Crim Law Review Tips

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW TIPS
PIERRE MARTIN DE LEON REYES

===========================================
MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS

===========================================
2011-2012
1. A scattered coconut remnants with human
excrements on the stairs, doors, and floors of
the municipal building to obstruct the
performance of public functions. What crime, if
any, did A commit?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Unjust vexation
None
Grave scandal
Malicious mischief
According to People vs. Dumlao, when

several persons scattered coconut remnants
which contained human excrements on the
stairs and floor of the municipal building,
including its interior, the crime committed is
malicious mischief under Article 329 (Reyes
II, pg. 894)
2. What crime, if any, is committed if the gift or
present is not accepted by the public officer?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Direct bribery
Corruption of public official
None
Direct bribery
If the offer is not accepted by the public

officer, only the person offering the gift or
present is criminally liable for attempted
corruption of public officer under Article 212
in relation to Article 6. The public officer is
not liable. (Reyes II, pg. 387-388)
3. What crime, if any, is committed by a private

person who aided a municipal treasurer in taking
away money intended for teachers salaries?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Estafa
Theft
Malversation
None
According to U.S. v. Ponte and People v.

Sendaydiego, a private person who
conspired with a public officer or aids a
public officer in committing malversation is
likewise guilty of malversation (Reyes II, pg.
430-431).
4. A is a natural son of B. C is the legitimate father
of B. A killed C. What crime did A commit?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
He who kills an illegitimate ascendant or

descendant is not guilty of parricide, but of
simple homicide or murder as the case may
be. Since C is an illegitimate father of A, the
crime is only homicide. (Reyes II, pg. 486)
5. A coming home early from work, surprised his
wife and kumpadre sleeping in bed. A shot
both with his pistol, killing his wife and inflicting
less serious physical injuries on his
kumpadre. Is A liable criminally?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
A is liable for homicide and attempted

homicide
A is liable for parricide and frustrated
murder
A is entitled to the benefits of Art. 427
A is liable for parricide and frustrated
homicide
Article 247 is not applicable when the

accused did not see his spouse in the act of
sexual intercourse with another person.
According to People v. Bituanan, the phrase
in the act of committing sexual intercourse
does not include merely sleeping on the
same bed. (Reyes II, pg. 491)
6. A is a stranger, poisoned a pregnant woman, to
kill her. As a consequence, she died and the
foetus in her womb also died. What crime was
committed by A?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Parricide
Homicide
Murder
Murder and unintentional abortion

Complex crime of murder
intentional abortion
Murder
PAGE 1
with

__ C.
The crime committed is murder only. A
cannot be liable for unintentional abortion
because there is no violence as he used
poison. Further, he cannot be liable for
intentional abortion as the abortion was not
intended. The intention of A is to kill the
pregnant woman only.
7. A servant opened the window of the house of
her master to make possible the entrance of her
suitor in the house. What is the criminal liability
of the servant and her suitor?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Attempted qualified theft

Trespass to dwelling
Malicious mischief
Violation of domicile
The servant is a principle by indispensable

cooperation in the crime of qualified
trespass to dwelling and her suitor is a
principal by direct participation in the said
crime (Reyes 1964, pg. 518).
8. A, in the heat of anger, struck B with a stick,
saying I will kill you. B suffered slight physical
injuries. What crime was committed by A?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Light threats
Unjust vexation
Slight physical injuries
Attempted homicide
In attempted or frustrated homicide, the

offender must have the intent to kill the
victim. If there is no intent to kill on the part
of the offender, he is liable for physical
injuries only. Further, the intent to kill is
shown by the type of weapon used and the
parts of the victims body at which it was
aimed as shown by the wounds inflicted
(Reyes II, pg. 504). Here, only a stick was
used and slight injuries inflicted.
The threats was part of the assault (Reyes
1964, pg. 525).
9. A broke the wooden gate of the stone fence of
the premises of B and once inside took from the
yard of B building materials which were lying
there. What crime was committed by A?
__ A.
__ B.
Robbery with force upon things

Malicious mischief
Theft
Robbery with force upon things is committed

on an inhabited house, public building or
building dedicated to religious worship and
its dependencies. In order to be a
dependency, such structure must be
contiguous to the building, must have an
interior entrance connected therewith and
must form part of the whole. The yard cannot
be characterized as a dependency. (Reyes
1964, pg. 535)
10. While a woman was walking along Makati
Avenue, a man following her suddenly snatched
her bandbag and ran away with it. What crime
was committed by that man?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Qualified theft
Robbery with violence and intimidation
Robbery with force upon things
Theft
Since the taking was accomplished without

the use of violence against or intimidation of
persons or force upon things, the crime
committed is theft. Had she resisted and
violence was employed, the crime would
have been robbery with violence and
intimidation (Reyes 1964, pg. 537)
11. A gave B a janitor in his office P500.00 with
instruction to pay As insurance premium. B,
instead of paying it to the insurance company,
spent the money. What crime was committed by
B?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Estafa
Malversation
Other deceits
Theft
A person who misappropriated the thing

which he had received from the offended
party may be guilty of theft not estafa if he
acquired only the material or physical
possession of the thing (Reyes II, pg. 807)
(Reyes 1964, pg. 565)
12. What crime was committed by a person who
made forecast of what would happen at a certain
future time?
__ A.
__ B.
Alarms and scandals

Unjust vexation
PAGE 2

__ C.
__ D.
None
Other deceits
In order to fall under Article 318 (Other

deceits), the making of forecasts must be for
profit or gain (Reyes II, pg. 864) (Reyes 1964,
pg. 606).
13. A and B are son and father, respectively. A told
their servant to steal the watch of B, As father.
The servant took the watch of B without the
latters consent and gave it to A who sold it and
spent the proceeds of the sale. What is the
criminal liability, if any, of A and the servant?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
A and the servant are liable for theft

A is exempt from criminal liability;
the servant is liable for qualified theft
A is liable for estafa; the servant for
qualified theft
A is liable for simple theft; the servant
for qualified theft
A is not criminally liable because the crime

committed by him, as principal by induction
was theft and because of his relation with the
offended party he is exempt from criminal
liability. The exemption, however, does not
apply to strangers participating in the crime.
Hence, servant is liable for qualified theft
(Reyes 1964, pg. 615).
14. A woman was sleeping. When she woke up, she
found a man on top of her with his private part in
her private part. Realizing that it was futile to
resist and to scream for help, she just kept still
until the man accomplished his sexual desire. Is
the man liable for rape?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Yes, because the woman was

unconscious when the man inserted
his private part into the private part
of the woman
No, as the element of force or
intimidation is absent
No, because the woman eventually
consented
The rape was already consummated upon

the penetration of the female organ and such
carnal act was done while the offended party
was asleep (People v. Caballero). Further,
resistance when futile does not amount to
consent (Reyes II, pg. 561) (Reyes 1964, pg.
623).
15. A purchased merchandise and signed a

promissory note therefor. On the date of
maturity, he gave the check for the amount
stated in the promissory note, but the check was
dishonoured by the bank for lack of funds. What
crime punishable by the R.P.C., if any, was
committed by A?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22

