art. 34*);
'. @#ite sla&e trade (Art. 34);
). +orci0le a0duction (Art. 342);
1*. Consented a0duction (Art. 343).
The crimes of adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness are the socalled private crimes. They cannot be prosecuted except upon the
complaint initiated by the offended party. The law regards the privacy of the offended party here as more important than the disturbance to the order of society. 2or the
law gives the offended party the preference whether to sue or not to sue. :ut the moment the offended party has initiated the criminal complaint, the public prosecutor will
ta4e over and continue with prosecution of the offender. That is why under !rticle 6**, if the offended party pardons the offender, that pardon will only be valid if it comes
before the prosecution starts. The moment the prosecution starts, the crime has already become public and it is beyond the offended party to pardon the offender.
Article 888. W,o Are G.ilt# o( A$.lter#
!lements
1. T#e $oman is married;
2. <#e #as se4ual intercourse $it# a man not #er #us0and;
3. As regards t#e man $it# $#om s#e #as se4ual intercourse1 #e must 6no$ #er to 0e married.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 294
!dultery is a
crime not only
of the married
woman but
also of the
man who had
intercourse
with a married
woman
4nowing her
to be married.
)ven if the
man proves
later on that
he does not
4now the
woman to be
married, at the
beginning, he
must still be
included in the
complaint or
information.
This is so
because
whether he
4nows the
woman to be
married or not
is a matter of
defense and
its up to him
to ventilate
that in formal
investigations
or a formal
trial.
&f after preliminary investigation, the public prosecutor is convinced that the man did not 4now that the woman is married, then he could simply file the case against the
woman.
The ac9uittal of the woman does not necessarily result in the ac9uittal of her coaccused.
&n order to constitute adultery, there must be a joint physical act. Noint criminal intent is not necessary. !lthough the criminal intent may exist in the mind of one of the
parties to the physical act, there may be no such intent in the mind of the other party. >ne may be guilty of the criminal intent, the other innocent, and yet the joint
physical act necessary to constitute the adultery may be complete. 5o, if the man had no 4nowledge that the woman was married, he would be innocent insofar as the
crime of adultery is concerned but the woman would still be guilty< the former would have to be ac9uitted and the latter found guilty, although they were tried together.
! husband committing concubinage may be re9uired to support his wife committing adultery under the rule in pari delicto.
There is no frustrated adultery because of the nature of the offense.
2or adultery to exist, there must be a marriage although it be subse9uently annulled. There is no adultery, if the marriage is void from the beginning.
!dultery is an instantaneous crime which is consummated and completed at the moment of the carnal union. )ach sexual intercourse constitutes a crime of adultery.
!dultery is not a continuing crime unli4e concubinage.
&llustration'
0adamme C is a married woman residing in Pasay City. He met a man, B, at Roxas :oulevard. 5he agreed to go with to :aguio City, supposedly to come bac4 the next
day. .hen they were in :ulacan, they stayed in a motel, having sexual intercourse there. !fter that, they proceeded again and stopped at @agupan City, where they
went to a motel and had sexual intercourse.
There are two counts of adultery committed in this instance' one adultery in :ulacan, and another adultery in @agupan City. )ven if it involves the same man, each
intercourse is a separate crime of adultery.
Article 884. Coc.9ia*e
Acts punis#ed
1. Jeeping a mistress in t#e con?ugal d$elling;
2. 5a&ing se4ual intercourse1 under scandalous circumstances;
3. Co#a0iting $it# #er in any ot#er place.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 295
!lements
1. T#e
man is
married;
2. 5e is
eit#er /
a.
Jeepin
g a
mistres
s in t#e
con?ug
al
d$ellin
g;
0. 5a&ing
se4ual
interco
urse
under
scanda
lous
circum
stance
s $it#
a
$oman
$#o is
not #is
$ife; or
c. Co#a0iting $it# a $oman $#o is not #is $ife in any ot#er place;
3. As regards t#e $oman1 s#e 6no$s t#at t#e man is married.
.ith respect to concubinage the same principle applies' only the offended spouse can bring the prosecution. This is a crime committed by the married man, the husband.
5imilarly, it includes the woman who had a relationship with the married man.
&t has been as4ed why the penalty for adultery is higher than concubinage when both crimes are infidelities to the marital vows. The reason given for this is that when the
wife commits adultery, there is a probability that she will bring a stranger into the family. &f the husband commits concubinage, this probability does not arise because the
mother of the child will always carry the child with her. 5o even if the husband brings with him the child, it is clearly 4nown that the child is a stranger. ,ot in the case of
a married woman who may bring a child to the family under the guise of a legitimate child. This is the reason why in the former crime the penalty is higher than the latter.
