Crim Law 2 Compilation

CRIMINAL LAW II REVIEW TRANSCRIPTION FROM CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS TO THE END OF BOOK 2
depend on who the killer is. First, if the killer is the parent then it
Criminal law October 2, 2014
will fall under parricide.
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
Article 246. Parricide. - Any person who shall kill his father,
mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of
When you say crimes against persons it talks about killing. Now,
his ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse, shall be
there are several crimes that involve killing. Example A killed B.
guilty of parricide and shall be punished by the penalty of
What is the liability? You cannot answer that properly. You have
reclusion perpetua to death.
to determine several facts first.

So please take note of that. kasi pag sinabi mong parricide it is
You can answer that by the process of elimination. So first lets
always in the direct line tapos by blood. So even if utol mo
talk about yung baby pa, yung infanticide.
pinatay mo, is that direct line? By blood siguro pero not direct
Article 255. Infanticide. - The penalty provided for parricide
line! So therefore, it will not fall under parricide. Ang parricide
in Article 246 and for murder in Article 248 shall be imposed
kasi direct line and by blood. Always remember that. And take
upon any person who shall kill any child less than three
note, when you talk about father, mother, or child, the
days of age.
relationship may be legitimate or illegitimate.
If the crime penalized in this article be committed by the
BUT, when you talk about ascendant, descendants, and
mother of the child for the purpose of concealing her
including the spouse, the relationship must now be legitimate.
dishonor, she shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional
Otherwise, they will not be parricide. For example, common law
in its medium and maximum periods, and if said crime be
spouses, pinatay yung partner niya, that will not fall under
committed
parricide because the relationship is not legitimate.
for
the
same
purpose
by
the
maternal
grandparents or either of them, the penalty shall be prision

mayor.
Now, Supposing a husband asks someone to kill his spouse.

This is an example where there is a conspiracy diba? And as you
Killing of a person who is 3 days old. That is infanticide. Please
know na in conspiracy the act of one is the act of all. But here,
take note that it does not matter who the killer is because the
although the act one of one is the act of the other, THE CRIME
article says the offender can be any person. So if the offender is
OF ONE IS NOT THE CRIME OF THE OTHER. Because the
the parent or a stranger it does not matter as long as the victim
relationship factor is not there to the one who was assigned to
is less than 3 days old. Now, what point usually raised here is
kill the spouse.
that there are babies born na hindi full term.
parricide.
Meaning hindi
umabot ng 9 months. If they are killed right after they are born,
As to the husband, siya ang principal for
Kato iyang kasabot na killer, ibang crime yung sa
kanya kasi wala naman cya relationship dun sa pinatay.
infanticide parin yan kasi ang importante jan less than 3 days
old.
Now, next would be murder. Kasi nga process of elimination

tayo diba. So, kunwari hindi less than 3 days old, so wala na
Another issue there is when the accused will claim that the baby
infanticide.
had an intrauterine life of less than 7 months and was killed
parricide. So sa murder na tayo.
within 24 hours from the moment of birth. Pointing to an article
Article 248. Murder. - Any person who, not falling within the
in the civil code. Yung gud na if the baby survives within the 24
provisions of Article 246 shall kill another, shall be guilty of
hours he will be considered a person. Will that argument be
murder and shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its
valid? Well that article in the civil code start with the phrase
maximum period to death, if committed with any of the
FOR CIVIL PURPOSES. In other words that article will only
following attendant circumstances:
apply to civil cases.
Hindi rin father, mother, child, so hindi na rin
Para sa criminal cases, as far as the
revised penal code is concerned, bahala na kung unsa ang
1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior
intrauterine life diha basta when the baby is born and you killed
strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing
that baby na less than 3 days old pa, infanticide parin yan!
means to weaken the defense or of means or

persons to insure or afford impunity.
Now, when you look at the article it says there na ang penalty for
parricide and murder shall be imposed. Actually wala na yang
2. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise.
distinction kasi the penalty for murder and parricide are now the
same. Who ever the killer is, whether a stranger or the parent,
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,
the penalty will be the same and that is Reclusion perpetua to
shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or
Death.
assault upon a street car or locomotive, fall of an

airship, by means of motor vehicles, or with the use
Now, if the baby is more than 3 days old, he is still considered an

infant diba. Pero this time the crime is different na and It will
of any other means involving great waste and ruin.
4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated
So next topic would be the basic killing. Homicide. So if hindi
in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake,
mahulog sa infanticide, parricide, murder, then homicide na yan.
eruption
of
volcano,
destructive
cyclone,
Wait, please take note ha that under the child abuse law RA
epidemic or other public calamity.
7610, the killing of the child below 12 years old is punished by

5. With evident premeditation.
reclusion perpetua.
Kasi yung kanina, ung parricide, murder,
infanticide perpetua yan. Ang homicide naman is temporal. But

6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
if the victim if a child below 12 years old, the penalty would be
augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging
different, the penalty is perpetua.
or scoffing at his person or corpse.