Estafa by issuing a check without funds
None, the check was issued in
payment of a pre-existing obligation
When a check is issued in substitution of a

promissory note, it is in payment of a preexisting obligation (People v. Canlas). The
issuance of a bouncing check in payment of
a pre-existing obligation does not constitute
estafa. (Reyes, pg. 825)
Note: If the question stated what crime, if
any, was committed, the answer would be A
as the issuance of a bouncing check is
punishable under B.P. 22 even if it is for
payment of a pre-existing obligation. The
question here asks what crime under the
Revised Penal Code, if any. B.P. 22 is a
special penal law.
16. The husband, whenever his wife, was not in
their conjugal dwelling, used to have sexual
intercourse with their female servant What
crime, if any, was committed by the husband?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Concubinage
None
Qualified seduction
Adultery
The husband here did not take the servant as

concubine in the conjugal dwelling (Reyes II,
pg. 911) (Reyes 1964, pg. 622). However, if
the female servant was under 18 years old
and a virgin, he would have been liable for
qualified seduction (Reyes 1964, id.)
17. A prepared a drink, using methyl alcohol and
mixing it with sugar and lemon, and sold it to
three soldiers who were poisoned and died.
What crime, if any, was committed by A?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Homicide
Murder
Administering injurious substance or
PAGE 3

__ D.
beverage
Reckless imprudence resulting in
homicide
According to People v. Lara, alcohol for

motor vehicles is not proper for human
beings; common sense so dictates. Lacking
in the simplest precaution, A committed
reckless imprudence (Reyes II, pg. 1054)
18. A threatened a woman that he would kill her
husband if she would not have sexual
intercourse with him, and the next day, the
woman agreed to the condition imposed by A to
save her husband. A had sexual intercourse with
her. What crime was committed?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Grave threats
Grave coercion
Rape by means of intimidation
A is liable for grave threats because A

threatened the woman with infliction upon
the person of her husband of a wrong
amounting to a crime, that is, he would kill
him, imposing a condition, that is, that she
should have sexual intercourse with A and A
attained his purpose.
20. A left his loaded firearm on the chair within the

reach of a child then playing in the place. The
child picked it up and played with it causing the
firearm to explode with the bullet hitting As twoday old child who died as a result, What is the
criminal liability of A, if any, for the death of his
child?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
There was lack of intention to commit a

wrong on the part of A. However, A showed
inexcusable lack of precaution which has led
to the death of two-day old child, which
would have been punishable as infanticide
had intent been present.
21. A with intent of killing X, bought poison from a
drugstore. A then mixed the poison with food
intended for X. Before X could sit at the
breakfast table, a neighbors cat reached for the
poisoned food and scampered away. Did A
commit a crime?
__ A.
The crime is not rape because when the

offender had carnal knowledge with the
woman, she in a sense agreed to it. (Reyes
1964, pg. 520).
19. A told B that he would kill him if the latter would
not send him P10,000.00 within 24 hours. B sent
the money the next day. What crime was
committed by A?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Grave coercion
Robbery with intimidation
Grave threats
When the act consists in materially taking

possession or securing, on the spot, the
delivery of the money or other personal
property, through the effect of fear or fright,
the nature of the penal act is altered and
constitutes, not threats but the crime of
robbery with intimidation. (Reyes II, pg. 623)
Here, the delivery of the money was not on
the spot. In other words, the gain was not
immediate (Reyes 1964, pg. 521).
Homicide through reckless imprudence

Reckless imprudence resulting in
infanticide
Parricide through reckless imprudence
None, as it was due to an accident
__ B.
__ C.
Yes, he shall be liable for frustrated

murder
No, As acts are merely preparatory acts
Yes, he shall be liable for attempted
murder
The buying of poison with food intended for

X, and the latter did not know that it
contained poison, was about to eat it but was
prevented from doing so by a cat,
constituted overt acts of murder. A is liable
for attempted murder. (Reyes I, pg. 99)
22. A administered abortive drugs upon his
girlfriend, whom he believed to be pregnant, but
which turned out to be not true. The girlfriend as
a consequence became ill for more than 30
days. What crime, if any, did A commit?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Impossible crime of abortion

Serious physical injuries
Frustrated murder
Frustrated homicide
If the act performed constitutes a violation of

another provision of the Revised Penal Code,
there is no impossible crime (Reyes I, pg. 84-
PAGE 4

85). Here, the intent to kill the girlfriend is
absent but serious physical injuries were
inflicted.
23. A was charged with adultery with a married
woman. After conviction of both accused, the
accused married woman was given an absolute
pardon by the Chief Executive. Does the
absolute pardon of the married woman have the
effect of extinguishing the criminal liability of A?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Yes, because pardon abolishes and

obliterates effects of the felony
committed
No, pardon by the Chief Executive is
extended to specific individuals only
Yes, because pardon in the crime of
adultery refers to both offenders to be
effective.
taking is deemed complete from the moment

the offender gains possession of the thing,
even if he has no opportunity to dispose of
the same (Reyes II, pg. 735-736).
26. X married A in July 1995 only to learn on that A
was previously married to B from whom A had
been separated for more than 10 years.
Believing that his marriage to A was an absolute
nullity, X contracted a subsequent marriage with
C. Can X be prosecuted for bigamy?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
No, the first marriage being void ab initio

Yes, even though his marriage to A
was an absolute nullity
No, because X is entitled to a
dissolution of the first marriage under
the Family Code
No, because the power to extend executive

clemency is unlimited and that the exercise
of that power lies in the absolute and
uncontrolled discretion of the chief executive
(Reyes I, pg. 866)
Under the Family Code, the parties cannot

presume their marriage to be void. The fact
that the first marriage is void ab initio is not
a defense in a bigamy charge. There must be
a judicial declaration of the nullity of a
marriage before contracting the second
marriage (Reyes II, pg. 973).
24. A told B that C is a thief. C was previously

convicted of theft. For purposes of libel, can it be
presumed that the imputation made by A is
malicious?
27. Is notice of dishonour of the check issued

required in the prosecution of the offender for
estafa under Art. 315, par. 2(d), R.P.C. and
violation of B.P. 22?
__ A. No, as it was merely a statement of fact