=nli4e adultery, concubinage is a continuing crime.
Article 88!. Ra"e
T#is #as 0een repealed 0y 2epu0lic Act Co. '353 or t#e Ati;Ra"e La+ o( 111). <ee Article 3'';A.
Article 88'. Acts o( Lasci0io.sess
!lements
1. .ffender commits any act of lasci&iousness or le$dness;
2. %t is done under any of t#e follo$ing circumstances>
a. 7y using force or intimidation;
0. @#en t#e offended party is depri&ed or reason of ot#er$ise unconscious; or
c. @#en t#e offended party is anot#er person of eit#er se4.
,ote that there are two 4inds of acts of lasciviousness under the Revised Penal Code' #(% under !rticle 66-, and #"% under !rticle 668.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 296
(. !rticle
66-.
!cts of
Aascivi
ousne
ss
=nder
this
article,
the
offend
ed
party
may
be a
man or
a
woma
n. The
crime
commi
tted,
when
the act
perfor
med
with
lewd
design
was
perpetr
ated
under
circum
stance
s
which
would have brought about the crime of rape if sexual intercourse was effected, is acts of lasciviousness under this article. This means that the offended party is
either +
#(% under (" years of age< or
#"% being over (" years of age, the lascivious acts were committed on him or her through violence or intimidation, or while the offender party was deprived of
reason, or otherwise unconscious.
". !rticle 668. !cts of Aasciviousness with the Consent of the >ffended Party'
=nder this article, the victim is limited only to a woman. The circumstances under which the lascivious acts were committed must be that of 9ualified seduction or
simple seduction, that is, the offender too4 advantage of his position of ascendancy over the offender woman either because he is a person in authority, a
domestic, a househelp, a priest, a teacher or a guardian, or there was a deceitful promise of marriage which never would really be fulfilled.
5ee !rticle 668.
!lways remember that there can be no frustration of acts of lasciviousness, rape or adultery because no matter how far the offender may have gone towards the
reali3ation of his purpose, if his participation amounts to performing all the acts of execution, the felony is necessarily produced as a conse9uence thereof.
&ntent to rape is not a necessary element of the crime of acts of lasciviousness. >therwise, there would be no crime of attempted rape.
Article 88). 6.ali(ie$ Se$.ctio
Acts punis#ed
1. <eduction of a &irgin o&er 12 years and under 1' years of age 0y certain persons1 suc# as a person in aut#ority1 priest1 teac#er; and
!lements
1. .ffended party is a &irgin1 $#ic# is presumed if s#e is unmarried and of good reputation;
2. <#e is o&er 12 and under 1' years of age;
3. .ffender #as se4ual intercourse $it# #er;
4. T#ere is a0use of aut#ority1 confidence or relations#ip on t#e part of t#e offender.
2. <eduction of a sister 0y #er 0rot#er1 or descendant 0y #er ascendant1 regardless of #er age or reputation.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 297
-erson lia0le
1. T#ose
$#o
a0use
d t#eir
aut#ori
ty /
a. -erson
in
pu0lic
aut#ori
ty;
0.
;uardian;
c.
Teac#er;
d. -erson
$#o1 in
any
capacit
y1 is
entrust
ed $it#
t#e
educati
on or
custod
y of
t#e
$oman
seduce
d;
2. T#ose $#o a0used confidence reposed in t#em /
a. -riest;
0. 5ouse ser&ant;
c. 9omestic;
3. T#ose $#o a0used t#eir relations#ip /
a. 7rot#er $#o seduced #is sister;
0. Ascendant $#o seduced #is descendant.
This crime also involves sexual intercourse. The offended woman must be over (" but below (1 years.
The distinction between 9ualified seduction and simple seduction lies in the fact, among others, that the woman is a virgin in 9ualified seduction, while in simple
seduction, it is not necessary that the woman be a virgin. &t is enough that she is of good repute.
2or purposes of 9ualified seduction, virginity does not mean physical virginity. &t means that the offended party has not had any experience before.
!lthough in 9ualified seduction, the age of the offended woman is considered, if the offended party is a descendant or a sister of the offender + no matter how old she is
or whether she is a prostitute + the crime of 9ualified seduction is committed.
&llustration'
&f a person goes to a sauna parlor and finds there a descendant and despite that, had sexual intercourse with her, regardless of her reputation or age, the crime of
9ualified seduction is committed.
&n the case of a teacher, it is not necessary that the offended woman be his student. &t is enough that she is enrolled in the same school.