Now, next would be ang pinaka sikat na provision ditto. Article
So murder is just killing someone outside of infanticide and
parricide but with qualifying circumstances.
247.
The qualifying
circumstances are provided in article 248. So if the killing is
Article 247. Death or physical injuries inflicted under
attended by any of those mentioned, then the crime because
exceptional circumstances. - Any legally married person
murder. So kung wala ang mga circumstances na yan, then it
who having surprised his spouse in the act of committing
will not fall under murder, dun yan mahuhulog sa homicide. So
sexual intercourse with another person, shall kill any of
always remember the process of elimination ha. Tingnan mo
them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter, or
muna if infanticide, if hindi pasok dun then check mo sa
shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury, shall
parricide, if hindi parin then you check if murder if nandun ba
suffer the penalty of destierro.
yung mga circumstances mentioned, if wala then homicide nay

If he shall inflict upon them physical injuries of any other
an.
kind, he shall be exempt from punishment.

Now, back to murder. If you have noticed, the circumstances
listed are the same as those listed as aggravating circumstances
These
rules
shall
be
applicable,
under
the
same
sa article 14. So, the principles that we have talked about article
circumstances, to parents with respect to their daughters
14 are the same principles that will apply if we talk about the
under eighteen years of age, and their seducer, while the
circumstances in murder. So lahat yun, like treachery. Diba
daughters are living with their parents.
dapat the victim should not be in the position to defend himself

etc. so lahat un, lahat ng principles dun sa articles 14, you apply
Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution
those principles when you qualify the crime to murder.
of his wife or daughter, or shall otherwise have consented to

the infidelity of the other spouse shall not be entitled to the
What is different lang is yung etong number 6. yung scoffing or
benefits of this article.
outraging at the person or the corpse. that is not found in article

14 diba. So its not an aggravating circumstance, it is a qualifying
Now, remember ha na when you talk about 247, pwede
circumstance. That is one circumstance that qualifies the crime
ang death OR physical injuries dito. So magapply parin ang 247
to murder but is not provided in article 14.
even if you were not able to kill the victim. Kahit physical injuries
lang ang na inflict mo, pwede parin gamitin ang article na ito.
Ok, one question would be what if marami ang qualifying