__ B. No, as it is not a defamatory imputation
__ C. Yes, every defamatory imputation is
presumed to be malicious even if it be true
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Article 354 provides that every defamatory

imputation is presumed to be malicious even
if it be true. (Reyes II, pg. 998).
25. X lifted from the jewellery section of a
department store 2 gold bracelets and put them
in her purse. At the stores exit, however, X was
arrested by the guards who were alerted of Xs
act which was caught in the stores CCTV
cameras. What crime was committed by X?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Attempted theft
Frustrated theft
Consummated theft
The ability of the offender to freely dispose

of the property stolen is not a constitutive
element of the crime of theft. The unlawful
Notice of dishonor is require in estafa,

but not in B.P. 22
Notice of dishonor is a pre-requisite in
B.P. 22 but not in estafa
Notice of dishonor is required in both
estafa and B.P. 22
While the RPC prescribes that the drawer of

the check must deposit the amount needed
to cover his check within three days from
receipt of notice of dishonor, BP 22, on the
other hand, requires the maker or drawer to
pay the amount of the check within five days
from receipt of notice of dishonor. Under
both laws, notice of dishonor is necessary
for prosecution (for estafa and violation of
BP 22). Without proof of notice of dishonor,
knowledge of insufficiency of funds cannot
be presumed and no crime (whether estafa
or violation of BP 22) can be deemed to exist.
(People v. Ojeda)
PAGE 5

28. X pointed a dirty finger at his superior for the
latters repeated delay in approving his
application for leave monetization. What crime, if
any, did X commit?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Unjust vexation
None
Simple slander by deed
Malicious mischief
According to People v. Villanueva, pointing a

dirty finger constitutes simple slander by
deed, it appearing from the facts that the act
complained of was employed to express
anger or displeasure at complainant for
procrastinating the approval of his leave
monetization (Reyes II, pg. 1029)
29. X, Y, and Z shot and killed A, a tricycle driver,
and took possession of his motorized tricycle.
What crime did X, Y, and Z commit?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Robbery with violence against person

Qualified theft
Qualified carnapping
Highway robbery
According to People v. Lobitania, where

accused-appellant and his companions shot
the driver of the tricycle resulting in his
death, abandoned him and took possession
of the vehicle, the crime committed is
qualified carnapping under R.A. No. 6539.
(Reyes II, pg. 761)
30. During a free-for-all fight in a market place, an
old woman market vendor was seen pushed to
the ground by X. Later, the old woman was
found dead. It appears that the cause of her
death was a stab wound on the side of her body
and the person who inflicted it could not be
identified. Is X criminally liable for the death of
the old woman?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
No, the person who stabbed the victim

should be held liable
No, the victim is not a participant in the
free-for-all
Yes, having used violence upon the
victim in the course of a tumultuous
affray.
If the one who inflicted the serious physical

injuries is unknown, all the persons who
used violence upon the person of the victim
are liable, but with lesser liability (People v.

Dacanay) (Reyes II, pg. 512)
31. X forced upon the window to enter the house of
A, a 70 year old woman. Once inside, X took the
cash and jewellery of A who as a consequence
was awakened. X stabbed A to death. May
disregard of age and sex be appreciated in the
crime committed by X?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Yes, X disregarded the age and sex of

the victim
Yes, having committed homicide,
disregard of age and sex may be
appreciated
No, disregard of age and sex may not
be appreciated in robbery with
homicide
According to People v. Nabaluna, It is not

proper to consider disregard of old age in
crimes against property. Robbery with
homicide is primarily a crime against
property and not against persons. Homicide
is a mere incident of the robbery, the latter
being the main purpose and object of the
criminal (Reyes I, pg. 360)
32. May a woman be charged as principal in rape
committed by sexual intercourse?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
No, rape by sexual intercourse is

committed by a man upon a woman
Yes, the crime of rape can now be
committed by a male or a female
Yes, if the woman is charged as coprincipal together with a man
A woman can be guilty of rape as a principal

by
inducement,
by
indispensable
cooperation
or
as
a
co-conspirator
(Regalado, pg. 609)
33. The Senate Blue Ribbon Committee issued
summons to X to appear in the investigation of
the Gen. Garcia plea bargain agreement in aid
of legislation. X, without legal excuse, refused to
obey the summons. What crime, if any, did X
commit?
__ A.
__ B.
Open disobedience to an order of a

superior authority (Art. 231)
Malicious delay in the administration of
justice (Art. 207)
PAGE 6

__ C.
Disobedience to summons issued by

the National Assembly (Art. 150)
shall be considered as piracy (Reyes II, pg.

36)
Article 150 punishes the refusal, without

legal excuse, to obey summons of the
National Assembly, its special or standing
committees and subcommittees. (Reyes II,
pg. 149)
36. A, a barangay chairman, was presiding over a

meeting regarding peace and order in their
community when he wa attached by his creditor
whom he has not paid for a long time despite his
repeated promises to d so. A suffered serious
physical injuries. What crime did the creditor
commit?
34. X is a teller of the Development Bank of the

Philippines (DBP). Taking advantage of his
position, X pocketed and appropriated
P10,000.00 which he had in his possession.
What crime did X commit?
__ A.
__ B.
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Malversation,
DBP
being
a
government bank
Estafa, A had possession of the money
which he appropriated with abuse of
confidence
Qualified theft. X has only physical
possession of the money and as teller
his
position
involves
trust
and
confidence
Indeed, the possession of X as teller was the

possession of the bank, as he had only the
physical, not juridical, possession of the
money (which would in turn be estafa) and it
was committed with grave abuse of
confidence, it would have amounted to
qualified theft (People v. Locson) (Reyes II,
pg. 758). However, the teller here is a public
officer or employee who has in his custody
public funds and the bank is a GOCC. (Reyes
1964, pg. 453)
35. A while soundly asleep in his fishing boat
moored in the Pasig River in Manila, was
attached and rendered unconscious by X.
Thereafter, X took his cash and cellphones.
What crime did X commit?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ C.
Serious physical injuries since the

motive for the attack was private and
personal
Direct assault with serious physical
injuries as A was then in the
performance of his official duties
Direct assault only, the physical injuries
absorbed
When a person in authority or his agent is in

the actual performance of his official duty,
the motive of the offender is immaterial
(Reyes II, pg. 145). Where in the commission
of direct assault, serious or less serious
physical injuries are inflicted, the offender is
guilty of the complex crime of direct assault
with serious or less serious physical injuries
(Reyes II, pg. 146)
37. X owns and operates a gift and jewellery shop.
A sold to him for P1,000.00 a diamond ring
worth P120,000.00 which she stole. What crime,
if any, did X commit?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
None
Theft
Fencing
X cannot be liable for theft as it was A who

committed the theft nor can X be held liable
for fencing as such would require knowledge
that the item was stolen
Robbery with violence and intimidation

Piracy under P.D. 532, as amended
Robbery with frustrated homicide
P.D. 532 provides that any attack or seizure

of any vessel, or the taking away of the
whole or part thereof or its cargo, equipment
or
the
personal
belongings
of
its
complement or passengers by means of
violence against or intimidation of persons
or force upon things, in Philippine waters
38. In mercy killing, is the attending physician

criminally liable for deliberately turning off the life
support system consequently costing the life of a
brain dead patient?
__ A.
__ B.
No. There is absent mens rea