@eceit is not necessary in 9ualified seduction. Mualified seduction is committed even though no deceit intervened or even when such carnal 4nowledge was voluntary on
the part of the virgin. This is because in such a case, the law ta4es for granted the existence of the deceit as an integral element of the crime and punishes it with greater
severity than it does the simple seduction, ta4ing into account the abuse of confidence on the part of the agent. !buse of confidence here implies fraud.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 298
Article 88/.
Si&"le
Se$.ctio
!lements
1.
.ffend
er
party is
o&er
12 and
under
1'
years
of age;
2. <#e is
of
good
reputat
ion1
single
or
$ido$;
3.
.ffend
er #as
se4ual
interco
urse
$it#
#er;
4. %t is committed 0y means of deceit.
This crime is committed if the offended woman is single or a widow of good reputation, over (" and under (1 years of age, the offender has carnal 4nowledge of her, and
the offender resorted to deceit to be able to consummate the sexual intercourse with her.
The offended woman must be under (1 but not less than (" years old< otherwise, the crime is statutory rape.
=nli4e in 9ualified seduction, virginity is not essential in this crime. .hat is re9uired is that the woman be unmarried and of good reputation. 5imple seduction is not
synonymous with loss of virginity. &f the woman is married, the crime will be adultery.
The failure to comply with the promise of marriage constitutes the deceit mentioned in the law.
Article 881. Acts o( Lasci0io.sess +it, t,e Coset o( t,e O((e$er %art#
!lements
1. .ffender commits acts of lasci&iousness or le$dness;
2. T#e acts are committed upon a $oman $#o is a &irgin or single or $ido$ of good reputation1 under 1' years of age 0ut o&er 12 years1 or a sister or descendant1
regardless of #er reputation or age;
3. .ffender accomplis#es t#e acts 0y a0use of aut#ority1 confidence1 relations#ip1 or deceit.
Article 844. Corr."tio o( Miors
T#is punis#es any person $#o s#all promote or facilitate t#e prostitution or corruption of persons under age to satisfy t#e lust of anot#er.
%t is not re3uired t#at t#e offender 0e t#e guardian or custodian of t#e minor.
%t is not necessary t#at t#e minor 0e prostituted or corrupted as t#e la$ merely punis#es t#e act of promoting or facilitating t#e prostitution or corruption of said minor and
t#at #e acted in order to satisfy t#e lust of anot#er.
Article 841. W,ite Sla0e Tra$e
Acts punis#ed
1. !ngaging in t#e 0usiness of prostitution;
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 299
2.
-rofiting 0y
prostitution;
3.
!nlistin
g t#e
ser&ice
s of
$omen
for t#e
purpos
e of
prostit
ution.
Article 843.
Forci9le
A9$.ctio
!lements
1. T#e person a0ducted is any $oman1 regardless or #er age1 ci&il status1 or reputation;
2. T#e a0duction is against #er $ill;
3. T#e a0duction is $it# le$d designs.
! woman is carried against her will or brought from one place to another against her will with lewd design.
&f the element of lewd design is present, the carrying of the woman would 9ualify as abduction< otherwise, it would amount to 4idnapping. &f the woman was only brought
to a certain place in order to brea4 her will and ma4e her agree to marry the offender, the crime is only grave coercion because the criminal intent of the offender is to
force his will upon the woman and not really to restrain the woman of her liberty.
&f the offended woman is under (" years old, even if she consented to the abduction, the crime is forcible abduction and not consented abduction.
.here the offended woman is below the age of consent, even though she had gone with the offender through some deceitful promises revealed upon her to go with him
and they live together as husband and wife without the benefit of marriage, the ruling is that forcible abduction is committed by the mere carrying of the woman as long as
that intent is already shown. &n other words, where the man cannot possibly give the woman the benefit of an honorable life, all that man promised are just machinations
of a lewd design and, therefore, the carrying of the woman is characteri3ed with lewd design and would bring about the crime of abduction and not 4idnapping. This is
also true if the woman is deprived of reason and if the woman is mentally retardate. 2orcible abduction is committed and not consented abduction.
Aewd designs may be demonstrated by the lascivious acts performed by the offender on her. 5ince this crime does not involve sexual intercourse, if the victim is
subjected to this, then a crime of rape is further committed and a complex crime of forcible abduction with rape is committed.
The ta4ing away of the woman may be accomplished by means of deceit at the beginning and then by means of violence and intimidation later.
The virginity of the complaining witness is not a determining factor in forcible abduction.