circumstances present in the killing? Kasi like I said, anyone of
Ok, we said that 247 is not realy a crime. Pero ang tanong ko
them is sufficient to qualify the crime to murder.
Pano if
naman is if it is not a crime, bakit nakalagay na man jan na shall
magsama sama yan? Like if may treachery tapos may reward
suffer a penalty of destierro. And diba ang basic principal natin
tapos may scoffing pa and etc. sa pano yan? ANG RULE JAN
diba is nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege, and diba if there is a
IS PILI KA LANG NG ISA TO QUALIFY TAPOS THE REST YOU
penalty attached then there is a crime. Now, when you kill
USE THEM AS AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES.
Iba iba
someone you will not be charged under article 247! You will be
man yun. kasi diba qualifying circumstances are those which
charged by murder or parricide. BUT you can use this article 247
change the nature of the crime. They do not exclude others.
as a DEFENSE.
They are not mutually exclusive. You can still use the others. So,
circumstances of article 247. sabihin mo na I killed them
one is used to qualify then the other is used to increase the
DURING the act of sexual intercourse. So pasok ka na diba? So
penalty to the maximum as long as you do not exceed the
you use this as a defense. So klaro na ha? DURING dapat
maximum penalty provided for by law diba.
diba?
Now, please do not forget also dun sa criminal procedure na all
So pano if BEFORE the act? Example, Pag uwi mo sa bahay,
those circumstances should be ALLEGED otherwise they cannot
may narinig ka sa kwarto.
be considered to qualify the offense. Kelangan andun yan. If
Pumasok ka tapos pinag babaril mo silang dalawa. Now, nasa
wala, then you cannot charge murder.
court ka na tapos sabi mo sa judge your honor I invoke article
Ang sabi mo I killed them under the
Pag silip mo naghubad na sila.
247 as a defense. Tapos tinanong ka ng judge, did you catch
Distinguish that from another case. Nakita niya sa bahay niya, so
them during the act of sexual intercourse? Ang sabi mo
in the act. Pero umalis siya, naghanap muna siya ng weapon,
padulong na man toh your honor kay nag hubo na gani sila. The
bolo. Unya balik siya. Sabi ng Court, that is not covered.
judge will ask you again, BUT did you catch them DURING
sexual intercourse? Jan na papasok ang problema mo! YOU
But again, the most famous of them all, Abarca. Kato kay
MUST CATCH THEM IN THE ACT OF SEXUAL INTERCOUSE!
nihawa man pud siya. Kato kay nasurprise niya, pero nasurprise
pud siya kay napusilan siya. Abtik pud tong cholokoy. Lakaw
Marami nga ang pumapalag dito eh, kelangan mo pa bang
siya, nangita pud ug weapon. Sabi ng Court in this case,
antayin na pumasok yung ari before mo patayin? That seems to
proximate pa rin yan. There is still a relation of cause and effect.
be unfair diba? Also take note na this would apply to both
The duration there was more or less one hour yata. Doon niya
husband and wife ha.
na kita sa mahjongan, dun niya pinatay.
Ang wife, pwede rin nya iinvoke ito.
Anyway, that is the rule ha. You have to remember this is still
killing somebody kasi. Actually, this is a benefit kasi isipin mo
So take note of these cases. Yan yung "immediately thereafter"
naka patay ka tapos ang penalty mo lang is destierro. So, when
na problematic diyan. Walang problem kung during kay klaro
you kill someone and avail of article 247, it will be STRICTLY
man. Wala ding problema kung immediately thereafter na literal.
CONSTRUED against you. So, that is a basic requirement, that
Ang problema mo niyan, kung hindi doon sa situs, doon sa ibang
you must catch them in the act of sexual intercourse.
So if
place na. Whether it's a continuing event or not. Kasi if it can be
before sexual intercourse, kanang naghubo pa sila, dili pa na
considered continuing, Abarca ka. Kung hindi, pasensya. You
pwede. Kahit na sabi mo na ABOUT TO or very very near na
can avail of the other circumstances, pero you cannot avail of
your honor, hindi parin pwede yan! Unsaon ta man wala pa man
247.
nisulod.
There's one more issue pala dun. Kasi, in Abarca, meron siyang
Now, going back, basic requirement is that you must surprise
tinamaan na ibang mga tao aside from the cholokoy. Did he
them in the act of sexual intercourse. Now, what is this phrase
commit a crime against them? Remember the principle in Article
or immediately thereafter doing here? So you mean pwede
4, that one is responsible for all the direct, natural and logical
pala na supposing you catch them na naka bihis na or andun pa
consequences of one's action. That is the doctrine of proximate
pero naka higa na, naga yosi2x na lang. They were just lying
cause. But remember always, that that applies if you are
down na. pasok ka ba sa sa 247? NO! kasi na dapat in the act of
committing a felony. You are committing a crime, kung anong
sexual intercourse.
So what is the meaning of this phrase
mangyari diyan, that which you did not intend, you are still
immediately thereafter? THIS TALKS ABOUT THE KILLING.
responsible. You are still responsible even if that was not the
The law authorizes you to kill them after you have caught them
crime which you intended.
IN THE ACT. So you can kill them after. SO YOU MUST FIRST
CATCH
THEM
DURING
THE
ACT
OF
SEXUAL
In this case of Abarca, he will responsible for the injuries of the
INTERCOURSE, THEN YOU HAVE THE OPTION TO KILL
other people there if he was committing a felony. Kay Abarca, he
THEM DURING OR IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER.
can avail of the benefit of 247, but he should not have been
negligent. Such that, doon siya pinasok sa reckless imprudence.
Now, what is the meaning of the word immediately? How is it
Kaya hindi siya liable kasi he is considered as not committing a
used in the provision? Does it meaning pag human jud mismo
felony, so Article 4 will not apply.
sa jer2x? May isang case jan, yung case ni Alano, yung misis
nya nag paalam na alis muna ako may bibilhin lang ako sa
tindahan.
So in this case of People v. Wagas:
Now, yung husband nagtaka na kasi ang tagal
bumalik ng asawa nya. So he went looking for his wife. Pag
The law is strict on this, authorizing as it does, a man to
dating nya dun sa may bushes may narinig siya. Pag silip nya
chastise her, even with death. But killing the errant
nakita nya dun ang asawa nya.
So pagkakita nya, tumakbo
spouse as a purification must is so severe as that it can
yung lalaki, so he went after the guy pero hindi nya naabutan
only be justified when the unfaithful spouse if caught in
kasi ang bilis tumakbo. So what did he do? He went back to the
flagrante delicto; and it must be resorted to only with
bushes pero wala na dun ang asawa nya. So he went home.
great caution so much so that the law requires that it be
Pag dating nya sa bahay, andun ang asawa nya. Dun pa nya
inflicted only during the sexual intercourse or immediately
gibirahan. Gi patay nya asawa nya dun. So is that covered under
thereafter.
the phrase immediately thereafter? Yes! That is a continuous