No,
because
of
the
justifying
circumstance of state of necessity
PAGE 7

__ C.
Yes, euthanasia is not a modifying

circumstance in our jurisdiction
In euthanasia or mercy-killing, the person

killed does not want to die. A doctor who
resorts to mercy killing of his patient may be
liable for murder (Reyes II, pg. 516)
39. X, with intent to kill, aimed his revolver at B. B
cried, asking X not to kill him. X then turned
around and left B. Is X liable for attempted
homicide?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
Yes, but his liability shall be mitigated

Yes. There was intent to kill when he
aimed his revolver at B
No. X desisted without performing all
the acts of execution to accomplish
the felony
Spontaneous desistance of a malefactor

exempts him from criminal liability for the
intended crime but it does not exempt him
from the crime committed by him before his
desistance (Reyes I, pg. 105) (Reyes 1964,
pg. 164)
40. X was found guilty of drug trafficking, X
appealed his conviction. Pending appeal, X filed
a petition for probation. How would you resolve
the petition?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
The petition should be granted as under

the law, he is not included among the
disqualified offenders
The petition should be granted as Xs
conviction is still pending appeal
The petition should be denied as X
was found guilty of drug trafficking
and having appealed his conviction,
he is also a disqualified offender
Those previously convicted by final

judgment of an offense by imprisonment not
less than one month and one day and/or a
fine of not more than two hundred pesos are
disqualified from being placed on probation
(Reyes I, pg. 830). Further, the Probation Law
expressly prohibits the grant of an
application for probation if the defendant has
perfected an appeal from the judgment of
conviction (Reyes I, pg. 827).
2010-2011
(Only those questions not included above)
1. A married woman who habitually appeared in

public places with her paramour and frequented
suspicious places and vacant houses is liable for
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Adultery
Grave scandal
Prostitution
None
According to U.S. v. Samaniego, a married

woman who habitually appeared in public
places with her paramour, frequented
suspicious places, vacant houses did not
violate Article 200 (Grave scandal) because
the acts were not committed in public places
or within the public knowledge or view
2. A wrote a letter to B, a respectable woman, that
the latter was the querida of C. The letter was in
a sealed envelope but sent through mail. What
crime, if any, was committed by A?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Libel, as it is an imputation of a
circumstance tending to cause
dishonor
Intriguing against honor
Unjust vexation
Slander
According to Lopez v. Delgado, sending a

letter in a sealed envelope through a
messenger is not publication. Here, the
sealed envelope was sent through mail.
Thus, the ruling in Orfanel v. People should
apply where the Supreme Court stated that
writing a letter to another person other than
the person defamed is sufficient to
constitute publication, for the person to
whome the letter is addressed is a third
person in relation ot its writer and the person
defamed therein (Reyes II, pg. 991) (Reyes
1964, pg. 651).
3. A, a big and husky man, assaulted in a public
place a person who could not fight him because
of his small size and weak physical constitution.
Assuming that no physical injuries wre inflicted,
what crime, if any, was committed by A?
__ A.
__ B.
__ C.
__ D.
Slander by deed
Unjust vexation
Challenging to a duel
Light threats
PAGE 8

The common denominator present in unjust
vexation and slander by deed is irritation or
annoyance. Without any other concurring
factor, the offense would be merely unjust
vexation because unjust vexation is equated
with anything that annoys or irritates another
without any justification. If in addition to the
irritation or annoyance, there was attendant
publicity and dishonour or contempt, the
offense would be slander by deed. (Reyes II,
pg.1031). Here, the irritation or annoyance
was done in a public place. (Reyes 1964, pg.
663).
3. What is the corpus delicti in crimes against

persons where the death of the victim
consummates the crime?
In all crimes against persons, in which the death
of the victim is an element of the offense, the
corpus delicti is the fact of death or the manner
in which the victim died.
4. A woman suffered abortion by natural cause.
The expelled foetus had already a human form
and about six months old. While the foetus was
still alive, it was buried by the servant in the
yard, as instructed by the mother. Are the
mother and the servant liable criminally? Explain
===========================================
ESSAY
===========================================
2010-2011; 2011-2012
1. Having decided a case in favour of the plaintiff,
the judge was given a gift by said plaintiff. The
decision was perfectly legal and just and in fact
when the defendant appealed the case to the
Supreme Court it was affirmed in its entirety. Did
the judge incur criminal liability?
Yes, the judge is criminally liable for indirect
bribery. All the elements of indirect bribery are
present in this case. First, the judge is a public
officer. Second, he accepted a gift from the
plaintiff. Third, he received the gift by reason of
his office. It is immaterial if the decision was
perfectly legal and just. By accepting the gift
which was given in anticipation of future favour,
he exposed himself to future corruption.
2. When is the taking of money bills used as
evidence in the trial of a case by the clerk of
court infidelity in the custody of document, and
when is it malversation?
A clerk of court is liable for infidelity in custody
of document if having received the money bills
as exhibits in a case, took away the money bills
used as evidence in the said case. When the
case is done and the money bills are to be
returned to its owner, the clerks custody is now
in the nature of a trust. Hence, when the clerk
appropriates it after the case is done, he is liable
for malversation.
No, the mother and servant are not criminally

liable. They cannot be held liable for abortion as
it was due to natural causes and not through the
acts of the mother and servant. Further, they
cannot be held liable for infanticide because
such crime requires that the foetus is capable of
sustaining an independent life after its
separation from the maternal womb. Here, the
foetus is only 6 months old and not capable of
surviving.
5. A and B kidnapped and detained X for a week to
compel the latter to work in a plantation in
Mindoro without salary. Before A and B could
board the vessel for Mindoro with X, a
policeman rescued X. What crime was
committed by A and B? Why?
A and B committed slavery punished under
Article 272 of the Revised Penal Code. In
determining whether the act of kidnapping
constitutes kidnapping or illegal detention or
slavery, the purpose must be determined. If the
purpose is to enslave the victim, it is slavery;
otherwise, it is kidnapping or illegal detention. In
this case, it is clear that the purpose of A and B
in kidnapping X was to enslave him.
6. A held-up B at the point of a revolver,
threatening to kill him, and succeeded in taking
a watch from B. When he reached home, A
found that the watch he had taken from B was
his own watch which he had lost a week before.
What crime was committed by A? Explain
A committed grave threats. A threatened B with
the infliction upon his person of a wrong
amounting to a crime. While indeed that
intimidation here produced immediate effect, the
PAGE 9