&n order to demonstrate the presence of the lewd design, illicit criminal relations with the person abducted need not be shown. The intent to seduce a girl is sufficient.
&f there is a separation in fact, the ta4ing by the husband of his wife against her will constitutes grave coercion.
@istinction between forcible abduction and illegal detention'
.hen a woman is 4idnapped with lewd or unchaste designs, the crime committed is forcible abduction.
.hen the 4idnapping is without lewd designs, the crime committed is illegal detention.
:ut where the offended party was forcibly ta4en to the house of the defendant to coerce her to marry him, it was held that only grave coercion was committed and not
illegal detention.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 300
Article 848.
Cosete$
A9$.ctio
!lements
1.
.ffended
party is a
&irgin;
2. <#e is
o&er
12 and
under
1'
years
of age;
3.
.ffend
er
ta6es
#er
a$ay
$it#
#er
consen
t1 after
solicita
tion or
ca?oler
y;
4. T#e ta6ing a$ay is $it# le$d designs.
.here several persons participated in the forcible abduction and these persons also raped the offended woman, the original ruling in the case of Peo!le v. ,o+e is that
there would be one count of forcible abduction with rape and then each of them will answer for his own rape and the rape of the others minus the first rape which was
complexed with the forcible abduction. This ruling is no longer the prevailing rule. The view adopted in cases of similar nature is to the effect that where more than one
person has effected the forcible abduction with rape, all the rapes are just the consummation of the lewd design which characteri3es the forcible abduction and, therefore,
there should only be one forcible abduction with rape.
&n the crimes involving rape, abduction, seduction, and acts of lasciviousness, the marriage by the offender with the offended woman generally extinguishes criminal
liability, not only of the principal but also of the accomplice and accessory. However, the mere fact of marriage is not enough because it is already decided that if the
offender marries the offended woman without any intention to perform the duties of a husband as shown by the fact that after the marriage, he already left her, the
marriage would appear as having been contracted only to avoid the punishment. )ven with that marriage, the offended woman could still prosecute the offender and that
marriage will not have the effect of extinguishing the criminal liability.
Pardon by the offended woman of the offender is not a manner of extinguishing criminal liability but only a bar to the prosecution of the offender. Therefore, that pardon
must come before the prosecution is commenced. .hile the prosecution is already commenced or initiated, pardon by the offended woman will no longer be effective
because pardon may preclude prosecution but not prevent the same.
!ll these private crimes + except rape + cannot be prosecuted de officio. &f any slander or written defamation is made out of any of these crimes, the complaint of the
offended party is till necessary before such case for libel or oral defamation may proceed. &t will not prosper because the court cannot ac9uire jurisdiction over these
crimes unless there is a complaint from the offended party. The paramount decision of whether he or she wanted the crime committed on him or her to be made public is
his or hers alone, because the indignity or dishonor brought about by these crimes affects more the offended party than social order. The offended party may prefer to
suffer the outrage in silence rather than to vindicate his honor in public.
&n the crimes of rape, abduction and seduction, if the offended woman had given birth to the child, among the liabilities of the offender is to support the child. This
obligation to support the child may be true even if there are several offenders. !s to whether all of them will ac4nowledge the child, that is a different 9uestion because
the obligation to support here is not founded on civil law but is the result of a criminal act or a form of punishment.
&t has been held that where the woman was the victim of the said crime could not possibly conceive anymore, the trial court should not provide in its sentence that the
accused, in case a child is born, should support the child. This should only be proper when there is a probability that the offended woman could give birth to an offspring.
TITLE GII. CRIMES AGAINST THE CI2IL STATUS OF %ERSONS
Crimes against t#e ci&il status of persons
1. <imulation of 0irt#s1 su0stitution of one c#ild for anot#er and concealment or a0andonment of a legitimate c#ild (art. 34");
2. 8surpation of ci&il status (Art. 34');
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 301
3.
7igamy (Art.
34));
4.
Marria
ge
contra
cted
against
pro&isi
ons of
la$
(Art.
35*);
5.
-remature
marriages
(Art. 351);
.
-erfor
mance
of
illegal
marria
ge
cerem
ony
(Art.
352).
Article 84). Si&.latio o( Airt,s@ S.9stit.tio o( Oe C,il$ (or Aot,er@ a$ Coceal&et o( A9a$o&et o( A Le*iti&ate C,il$
Acts punis#ed
1. <imulation of 0irt#s;
2. <u0stitution of one c#ild for anot#er;
3. Concealing or a0andoning any legitimate c#ild $it# intent to cause suc# c#ild to lose its ci&il status.
&llustration'
People who have no child and who buy and adopt the child without going through legal adoption.