sequence. So ang immediately thereafter is not literal. As long
Ito na mang illegal possession of firearms, RA 8294. What you
as proximate dapat. There is that relation of cause and effect. It
need to know here, when you use a firearm in the killing,
is a continuous offense.
homicide or murder, aggravating na yan. Wala nang separate

crime of illegal possession. It serves to aggravate the killing.
Take note also of unlicensed firearms because it includes
When in a tumultuous affray as referred to in the preceding
firearms with license but expired. Pareho ra na.
article, only serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the

participants thereof and the person responsible thereof
Now, let's go to 251, Tumultuous affray.
cannot be identified, all those who appear to have used

violence upon the person of the offended party shall suffer
Art. 251. Death caused in a tumultuous affray. When,
the penalty next lower in degree than that provided for the
while several persons, not composing groups organized for
physical injuries so inflicted.
the common purpose of assaulting and attacking each other
When the physical injuries inflicted are of a less serious
reciprocally, quarrel and assault each other in a confused
nature and the person responsible therefor cannot be
and tumultuous manner, and in the course of the affray
identified, all those who appear to have used any violence
someone is killed, and it cannot be ascertained who actually
upon the person of the offended party shall be punished by
killed the deceased, but the person or persons who inflicted
arresto mayor from five to fifteen days.
serious physical injuries can be identified, such person or

persons shall be punished by prision mayor.
Now ito, physical injuries lang. Similar to 251, hindi mo malaman
If it cannot be determined who inflicted the serious physical
ngayon sino ang nag inflict ng physical injuries. So here, "all
injuries on the deceased, the penalty of prision correccional
those who appear to have used violence upon the person of the
in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed upon
offended party shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than
all those who shall have used violence upon the person of
that provided for the physical injuries so inflicted." So those who
the victim.
appear to have used violence shall be responsible.
You have to remember here pag muingon ug tumultuous affray,
So yung second paragraph, yung less serious nature, ang
grupo, daghan. Daghang tao, nagsinumbagay, binigyanay.
punishment is arresto mayor from five to fifteen days. Wala

gihapon ko kasabot ana hangtod karon. Ngano man? Unsa diay
"Quarrel and assault each other in a confused" - riot siya
ang arresto mayor? 1 month and 1 day to 6 months. Paano
kumbaga. Please be cautious also because not all riots will fall
naging arresto mayor yan? Pwede mong sabihin ito ang gi-
under this article. Kasi may mga riot diba between versus mga
impose ng law. Pero gi-menor dapat na. But when there is a
gang, Batang City Jail versus Sputnik gang. Klaro man na grupo
conflict, the law will always prevail.
sila pero ang dito kasi "not composing groups organized for the
common purpose of assaulting and attacking each other
Problema mo ngayon, less serious yan, paano kung slight? Ibig
reciprocally".
sabihin diyan, hindi gilagay ang slight, walang penalty. So the

intent is not to punish pag slight.
In other words, when you say tumultuous affray, it's really a free
for all. Diri, way klaro kinsay kalaban kinsay amigo. Pag rumble,
Art. 253. Giving assistance to suicide. Any person who
klaro man na kung unsan grupo sila. Dili sila tumultuous affray.
shall assist another to commit suicide shall suffer the

penalty of prision mayor; if such person leads his
Now, dito sa 251, may namatay. Here, the person cannot be
assistance to another to the extent of doing the killing
identified. Sabi "in the course of the affray someone is killed, and
himself, he shall suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal.
it cannot be ascertained who actually killed the deceased, but
However, if the suicide is not consummated, the penalty of
the person or persons who inflicted serious physical injuries can
arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods, shall be
be identified, such person or persons shall be punished by
imposed.
prision mayor." Kung hindi malaman sinong nakapatay, hanapin

mo ngayon kung sino yung nag inflict ng serious physical
It's a crime to assist someone to commit suicide. But the person
injuries.
himself who wants to commit suicide is not liable. Wala siyay

sala. Pero if you assist, to the extent of doing the killing, the
If it cannot be determined also who inflicted the serious physical
penalty is the same as homicide. Kasi, gipatay mo pa rin siya.
injuries, hanapin mo ngayon anyone who inflicted violence.
Pareho lang yan. Kung hindi yun ang extent, prision mayor.
Those are the persons you will hold liable.