threat may be considered as not subject to a
condition.
The crime is not robbery with the use of violence
or intimidation upon persons because one of the
elements of robbery is absent. The watch here
actually belongs to A. Further, the crime is not
grave coercion because there is intent to gain
here. (Reyes 1964, pg. 540-541).
7. If parricide is committed on the occasion or by
reason of the robbery, what is the crime
committed? Why?
The crime is the special complex crime of
robbery with homicide. The term homicide as
used in Article 294, para. 1 is used in its generic
sense to include parricide and murder. Thus, if
parricide is committed on occasion or by reason
of the robbery, the crime would be denominated
as robbery with homicide.
8. A, a boy seven years old, found a wallet with
money bills in the amount of P200.00 in it. A
gave it to his father who later spent the money.
What crime was committed by the father?
Explain your answer.
The father committed the crime of theft, because
although the father is not the finder in fact, he is
the finder in law. A, the finder in fact, acquires
physical custody only and did not become
vested with legal possession. The father to
whom the wallet with money bills was given, by
voluntary substitution, steps into the shoes of
the finder in fact. When the father appropriated
the property found, he became liable for theft.
9. A, wife of B, surprised the latter and another
woman in a hotel in the act of sexual
intercourse. A now consults you to find out if she
can file a complaint and prosecute them for
concubinage. What is your opinion? Explain
your views on the matter.
The complaint for concubinage will not prosper.
Concubinage is committed in three ways,
namely: (1) keeping a mistress in the conjugal
dwelling; (2) having sexual intercourse under
scandalous circumstances with a woman not his
wife; or (3) cohabiting with her in any other
place. In this case, the B and his mistress did not
commit any of the above acts. First, the mistress
was not taken by B into the conjugal dwelling as
concubine. Second, they were not caught under
scandalous circumstances as they were having

sex in a hotel. Third, they were not cohabiting as
this would entail living together as husband and
wife.
10. May a person convicted of bigamy still be
prosecuted for concubinage? Explain
Yes. The two offenses are distinct. First, bigamy
is an offense against civil status which may be
prosecuted at the instance of the State while
concubinage is an offense against chastity and
may be prosecuted only at the instance of the
offended party. Second, the celebration of the
second marriage, with the first still existing,
characterizes the crime of bigamy while mere
cohabitation by the husband with a woman not
his wife characterizes the crime of concubinage.
2009-2010
1. A and B, Filipino citizens, went to Hong Kong on
a pleasure trip. When they returned to, and were
already in the Philippines, A discovered that B
stole her diamond ring worth P200,000 while
they were in Hong Kong, B is a trusted personal
aide of A. If you are the investigating prosecutor,
what crime, if any, should you file against B?
Explain.
None. According to the territoriality principle, the
law is applicable to all crimes committed within
the limits of Philippine territory. In Article 2 of
the Revised Penal Code, the crime of theft is not
one of those crimes which the Code is given
extra-territorial application.
2. A was awakened by the barking of his dog. He
looked out of the window of his house and saw a
man in his yard. A got his shotgun and believing
that man to be a robber, shot and killed him in
his yard. When he went down to see the man he
had killed, he found out that the man was his
brother who wanted to spend the night in As
house.
What crime, if any, would A be liable? Explain.
A will be liable for homicide. The elements of
homicide are present in this case. First, the
robber was killed. Second, A killed the robber
without any justifying circumstance. Even if the
man was in fact a robber and not his brother, A
is not justified in shooting the robber to death as
there was no unlawful aggression on the part of
PAGE 10

the man which would allow for valid claim of
self-defense. Third, there is intent to kill. Lastly,
the shooting was not attended by any of the
circumstances
of
murder,
parricide
or
infanticide.
Can A successfully invoke mistake of fact as a
defense? Explain your answer.
No, he cannot invoke mistake of fact as a
defense. Even if the man was in fact a robber
and not his brother, A would not have been
justified in shooting him to death. There was
neither defense of As person, defense of home
nor defense of property in this case because
there was no unlawful aggression on the part of
the robber.
3. A for the purpose of raping B in a room occupied
by her exclusively as a boarder, used a false key
which he opened its door. Once inside, but
before he could touch B, A changed his mind
and went out of the room. For what crime or
crimes, if any, would A be liable? Explain your
answer.
A is liable for trespass to dwelling. The elements
of trespass to dwelling are present in this case.
First, A is a private person. Second, A entered
the dwelling of B. It has been held that a room
constitutes a dwelling. Third, the entrance is
against the will of B.
A cannot be held liable for attempted rape as he
desisted before he could perform all acts of
execution. Further, A cannot be held liable for
the use of false keys as the possession of false
keys under Article 305 is not punishable.
4. A was in love with the wife of B. One day, A at a
distance of 50 yards saw B in the act of stabbing
C, a stranger, with a knife. A shot B who was
mortally wounded. What, if any, is the criminal
liability of A? Explain.
It depends. If A killed B only to save C from
being killed by B, A was justified in doing so. But
if A killed B to enable him to marry Bs wife, the
third requisite of defense of stranger is lacking
as he was induced by evil motive.
If his purpose was indeed to enable him to marry
Bs wife, then A committed frustrated homicide.
A performed all the acts of execution which
would produce the felony of homicide as a
consequence but did not produce it by reason of

a cause independent of his will. The wound was
mortal and is sufficient to cause the death of B.
5. A while supervising the treshing of his palay in
his rice field, saw B carrying away a sack of
palay, A shouted at B to stop and return the
sack of palay, but B continued to run away with
it. A picked up a piece of hard wood and threw it
at B who was hit and seriously injured. Is A
criminally liable for the injuries inflicted upon B?
Explain.
No, he is not liable. A was acting in the lawful
exercise of a right because under the Civil Code,
the owner or lawful possessor of a thing has the
right to exclude any person from enjoyment and
disposal thereof. In that regard, he may use such
force as may be reasonably necessary to repel
or prevent an actual or threatened unlawful
physical invasion or usurpation of his property.
6. In the prosecution of a boy of 17 years of age,
the public prosecutor succeeded in proving the
case of theft against the accused. There was no
evidence that the accused, at the time of the
commission of the crime, did not understand the
consequences of his act. If you were the judge
trying the case, would you acquit or convict the
accused. Explain your answer.
I will acquit the accused. The presumption is that
the minor acted without discernment. The
prosecution has the burden to prove the
existence of discernment on the part of the
accused and they failed to do so. Absent proof
that the boy acted with discernment, he is
exempt from criminal liability.
7. If the faithful wife committed adultery in the
conjugal dwelling, is dwelling aggravating?
It depends. If the paramour is not living in the
same dwelling, it is aggravating because besides
the wifes breach of the fidelity she owes her
husband, she and the paramour also violated the
sanctity of the conjugal home.
If the paramour is also living in the same house,
dwelling is not aggravating as both the wife and
paramour had a right to be in the conjugal
dwelling.
8. A previously served sentence for less serious
physical injuries, punishable by arresto mayor.
PAGE 11