&f the child is being 4idnapped and they 4new that the 4idnappers are not the real parents of their child, then simulation of birth is committed. &f the parents are parties to
the simulation by ma4ing it appear in the birth certificate that the parents who bought the child are the real parents, the crime is not falsification on the part of the parents
and the real parents but simulation of birth.
6.estios 7 As+ers
1. A $oman $#o #as gi&en 0irt# to a c#ild a0andons t#e c#ild in a certain place to free #erself of t#e o0ligation and duty of rearing and caring for t#e c#ild.
@#at crime is committed 0y t#e $oman=
The crime committed is abandoning a minor under !rticle "?-.
2. <uppose t#at t#e purpose of t#e $oman is a0andoning t#e c#ild is to preser&e t#e in#eritance of #er c#ild 0y a former marriage1 $#at t#en is t#e crime
committed=
The crime would fall under the second paragraph of !rticle 6*?. The purpose of the woman is to cause the child to lose its civil status so that it may not be able to
share in the inheritance.
3. <uppose a c#ild1 one day after #is 0irt#1 $as ta6en to and left in t#e midst of a lonely forest1 and #e $as found 0y a #unter $#o too6 #im #ome. @#at crime
$as committed 0y t#e person $#o left it in t#e forest=
&t is attempted infanticide, as the act of the offender is an attempt against the life of the child. 5ee 3S v. Ca!illo, e) al., 3& Phil. 319.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 302
Article 841.
Us.r"atio o(
Ci0il Stat.s
T#is crime is
committed
$#en a
person
represents
#imself to 0e
anot#er and
assumes t#e
filiation or t#e
parental or
con?ugal rig#ts
of suc#
anot#er
person.
Thus, where a
person
impersonates
another and
assumes the
latterPs right
as the son of
wealthy
parents, the
former
commits a
violation of
this article.
The term Kcivil
statusK
includes onePs public station, or the rights, duties, capacities and incapacities which determine a person to a given class. &t seems that the term Kcivil statusK includes
onePs profession.
Article 841. Ai*a&#
!lements
1. .ffender #as 0een legally married;
2. T#e marriage #as not 0een legally dissol&ed or1 in case #is or #er spouse is a0sent1 t#e a0sent spouse could not yet 0e presumed dead according to t#e Ci&il
Code;
3. 5e contracts a second or su0se3uent marriage;
4. T#e second or su0se3uent marriage #as all t#e essential re3uisites for &alidity.
The crime of bigamy does not fall within the category of private crimes that can be prosecuted only at the instance of the offended party. The offense is committed not
only against the first and second wife but also against the state.
/ood faith is a defense in bigamy.
2ailure to exercise due diligence to ascertain the whereabouts of the first wife is bigamy through rec4less imprudence.
The second marriage must have all the essential re9uisites for validity were it not for the existence of the first marriage.
! judicial declaration of the nullity of a marriage, that is, that the marriage was void ab initio, is now re9uired.
>ne convicted of bigamy may also be prosecuted for concubinage as both are distinct offenses. The first is an offense against civil status, which may be prosecuted at
the instance of the state< the second is an offense against chastity, and may be prosecuted only at the instance of the offended party. The test is not whether the
defendant has already been tried for the same act, but whether he has been put in jeopardy for the same offense.
>ne who, although not yet married before, 4nowingly consents to be married to one who is already married is guilty of bigamy 4nowing that the latterDs marriage is still
valid and subsisting.
@istinction between bigamy and illegal marriage'
:igamy is a form of illegal marriage. The offender must have a valid and subsisting marriage. @espite the fact that the marriage is still subsisting, he contracts a
subse9uent marriage.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 303
&llegal
marriage
includes also
such other
marriages
which are
performed
without
complying
with the
re9uirements
of law, or such
premature
marriages, or
such marriage
which was
solemni3ed by
one who is not
authori3ed to
solemni3e the
same.
2or bigamy to
be committed,
the second
marriage must
have all the
attributes of a
valid
marriage.
Article 8!4.
Ille*al
Marria*e
!lements
1. .ffender contracted marriage;
2. 5e 6ne$ at t#e time t#at /
a. T#e re3uirements of t#e la$ $ere not complied $it#; or
0. T#e marriage $as in disregard of a legal impediment.
Marriages contracted against t#e pro&isions of la$s
1. T#e marriage does not constitute 0igamy.
2. T#e marriage is contracted 6no$ing t#at t#e re3uirements of t#e la$ #a&e not 0een complied $it# or in disregard of legal impediments.