And it does not matter who is the person giving assistance.
Please take note also that the person killed here need not be
Because the law says any person.
part of the affray. Kung bystander or nagtan-aw lang didto,

kasama yan dito.
Art. 254. Discharge of firearms. Any person who shall

shoot at another with any firearm shall suffer the penalty of
Now, 252.
prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods,

unless the facts of the case are such that the act can be
Art. 252. Physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray.
held to constitute frustrated or attempted parricide, murder,
homicide or any other crime for which a higher penalty is

prescribed by any of the Articles of this Code.
Take note that the penalty is lower if the crime is committed to

conceal the dishonor. Usually ito nung unang panahon kasi dati
Discharge, we talked about this already. This should be without
pag sabihin buntis ka tapos di kilala yung tatay, big deal yan. So
intent to kill. Although it says you "shoot at another". So unsa
some people resort to abortion. The penalty is lower. Included
man diay na? Tapos walay intent to kill. Kamo na lang sabot
diyan sa Article yung parents.
kung kailan yang mangyari. Imong gipusil ang isa ka tao without
intent to kill.
Art. 260. Responsibility of participants in a duel. The

penalty of reclusion
So let's go to Abortion.
temporal shall be imposed upon any person who shall kill

his adversary in a duel.
Abortion, nasa loob pa, infanticide, lumabas na.
If he shall inflict upon the latter physical injuries only, he

shall suffer the penalty provided therefor, according to their
Art. 256. Intentional abortion. Any person who shall
nature.
intentionally cause an
In any other case, the combatants shall suffer the penalty of
abortion shall suffer:
arresto mayor, although no physical injuries have been
1. The penalty of reclusion temporal, if he shall use any
inflicted.
violence upon the person of the pregnant woman.

2. The penalty of prision mayor if, without using violence,
he shall act without the consent of the woman.
3. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods, if the woman shall have consented.
Now itong itong Duel, I don't think meron pang mafile-an niyan
ngayon. Kasi a duel is a formal combat. May mga ritual yan.
Have you seen the movie Barry Lyndon? Yan ang duel. Count to
10, lakad kayo. Tapos you choose your weapon. Meron kang
mga alalay. Formal yan. Mga karaan yan.
Art. 257. Unintentional abortion. The penalty of prision

correccional in its
Art. 261. Challenging to a duel. The penalty of prision
minimum and medium period shall be imposed upon any
correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon
person who shall cause an abortion by violence, but
any person who shall challenge another, or incite another to
unintentionally.
give or accept a challenge to a duel, or shall scoff at or

decry another publicly for having refused to accept a
When you say intentional, the intent really is to abort. The
challenge to fight a duel.
penalties there will differ.

It's also a crime to challenge someone to a duel. Also included is
The usual case given: The husband inflicts violence on the wife
"to scoff at or decry another publicly for having refused to accept
who is pregnant. Tapos the wife dies and she was pregnant so
a challenge to fight a duel." Ano yan? Nanganchaw. Ingnan
aborted. Anong crime yan? You have to distinguish. Kung
nimog "Waa talawan! Gichallenge sa duel, hadlok man."
talagang sinadya na mag-inflict ng violence para ma-abort, iba

yun. Doon ka sa intentional. Dito, unintentional. But there is
Criminal Law Review October 3, 2014
violence inflicted on the wife, kaya lang yung abortion diyan is

unintentional. But you have the rule in complex crime wherein a
PHYSICAL INJURIES: the common perception of people is that
single act results in two or more grave or less grave felonies. So,
there are 3 kinds diba, serious, less serious and slight. Under
parricide and unintentional abortion.
physical injuries, Chapter 2, the 1st kind of injury is actually

MUTILATION. What is Mutilation? Under 262- any person who
Art. 258. Abortion practiced by the woman herself of by her
shall intentionally mutilate another by depriving him either totally
parents. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium
or partially, of some essential organ of reproduction.
and maximum periods shall be imposed upon a woman who

shall practice abortion upon herself or shall consent that
any other person should do so.
Here, we have 2 kinds of MUTILATION:

1.) The 1st one is Castration- yan yung you deprive
Any woman who shall commit this offense to conceal her
somebody of an essential organ of reproduction. If you
dishonor, shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in
deprive somebody of that, dili nah sya ordinary physical
its minimum and medium periods.