He is now convicted of estafa, punishable by
prision
correctional.
What
aggravating
circumstance do you find in this case? Explain.
differ as to the second way of committing

violation of domicile.
As to persons liable
None. First, it cannot be reiteracion because the

penalty attached to the first offense is lighter
than that of the second offense. Second, it
cannot be recidivism because estafa and
physical injuries are not contained in the same
title of the Revised Penal Code.
The offender in trespass to dwelling is any

private person. On the other hand, the offender
in violation of domicile is any public officer or
employee.
9. What would be the crime if a private individual

detained another for some legal ground and
failed to deliver the person detained to the
proper authority within the time specified in Art.
125 of the Code? Explain.
12. A removed the radio of B from the car of the

latter and began to leave the place. On the way,
B met A and having recognized the radio, B
asked A where he had gotten it; but A drew out
and opened his knife and threatened to kill B.
What crimes were committed by A? Explain your
answer.
The private individual will be guilty of illegal

detention. While the private individual may make
an arrest, he has a duty to deliver the person to
the police officer without unnecessary delay. If
he fails to do so, he will be liable for illegal
detention. He cannot be liable for arbitrary
detention as he is not a public officer.
10. A, having conceived the idea of killing her
husband, hired B, a stranger, to kill him with a
pistol furnished by C the brother of A. B shot the
husband of A to death. When C gave the pistol
to B, the former knew that his sister A had
induced B to kill her husband. What crime was
committed by B and C? Explain your answer.
B committed murder. B killed the deceased in
consideration of a price or promise of reward. C,
on the other hand, is an accomplice to the crime
of murder, not in the crime of parricide.
The qualifying circumstance of relationship does
not apply to B and C and hence should not
qualify the crime committed by them to parricide.
Here, only the wife is liable for parricide.
11. What is the difference between trespass to
dwelling and violation of domicile?
As to the manner of execution:
Violation of domicile is committed in two ways:
(1) by entering into the dwelling against the will
of the owner; and (2) by surreptitiously entering
said dwelling and refusing to leave after being
required to do so. On the other hand, trespass to
dwelling is committed by entering the dwelling
against the will of the owner. The two crimes
A committed theft and grave threats. The crime

of theft was consummated when A was able to
take the radio of B from the car. The threat to kill,
on the other hand, did not become a constitutive
element of robbery with violence or against
intimidation of persons as the intimidation was
employed by A after the taking of the radio of B.
13. A requested a stenographer in the office of the

treasurer to pay his land tax and gave him
P1,000.00. The stenographer, instead of paying
the amount to the treasurer for A, spent the
money, took the land tax receipt of his father,
erased the name of A and gave it to him,
representing that it was his official receipt. What
crime was committed by the stenographer?
The stenographer committed two crimes: estafa
and falsification of an official document, the land
tax receipt. One of the acts of falsification is the
altering of a genuine document which changes
its meaning. Here, the falsification was not
necessary to commit estafa. Instead, the
falsification was committed to conceal the crime
of estafa. That being the case, he is liable for
both estafa and falsification of an official
document.
14. Is there falsification of private document through
reckless imprudence if there is no actual
damage? Supposed that there is actual damage
caused? Explain your answers.
Absent actual damage, there must be at least
intent to cause damage. Imprudence implies the
PAGE 12

lack of such intent. Hence, there is no
falsification of private document through
reckless imprudence.
But if there is actual damage caused, it is the
result, not the intention that becomes important.
As such, there is a crime of falsification of
private document through reckless imprudence
committed.
15. A gave B a policeman, P10,000 because the
latter agreed to steal a certain firearm from the
property custodian of the Police Department of
the city, the said firearm having been
confiscated from A for possessing the same
without license. In consideration of the P10,000,
B stole the firearm and gave it to A. Do you
believe that B is liable for direct bribery,
considering he was a public officer and he
agreed to perform an act constituting a crime?
No, B is not liable for direct bribery. The act
which B agreed to perform, which is to steal the
firearm and thereby committing theft, is not
connected with the performance of his official
duties. Lacking this element, direct bribery is not
committed even if he accepted the gift.
If your answer is in the negative, what crime was
committed by A? Why?
A committed theft as a principal by induction. He
is not liable for corruption of a public officer
because in order for the giver of the gift to be
held liable for such crime, the public officer must
have committed bribery.
Suppose that in the preceding question, A gave
the money to the property custodian, also an
employee of the city government, who agreed to
give the firearm to him, what would be the
crime? Explain.
The crime committed is direct bribery. Here, the
property custodian agreed to commit an act
connected with the performance of his official
duty; that is, malversation by permitting another
person to take public property.
Suppose that the property custodian was not
able to give the firearm to A because he was
relieved as property custodian after he received
the money. Is the property custodian liable for
direct bribery? Why?
Yes, the property custodian is still liable for

direct bribery. The mere concurrence of offer
and acceptance consummates the crime of
bribery.
Suppose the property custodian gave the
firearm to A soon after he had received the money
from A. How many crimes were committed by the
public officer? Why?
Two crimes were committed: Direct bribery and
Malversation. This is so because the Revised
Penal Code provides that the penalty for direct
bribery shall be in addition to the penalty
corresponding to the crime agreed upon, if the
same shall have been committed.
16. A was granted conditional pardon after four
years of the six years of imprisonment imposed
on him by the court. The condition was that he
should not commit any crime in the future. One
year after, he was accused and found guilty of
concealing a deadly weapon punishable under a
special law and was sentenced to pay a fine. By
order of the President, A was reincarcerated and
required to serve the unexpired portion of his
sentence of six years. A filed a petition for
habeas corpus claiming and contending that he
was illegally detained, because he was never
prosecuted and tried for violation of the
conditional pardon under Art. 159. Will his
petition prosper? Why?
No, the petition will not prosper. According to
the Revised Administrative Code, the President
may order the arrest and reincarceration of the
person who violated the conditions of the
pardon without previous judicial trial. It is not
necessary to prosecute him and find him liable
under Article 159 of the Revised Penal Code.
17. A entered the house of B for the purpose of

stealing some personal property inside. When
he was about to enter the room of the house of
B, A saw B inside the room cleaning his pistol. A
hid himself on the other side of the wall of the
room, waiting for B to leave the room. While
cleaning the gun, B happened to touch the
trigger thereof causing it to explode and a slug
was fired to the direction of the wall where A
was hiding. The slug passed through the wall
and killed A. During the investigation made by
the police, it appeared that B had no license to
PAGE 13