3. .ne $#ere t#e consent of t#e ot#er $as o0tained 0y means of &iolence1 intimidation or fraud.
4. %f t#e second marriage is &oid 0ecause t#e accused 6no$ingly contracted it $it#out complying $it# legal re3uirements as t#e marriage license1 alt#oug# #e $as
pre&iously married.
5. Marriage solemni:ed 0y a minister or priest $#o does not #a&e t#e re3uired aut#ority to solemni:e marriages.
Article 8!1. %re&at.re Marria*e
-ersons lia0le
1. A $ido$ $#o is married $it#in 3*1 days from t#e date of t#e deat# of #er #us0and1 or 0efore #a&ing deli&ered if s#e is pregnant at t#e time of #is deat#;
2. A $oman $#o1 #er marriage #a&ing 0een annulled or dissol&ed1 married 0efore #er deli&ery or 0efore t#e e4piration of t#e period of 3*1 days after t#e date of t#e
legal separation.
The 5upreme Court has already ta4en into account the reason why such marriage within 6;( days is made criminal, that is, because of the probability that there might be
a confusion regarding the paternity of the child who would be born. &f this reason does not exist because the former husband is impotent, or was shown to be sterile such
that the woman has had no child with him, that belief of the woman that after all there could be no confusion even if she would marry within 6;( days may be ta4en as
evidence of good faith and that would negate criminal intent.
TITLE GIII. CRIMES AGAINST HONOR
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 304
Crimes
against #onor
1. Ai0el
0y
means
of
$riting
s or
similar
means
(Art.
355);
2.
T#reat
ening
to
pu0lis#
and
offer to
pre&en
t suc#
pu0lica
tion for
a
compe
nsation
(Art.
35);
3. -ro#i0ited pu0lication of acts referred to in t#e course of official proceedings (Art. 35");
4. <lander (Art. 35');
5. <lander 0y deed (Art. 35));
. %ncriminating innocent person (Art. 33);
". %ntriguing against #onor (Art. 34).
Article 8!8. De(iitio o( Li9el
A li0el is a pu0lic and malicious imputation of a crime1 or of a &ice or defect1 real or imaginary1 or any act1 omission1 condition1 status1 or circumstances tending to cause
t#e dis#onor1 discredit1 or contempt of a natural or ?uridical person1 or to 0lac6en t#e memory of one $#o is dead.
!lements>
1. T#ere must 0e an imputation of a crime1 or of a &ice or defect1 real or imaginary1 or any act1 omission1 condition1 status1 or circumstance;
2. T#e imputation must 0e made pu0licly;
3. %t must 0e malicious;
4. T#e imputation must 0e directed at a natural or ?uridical person1 or one $#o is dead;
5. T#e imputation must tend to cause t#e dis#onor1 discredit or contempt of t#e person defamed.
@istinction between malice in fact and malice in law
0alice in fact is the malice which the law presumes from every statement whose tenor is defamatory. &t does not need proof. The mere fact that the utterance or
statement is defamatory negates a legal presumption of malice.

&n the crime of libel, which includes oral defamation, there is no need for the prosecution to present evidence of malice. &t is enough that the alleged defamatory or
libelous statement be presented to the court verbatim. &t is the court which will prove whether it is defamatory or not. &f the tenor of the utterance or statement is
defamatory, the legal presumption of malice arises even without proof.
0alice in fact becomes necessary only if the malice in law has been rebutted. >therwise, there is no need to adduce evidence of malice in fact. 5o, while malice in law
does not re9uire evidence, malice in fact re9uires evidence.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 305
0alice in law
can be
negated by
evidence that,
in fact, the
alleged
libelous or
defamatory
utterance was
made with
good motives
and justifiable
ends or by the
fact that the
utterance was
privileged in
character.
&n law,
however, the
privileged
character of a
defamatory
statement
may be
absolute or
9ualified.
.hen the
privileged
character is said to be absolute, the statement will not be actionable whether criminal or civil because that means the law does not allow prosecution on an action based
thereon.
&llustration'
!s regards the statements made by Congressmen while they are deliberating or discussing in Congress, when the privileged character is 9ualified, proof of malice in fact
will be admitted to ta4e the place of malice in law. .hen the defamatory statement or utterance is 9ualifiedly privileged, the malice in law is negated. The utterance or
statement would not be actionable because malice in law does not exist. Therefore, for the complainant to prosecute the accused for libel, oral defamation or slander, he
has to prove that the accused was actuated with malice #malice in fact% in ma4ing the statement.