If this crime be committed by the parents of the pregnant
woman or either of them, and they act with the consent of
said woman for the purpose of concealing her dishonor, the
offenders shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in
its medium and maximum periods.
injuries, pinakaserious jud nah.

2.) Now the other is Mayhem. Diba in Castration is
essential organ, yung mayhem naman is ANY OTHER
PART OF THE BODY other than the essential organ of
reproduction. The limbs, arms, legs. That is mayhem
although it is also called mutilation.
Now, suppose during a fight, the essential organ of reproduction
Take note of the word or which is disjunctive. Now, itong
is cut off. Naay samurai, naigoh ang essential organ. Unsa man
ginasabing work, this really means vocation. Hindi ibig sabihin
i-file nimo? When you say mutilation, the object, the purpose,
na trabaho talaga, kaya nga may phrase na habitually engaged.
the intent is to deprive the victim of the essential organ of

reproduction or in the case of mayhem, to deprive the victim of
In number 3 (of Article 263), the person injured shall have
any other part of the body. That should be the intent to fall under
become deformed or shall have lost any part of his body, or
mutilation, because if that is not the intent then it would fall under
shall have lost the use thereof. When you say any part of the
the other physical injuries. Hanapin na lang dun, maraming
body, it is OTHER THAN THE PRINCIPAL MEMBERS OF THE
klaseng physical injuries kasi.
BODY mentioned by paragraph 2. Ano man ang kasali sa

paragraph 2, yung mga arms, legs, ganyan.Ayaw apila ang ulo
Now, Article 263, eto na yung start nung physical injuries that
ha kay kung wala na ulo, dili na mabuhi. Ano yung any part of his
many people know. In 263 which is SERIOUS PHYSICAL
body other than the principal members? Pwede na yung fingers.
INJURIES. Iba-ibang klase ito, iba-iba ang penalty sa kind of
Does this include the use of the THUMB? Finger man kaha nah
injury inflicted. What is common here in all these kinds of
siya. Pero there is a case, Spanish jurisprudence that if it is the
physical injuries is the manner of inflicting the physical injuries.
thumb, it would fall under paragraph 2. Kasi hindi ka na
If you look at the first part, yan yung manner.
makahawak niyan eh. It is a very important principal member.

Hindi ka na makatext diba.
Article 263. Serious physical injuries- Any person who shall

wound, beat, or assault another shall be guilty of the crime of
In the case of Reullo, its an old case, 31 Phil 484. Because, ang
physical injuries.
labas nito, he was permanently disabled from performing his