possess the firearm. What is the criminal liability
of B, if any? Explain your answer.
B is not criminally liable. A person is not
criminally liable for the death or injuries caused
by his reckless or negligent acts to trespassers
whose presence in the premises he is not aware
of. In People v. Meir, a boy clang to the side of
the vehicle for a joyride, without the knowledge
and consent of the defendant and was crashed
against a concrete post of a gate when the
vehicle passed through it. In that case, the CA
held that no man can be punished for not taking
precaution to prevent injuries to persons who
act at his back.
18. What is reckless imprudence?
Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, but
without malice, doing or failing to do an act, from
which material damage results by reason of
inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the
person doing or failing to do the act.
19. What is simple imprudence?
Simple imprudence consists in the lack of
precaution as can be shown on those cases in
which the damage impending to be caused is not
immediate nor the danger clearly manifest.
2008-2009
1. A was prosecuted for murder. After reception of

prosecution evidence, the defense moved to
dismiss the case for failure of the prosecution to
present proof of motive against the accused.
Rule on the motion to dismiss filed by the
defense.
A committed attempted homicide. A did not

perform all the acts of execution which would
produce the felony of homicide as he failed to
inflict a mortal wound sufficient to cause Bs
death.
3. A pressed on Bs face a piece of cloth soaked in
chemical which would induce her to sleep while
holding her body tightly under weight of his own.
H, however, managed to free herself and ran
away. A was prosecuted for attempted rape. Will
the charge against A prosper?
No, the charge will not prosper. A failed to
perform all acts of execution which should
produce the felony because H managed to free
herself and ran away, a cause other than his own
spontaneous desistance.
4. Article 10 of the Revised Penal Code provides
for the suppletory application of tis provisions to
special laws. May subsidiary imprisonment be
imposed in convictions for violation of B.P. 22?
Yes. According to SC Administrative Circulcar
No. 13-2001, if the accused is unable to pay the
fine imposed by the trail court, there is no legal
obstacle to the application of the Revised Penal
Code provisions on subsidiary imprisonment.
5. A had a shouting match with B. A then drew a

fan knife from his pocket. B reacted by drawing
his revolver and firing once at A who was
injured. When charged, B invoked self-defense.
Rule on Bs claim of self-defense.
I shall deny the motion to dismiss. Motive is

immaterial where the identity of the accused has
been established. Further, motive is not an
essential element of murder, and, as such, does
not have to be proved by the prosecution.
Bs claim of self-defense must fail. The element

of unlawful aggression is absent in this case. In
order to consider that unlawful aggression was
actually committed, it is necessary that an attack
or material aggression, an offensive act
positively determining the intent of the
aggressor to cause an injury shall have been
made. Mere threatening attitude is not unlawful
aggression. In People v. Guy-sayco, the mere
brandishing of a knife does not constitute
unlawful aggression.
2. A fired at B several times with his handgun. Due

to poor aim, and agility of B, the latter only
sustained a wound on the left arm that was not
sufficient to cause his death. What crime was
committed by A? Explain.
6. A discovered his wife B to be no longer a virgin

during their honeymoon. Since then, A would
routinely subject B to verbal and physical abuse.
One day, B feeling she had enough of As
maltreatment, took a kitchen knife and stabbed
PAGE 14

A while the latter was sleeping. Is B criminally
liable for the death of A? Explain.
B is not criminally liable. Under RA 9262, those
found to be suffering from battered women
syndrome do not incur criminal liability
notwithstanding the absence of any of the
elements for justifying circumstances of selfdefense under the Revised Penal Code. Here, B
is a battered woman as she is repeatedly
subjected to forceful physical and psychological
behaviour by her husband.
7. A, a minor over 15 but below 18 years old is one
of the brightest in her class in school. One day,
she was arrested for prostitution. Will the charge
against A prosper? Explain.
It is my opinion that the charge against A will
prosper. A child above 15 years of age but
below 18 years of age shall be exempt from
criminal liability unless she he/she acted with
discernment. In this case, A is one of the
brightest in her class. Hence, the prosecution
may be able to prove that she acted with
discernment in engaging in prostitution.
8. A, the town mayor, detained B on suspicion of
being a thief but was released after half an hour.
What crime, if any, did A commit? Explain.
A committed arbitrary detention. A detained B on
mere suspicion and without reasonable ground.
The fact that he was released after half an hour
is immaterial as the law does not fix any
minimum period of detention. In US. V.
Braganza, public officers were convicted of
arbitrary detention even if the offended party
was detained for less than half an hour.
9. If there is absent actual physical restraint, would
the offender still be liable for arbitrary detention?
Explain.
Yes, the offender will still be liable. Even if
persons detained could move freely, if their
movement is restrained by presence of guards
or armed men and they could not escape for fear
of being apprehended or harmed, there is still
arbitrary detention.
10. What crime is committed by a group of 40
persons who gathered in a meeting for the
purpose of committing cattle rustling in a nearby
ranch? Explain.
None. They cannot be liable for illegal assembly

as the crime requires that the persons present a
the meeting must be armed. Here, they are
simply going to conspire to commit qualified
theft and such is not punishable.
11. A, while being placed under arrest by a
policeman for intoxication and unruly behaviour
in a public place, pulled his unlicensed pistol and
struck the policeman on the head which caused
him to fall to the ground. A was subdued
thereafter by some civilians who witnessed the
incident. To what crime or crimes would A be
held liable for? Explain.
A committed the crime of direct assault. Direct
assault is committed when the person in
authority is attacked on occasion of such
performance of official duty. Here, the policeman
was conducting an arrest.
If serious or less serious physical injuries were
incurred by the policeman, the crime would be
the complex crime of direct assault with serious
or less serious physical injuries as the case may
be. If only slight physical injuries are sustained
by the policeman, the slight physical injuries are
absorbed in direct assault.
12. A was found in possession of a forged deed of
sale of parcel of land. No direct evidence of the
authorship of the forgery could be secured. Will
a charge of falsification against A prosper?
Explain.
No, the charge of falsification will not prosper.
According to People v. Sendaydiego, the rule is
that if a person had in his possession a falsified
document and he made use of it taking
advantage of it and profiting thereby, the
presumption is that he is the material author of
the falsification. Here, no such presumption
arises as A only found the forged deed of sale
and did not made use of it.
13. A brought a ring to sell to C. C liked the ring but
because C was in a hurry to catch the plane for
Cebu, C told A to leave the ring to her husband
and return after two days. When A returned to
Bs house, the latter issued a currently dated
check as payment. When A deposited Bs
check, the same was dishonoured for DAIF
(drawn against insufficient funds). To what crime
or crimes, if any, would B be liable? Explain.
PAGE 15

B will be liable for violation of B.P. 22 only. B
cannot be liable for estafa under Article 315 para.
2(d) because the check here was issued in
payment of an obligation contracted prior to the
issuance of the check. It was in payment of a
pre-existing obligation as the ring was already
left with the husband. On the other hand, B.P. 22
punishes the issuance of a check that is
subsequently dishonoured, even in payment of a
pre-existing obligation.
17. A, a thief surreptitiously entered the house of B

While inside the house, A saw B cleaning his
pistol, A hid himself on the side of the wall of the
room waiting for B to leave. B, while cleaning the
loaded gun, accidentally pulled the trigger. The
slug hit the wall where A was hiding. A died from
the gunshot wound. During the police
investigation, it appeared that B had no license
to possess the firearm. What crime or crimes, if
any, did A commit? Explain.
14. As dead body was discovered in his house that

was burned down. B, the lone witness, saw X
set on fire As house. What crime or crimes, if
any, did X commit?
A committed trespass to dwelling. The elements

of trespass to dwelling are present in this case.
First, the thief is a private person. Second, he
entered the dwelling of B. Third, the surreptitious
entrance of A to the house is against Bs will.
X committed only simple arson. Under P.D. No.