.hen a libel is addressed to several persons, unless they are identified in the same libel, even if there are several persons offended by the libelous utterance or
statement, there will only be one count of libel.
&f the offended parties in the libel were distinctly identified, even though the libel was committed at one and the same time, there will be as many libels as there are
persons dishonored.
&llustration'
&f a person uttered that E!ll the 0arcoses are thieves,K there will only be one libel because these particular 0arcoses regarded as thieves are not specifically identified.
&f the offender said, E!ll the 0arcoses + the father, mother and daughter are thieves.F There will be three counts of libel because each person libeled is distinctly
dishonored.
&f you do not 4now the particular persons libeled, you cannot consider one libel as giving rise to several counts of libel. &n order that one defamatory utterance or
imputation may be considered as having dishonored more than one person, those persons dishonored must be identified. >therwise, there will only be one count of libel.
,ote that in libel, the person defamed need not be expressly identified. &t is enough that he could possibly be identified because Einnuendos may also be a basis for
prosecution for libel. !s a matter of fact, even a compliment which is undeserved, has been held to be libelous.
The crime is libel is the defamation is in writing or printed media.
The crime is slander or oral defamation if it is not printed.
)ven if what was imputed is true, the crime of libel is committed unless one acted with good motives or justifiable end. Poof of truth of a defamatory imputation is not
even admissible in evidence, unless what was imputed pertains to an act which constitutes a crime and when the person to whom the imputation was made is a public
officer and the imputation pertains to the performance of official duty. >ther than these, the imputation is not admissible.
@#en proof of trut# is admissi0le
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 306
1. @#en
t#e act
or
omissi
on
impute
d
constit
utes a
crime
regardl
ess of
$#et#e
r t#e
offend
ed
party is
a
pri&ate
indi&id
ual or
a
pu0lic
officer;
2. @#en
t#e
offended party is a go&ernment employee1 e&en if t#e act or omission imputed does not constitute a crime1 pro&ided if its related to t#e disc#arged of #is official
duties.
2e3uisites of defense in defamation
1. %f it appears t#at t#e matter c#arged as li0elous is true;
2. %t $as pu0lis#ed $it# good moti&es;
3. %t $as for ?ustifia0le ends.
&f a crime is a private crime, it cannot be prosecuted de officio. ! complaint from the offended party is necessary.
Article 8!!. Li9el 9# Meas o( Writi*s or Si&ilar Meas
A li0el may 0e committed 0y means of /
1. @riting;
2. -rinting;
3. Ait#ograp#y;
4. !ngra&ing;
5. 2adio;
. -#otograp#;
". -ainting;
'. T#eatrical e4#i0ition;
). Cinematograp#ic e4#i0ition; or
1*. Any similar means.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 307
Article 8!'.
T,reatei*
to %.9lis,
a$ O((er to
%re0et S.c,
%.9licatio
(or A
Co&"esatio

Acts punis#ed
1.
T#reat
ening
anot#e
r to
pu0lis#
a li0el
concer
ning
#im1 or
#is
parent
s1
spouse
1 c#ild1
or
ot#er
mem0
ers of
#is
family;
2. .ffering to pre&ent t#e pu0lication of suc# li0el for compensation or money consideration.
:lac4mail + &n its metaphorical sense, blac4mail may be defined as any unlawful extortion of money by threats of accusation or exposure. Two words are expressive of
the crime + hush money. #3S v. E%uia, e) al., 38 Phil. 8$7% :lac4mail is possible in #(% light threats under !rticle "16< and #"% threatening to publish, or offering to
prevent the publication of, a libel for compensation, under !rticle 6$-.
Article 8!). %ro,i9ite$ %.9licatio o( Acts Re(erre$ to i t,e Co.rse o( O((icial %rocee$i*s
!lements
1. .ffender is a reporter1 editor or manager of a ne$spaper1 daily or maga:ine;
2. 5e pu0lis#es facts connected $it# t#e pri&ate life of anot#er;
3. <uc# facts are offensi&e to t#e #onor1 &irtue and reputation of said person.
The provisions of !rticle 6$? constitute the socalled K/ag Aaw.K
Article 8!/. Sla$er
5lander is oral defamation. There are tow 4inds of oral defamation'
#(% 5imple slander< and
#"% /rave slander, when it is of a serious and insulting nature.

Article 8!1. Sla$er 9# Dee$
!lements
1. .ffender performs any act not included in any ot#er crime against #onor;
2. <uc# act is performed in t#e presence of ot#er person or persons;
3. <uc# act casts dis#onor1 discredit or contempt upon t#e offended party.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 308
<lander 0y
deed refers to
performance
of an act1 not
use of $ords.