customary work. Sabi ng court, this is covered by paragraph 2
Now, the penalty would depend on the kind of injury that
NOT paragraph 3. Eto dito, yang Reullo na yan, permanently
would be inflicted in wounding, beating or assaulting the victim.
disabled siya so hindi na siya maka-farm. So pinasok siya sa
In number one, prision mayor ang penalty if in consequence, the
par.2 and the basis was Spanish jurisprudence, a Spanish case
injured person shall become insane, imbecile, impotent, or
of a clerk suffering injuries to his right hand which impaired the
blind. So, its really serious because gikulata nimo and the result
flexibility of his finger preventing him from performing his sworn
is nabuang, naging imbecile, naging impotent or naging blind,
duties. Anyway, just take note of that because usually pag
nabuta. Now, how do you distinguish the impotency referred to
sinabing fingers, they usually fall under paragraph 3, but then its
here from the mutilation or castration referred to by the previous
not according to the case.
article? The first would be yung INTENT nga. Anyway, lets look
at impotency, ano ba ang impotency, hindi ito yung vitamins ha.
Now, merong gisample or giquestion si Dean Inigo yung sa
Unsa man ning impotency, how do you distinguish that from
under Art.247. Diba yung sa 247, nasurprise in the act of sexual
castration?
essential organ
intercourse. Unya karon, instead of killing or inflicting serious
gideprive. Ang impotency does not necessarily refer to cutting or
physical injuries, ang ginawa ng husband, anah siya dali diri,
kapon/kapun. Alam niyo yung kapon? Now, ano yan? Is that
putlon nato nah imong esssential organ for reproduction. Karon
castration? Ano ang essential organ diyan for reproduction? The
gi-filan siya ug mutilation, sabi ng husband-Im claiming the
BALLS or the TIN-TIN? (student: the balls!) the balls? Now it
benefit of 247 because I caught them in the act of sexual
would be castration. Now, anyway, we go back to impotency.
intercourse and I inflicted physical injuries. Unya tan-awa ang
Impotency is NOT NECESSARILY removing or depriving,
Art.247, nakabutang diha, the offender shall kill or inflict serious
because as long as you lose your POWER TO PROCREATE
physical injuries, walang sinabing MUTILATION. Anyway, yan
yan ang impotency. Kasi pwede mang makacopulate ka pa pero
ang sinabi ni Dean Inigo, he cannot avail of the benefits of 247
kung makacopulate ka pa, pwede ka ring impotent pa rin
because this is mutilation and not serious physical injuries.
because you can no longer procreate. Now, when you say
Actually ambot lang kung meron talagang case because you
blindness pala, it should be TOTAL. Hindi yang isang mata or
could consider that na serious physical injuries kay part man siya
naging blurry ang vision mo, dapat total blindness itong sa 1 st
dito na Chapter. Just take note of that.
In castration, putulin talaga,
paragraph.
Next is (still paragraph 3) shall have been ill OR incapacitated
Now, itong pangalawa (referring to 2ng paragraph of Art.263),
for the performance of the work in which he was habitually
shall have lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell
engaged for a period of more than 90 days. Now, take note that
or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a leg, or
the word is or, its disjunctive. Either you are ILL or
shall have lost the use of any such member, or shall have
INCAPACITATED, pwede yan magfall under this paragraph. Kasi
become incapacitated for the work in which he was habitually
when you say ill, you need not be incapacitated to be ill. Kasi
engaged. Thats why in the 1st paragraph, both eyes talaga, total,
pwede ka ma-ill but you can still go to work. Basta ILL ka lang
kasi dito sa 2
nd
isang eye lang. The term member is used to
because you are wounded, assaulted or beaten, meron kang
describe the principal parts or principal members of the body.
injuries. That is illness but not necessarily incapacity. And ang
incapacity, unlike sa previous paragraph (par.2) na permanent,
ngipon, that cannot be restored. 3.) VISIBILITY OR ITS
dito (par.3) for a period of more than 90 days. So kung ang
CONSPICUOUS- in other words, if the injury that you claim,
incapacity mo is more than 90 days OR ang illness mo is more
resulted in deforming you or disfigurement, hindi yan pwede
than 90 days, pasok ka dito sa paragraph 3. So either/or.
magfall under deformity because it cannot be seen just by

anybody. So lacking 1 requirement, it will not be deformity.
In paragraph 4, merong illness OR incapacity for labor, but this

time the period is more than 30 days. So more than 30 up to 90.
Now under Article 264, nakalagay diyan without intent to kill.

Article
264.
Administering
injurious
substances
or
Eto namang next paragraph (still Art.263), eto yung tinatawag
beverages.The penalties established by the next preceding
na QUALIFIED PHYSICAL INJURIES. If the offense shall have
article shall be applicable to any person who, without intent to
been committed against any of the persons enumerated in
kill, shall inflict upon another any serious physical injury, by
Art.246 (yung would amount to parricide if killed- father, mother,
knowingly administering to him any injurious substances or
child whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants,
beverages or by taking advantage of his weakness of mind or
or descendants, or his spouse).
credulity.
And take note of that last paragraph: The provisions of the
Now, under Article 265- LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES.
preceding paragraph shall not be applicable to a parent who
This seems to be a continuation of serious physical injuries. Diba
shall inflict injuries upon his child by excessive chastisement.
ang serious kay 30 to 90 days. Dito, the offended party is
You have to relate that to RA 7610, naa didto ang mga acts
incapacitated for labor for 10 days or more. Now, take note of
which are punished.
this, in serious physical injuries- ILLNESS OR INCAPACITY. Dito

(Less serious), may incapacity parin pero ang kapartner is OR
Also, I forgot to mention: Going back to the manner, diba
shall require MEDICAL ATTENDANCE for the same period.
wounding, assaulting or beating. Now, although its not found
When you say medical attendance, dapat nito ACTUAL, you are
here in the article itself, please take note that 1 element for
receiving medical attendance for that period.
physical injuries to be present is that ONE ELEMENT SHOULD