1613, the burning of houses is considered
simple arson. The decree further provides that if
by reason or on occasion of arson, death results,
the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall
be imposed and the crime of homicide is
absorbed. There is no complex crime of arson
with homicide.
15. A obtained a divorce under the Mohammedan
custom and later contracted a second marriage.
The first husband sued A or bigamy. A raised
the defense of mistake of fact as she honestly
believed that she was already free to do so by
virtue of the decree of divorce Is As defense
tenable? Explain.
No, As defense is untenable. According to the
case of People v. Bitdu, a divorce cannot be had
except in that court upon which the state has
conferred jurisdiction, and then only for those
causes and with those formalities which the
state has by statute prescribed. Under the Code
of Muslim Personal Laws, it is the Sharia Court
that must decree the divorce.
16. As application for leave monetization was
disapproved by his superiors. Displeased and
angered by his superiors disapproval, A pointed
a dirty finger on the latter. What crime, if any, did
A commit? Explain.
A committed simple slander by deed. Appearing
from the facts that act was employed by A to
express anger and displeasure at his superiors
for the disapproval of his leave monetization, the
act of pointing a dirty finger constitutes simple
slander by deed.
(Note: Compared to item 17 in the 2009-2010

exam, what is being asked here is the criminal
liability of the one who entered the house not the
person who accidentally fired the gun.)
18. A without detriment to himself failed to render
assistance to B whom he found in an
uninhabited place wounded and in danger of
dying. B, as a result died. To what crime, if any,
would A be liable? Explain.
A will be liable for homicide by abandonment.
Article 275 (abandonment of persons in danger)
as the Article punishes any person who
abandons one who is wounded or in danger of
death in an uninhabited place unless such
omission shall constitute a more serious
offense. Regalado opines that deliberate
abandonment is an act of commission, not of
omission, Thus, if the hapless person dies,
homicide is committed by abandonment.
19. A, a clerk of court, removed from the records of
a pending case two (2) P1,000.00 bills and
misappropriated it. What crime did A commit?
Explain
A committed infidelity of custody of documents.
When money bills are attached to the records as
exhibits and removed therefrom by a clerk of
court and misappropriated by him, the crime is
infidelity of custody of documents because the
money bills while still used as exhibits are
considered documents or papers. If the case is
terminated and the money bills are still kept and
the clerk of court misappropriated them, the
crime is malversation because the money bills
PAGE 16

are in the nature
government.
of
trust
funds
of
the
20. What are the corrupt practices of public officers

declared unlawful under RA 3019 (the Anti-Graft
and Corrupt Practices Act)
i. Knowingly approving or granting any license in

favour of any person not qualify or not legally
entitled
k. Divulging valuable information of a
confidential character acquired by his office or
by him on account of his official position
They are as follows:

a. Persuading, inducing or influencing another
public officer to perform an act constituting a
violation of rules and regulations or an offense
in connection with the official duties of the latter.
GOOD LUCK
b. Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving

any gift in connection with any contract or
transaction between the government and any
other party wherein the public officer in his
official capacity has to intervene.
c. Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving
any gift from any person for having secured or
obtained or to secure and obtain any
government permit or license.
d. Accepting or having any member of his family
accept employment in a private enterprise which
as pending official business with him during the
pendency thereof or within 1 year from
termination.
e. Causing any undue injury to any party or
giving any private party any unwarranted
benefits
f. Neglecting or refusing, after due demand,
without sufficient justification, to act within
reasonable time any matter pending before him
for the purpose of obtaining some pecuniary or
material benefit or favoring his own interest or
that of others
g. Entering on behalf of the Government into any
contract or transaction manifestly and grossly
disadvantageous to the same.
h. Directly or indirectly having financial or
pecuniary interest in any business in connection
with which he intervenes or takes part in his
official capacity
i. Directly or indirectly becoming interested, for
personal gain, in any transaction or act requiring
the approval of a board of which he is a member
PAGE 17

Crim Law Review Tips

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Crim Law Review Tips

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW TIPS

PIERRE MARTIN DE LEON REYES

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS

According to People vs. Dumlao, when

If the offer is not accepted by the public

3. What crime, if any, is committed by a private

According to U.S. v. Ponte and People v.

He who kills an illegitimate ascendant or

A is liable for homicide and attempted

Article 247 is not applicable when the

PIERRE MARTIN DE LEON REYES

Murder and unintentional abortion

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW TIPS

Attempted qualified theft

The servant is a principle by indispensable

In attempted or frustrated homicide, the

Robbery with force upon things

PIERRE MARTIN DE LEON REYES

Robbery with force upon things is committed

Since the taking was accomplished without

A person who misappropriated the thing

Alarms and scandals

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW TIPS

In order to fall under Article 318 (Other

A and the servant are liable for theft

A is not criminally liable because the crime

Yes, because the woman was

The rape was already consummated upon

PIERRE MARTIN DE LEON REYES

15. A purchased merchandise and signed a

Violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22

When a check is issued in substitution of a

The husband here did not take the servant as

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW TIPS

According to People v. Lara, alcohol for

A is liable for grave threats because A

20. A left his loaded firearm on the chair within the

There was lack of intention to commit a

The crime is not rape because when the

When the act consists in materially taking

PIERRE MARTIN DE LEON REYES

Homicide through reckless imprudence

Yes, he shall be liable for frustrated

The buying of poison with food intended for

Impossible crime of abortion

If the act performed constitutes a violation of

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW TIPS

Yes, because pardon abolishes and

taking is deemed complete from the moment

No, the first marriage being void ab initio

No, because the power to extend executive

Under the Family Code, the parties cannot

24. A told B that C is a thief. C was previously

27. Is notice of dishonour of the check issued

__ A. No, as it was merely a statement of fact

Article 354 provides that every defamatory

The ability of the offender to freely dispose

PIERRE MARTIN DE LEON REYES

Notice of dishonor is require in estafa,

While the RPC prescribes that the drawer of

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW TIPS

According to People v. Villanueva, pointing a

Robbery with violence against person

According to People v. Lobitania, where