T$o 6inds of
slander 0y
deed
1. <imple
slander 0y
deed; and
2. ;ra&e
slande
r 0y
deed1
t#at is1
$#ic#
is of a
serious
nature.
.hether a
certain
slanderous
act constitutes slander by deed of a serious nature or not, depends on the social standing of the offended party, the circumstances under which the act was committed,
the occasion, etc.
Article 8'8. Icri&iati* Iocet %ersos
!lements
1. .ffender performs an act;
2. 7y suc# an act1 #e incriminates or imputes to an innocent person t#e commission of a crime;
3. <uc# act does not constitute per?ury.
This crime cannot be committed through verbal incriminatory statements. &t is defined as an act and, therefore, to commit this crime, more than a mere utterance is
re9uired.
&f the incriminating machination is made orally, the crime may be slander or oral defamation.
&f the incriminatory machination was made in writing and under oath, the crime may be perjury if there is a willful falsity of the statements made.
&f the statement in writing is not under oath, the crime may be falsification if the crime is a material matter made in a written statement which is re9uired by law to have
been rendered.
!s far as this crime is concerned, this has been interpreted to be possible only in the socalled planting of evidence.
Article 8'4. Itri*.i* a*aist Hoor
T#is crime is committed 0y any person $#o s#all ma6e any intrigue $#ic# #as for its principal purpose to 0lemis# t#e #onor or reputation of anot#er person.
&ntriguing against honor is referred to as gossiping. The offender, without ascertaining the truth of a defamatory utterance, repeats the same and pass it on to another, to
the damage of the offended party. .ho started the defamatory news is un4nown.
@istinction between intriguing against honor and slander'
.hen the source of the defamatory utterance is un4nown and the offender simply repeats or passes the same, the crime is intriguing against honor.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 309
&f the offender
made the
utterance,
where the
source of the
defamatory
nature of the
utterance is
4nown, and
offender
ma4es a
republication
thereof, even
though he
repeats the
libelous
statement as
coming from
another, as
long as the
source is
identified, the
crime
committed by
that offender
is slander.
@istinction
between
intriguing
against honor
and
incriminating
an innocent
person'
&n intriguing against honor, the offender resorts to an intrigue for the purpose of blemishing the honor or reputation of another person.
&n incriminating an innocent person, the offender performs an act by which he directly incriminates or imputes to an innocent person the commission of a crime.
TITLE G2I. CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
Article 8'!. I&"r.$ece a$ Ne*li*ece
DuasiBoffenses punis#ed
1. Committing t#roug# rec6less imprudence any act $#ic#1 #ad it 0een intentional1 $ould constitute a gra&e or less gra&e felony or lig#t felony;
2. Committing t#roug# simple imprudence or negligence an act $#ic# $ould ot#er$ise constitute a gra&e or a less serious felony;
3. Causing damage to t#e property of anot#er t#roug# rec6less imprudence or simple imprudence or negligence;
4. Causing t#roug# simple imprudence or negligence some $rong $#ic#1 if done maliciously1 $ould #a&e constituted a lig#t felony.
@istinction between rec4less imprudence and negligence'
The two are distinguished only as to whether the danger that would be impending is easily perceivable or not. &f the danger that may result from the criminal negligence is
clearly perceivable, the imprudence is rec4less. &f it could hardly be perceived, the criminal negligence would only be simple.
There is no more issue on whether culpa is a crime in itself or only a mode of incurring criminal liability. &t is practically settled that criminal negligence is only a modality
in incurring criminal liability. This is so because under !rticle 6, a felony may result from dolo or culpa.
5ince this is the mode of incurring criminal liability, if there is only one carelessness, even if there are several results, the accused may only be prosecuted under one
count for the criminal negligence. 5o there would only be one information to be filed, even if the negligence may bring about resulting injuries which are slight.
@o not separate the accusation from the slight physical injuries from the other material result of the negligence.
&f the criminal negligence resulted, for example, in homicide, serious physical injuries and slight physical injuries, do not join only the homicide and serious physical
injuries in one information for the slight physical injuries. Bou are not complexing slight when you join it in the same information. &t is just that you are not splitting the
criminal negligence because the real basis of the criminal liability is the negligence.
&f you split the criminal negligence, that is where double jeopardy would arise.
R REVISED EVISED O ORTEGA RTEGA L LECTURE ECTURE N NOTES OTES ON ON C CRIMINAL RIMINAL L LAW AW 310

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close