BE LACKING. Parang ganun, baliktad, because you have to
Then, meron ka na namang QUALIFIED- (2nd paragraph)
distinguish this from attempted homicide or frustrated homicide.
whenever less serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted
What would be the distinction? Kasi sometimes the injury would
with the manifest intent to insult or offend the injured person, or
be graver or more serious and it would fall under serious
under circumstances adding ignominy to the offense.. and also
physical injuries. And sometimes the injury is not that serious
this (3rd paragraph) inflicted upon the offenders parents,
and it would fall under attempted homicide, na halos walang
ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers, or persons of rank, or
injury but the crime is graver. What would be the determining
persons in authority. Of course, the article itself says, that the
factor? The determining factor would be- INTENT TO KILL (this
requirement is that the assault upon these people should not
element should be lacking for physical injuries to be
constitute direct assault. Kasi if the attack or wounding,etc.
present). If there is intent to kill, kahit na isang finger lang diyan
would be such as to fall under direct assault, then doon ka sa
ang natanggal, pero dahil there is intent to kill, that would be
direct assault.
attempted homicide, a graver offense. Then here comes, serious

physical injuries, example natanggal ang kamay but there is NO
Article 266, SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES. We see incapacity
INTENT TO KILL, that will not fall under attempted homicide, dito
again for 1 to 9 days OR shall require medical attendance for the
ka lang sa serious physical injuries. Gituyo tang-tang ang tiil,
same period. Now, suppose you are not incapacitated and you
gituyo tang-tang ang tintin, diri nah siya mahulog, dili sa
do not also require medical attendance? Somebody beat you,
attempted homicide. Of course, you have other evidence for that,
gikulata ka, but you are not incapacitated pero naay mga lakra
to prove intent to kill, circumstances like the weapon used, asa
sa imong lawas because of the injury, hindi ka rin nagpa-medical
ka giigo, or the number of wounds received.
attendance within 1 to 9 days. Ngayon, more than 30 days have

passed and thats the time you decided to file the case. Take
Now, lets go back pala. Deformity actually refers to
note ha, you were not incapacitated and you did not require
disfigurement. When you say deformed, parang nahiwi, pero
medical attendance, but the wounds were there all along and
its not necessary na nahiwi, this really means na there is.. Diri
now its the 31st day. Kasi, more than 30 days na, and hindi ka
na lang ta sa 3 requirements para klaro: 1.) PHYSICAL
man incapacitated BUT YOU WERE ILL because of the wounds.
UGLINESS- diba when you say ugly, thats subjective diba. I will
Yan ang ibig sabihin nun. ILLNESS is NOT being equated to you
not file a case for deformity because it is tantamount to saying
requiring medical attendance. So in that case, although walang
Im ugly, bahala na mangita na lang kog lain nga paragraph diri,
Slight/Less serious physical injuries na ma-file because nga you
haha. As to what constitutes ugliness, bahala mo dira. 2.) ITS
were not incapacitated, you did not go to the doctor, on the 31 st
SOMETHING PERMANENT- meaning it cannot be restored or
day pwede ka nang magfile ng SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES
healed by nature. Kung nasumbagan ka, natangtang imong mga
kasi doon ka na papasok sa illness because you were ill for that
number of days, atleast 31 days. That is because medical
attendance is NOT REQUIRED is serious physical injuries.
genital or anal orifice of another person.
Now, ano tong ill-treat another by deed without causing any
"Article 266-B. Penalty. - Rape under paragraph 1 of the next

preceding article shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.
injury (Art.266 #3). Pwede ba yun? gi-ill treat mo na pero

walang injury. Ang example dito usually is sagpa, diba walang
injury. Unsa man ang injury anah? Ang imong pride, maulawan
"Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly

weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be
ka lang.
In relation to this, yung ANTI-HAZING LAW, RA 8049. Pareho
yan sa physical injuries. Ang difference actually is that the
penalties are increased substantially. So if you are given a
chance to file a case and it will fall under hazing, mas mataas
talaga sa hazing.
CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW
OCTOBER 8, 2014
TRANSCRIBED BY: ELA VELARDE
RAPE
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8353

AN ACT EXPANDING THE DEFINITION OF THE CRIME OF
RAPE, RECLASSIFYING THE SAME AS A CRIME AGAINST
PERSONS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ACT NO.
3815, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
REVISED PENAL CODE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the Philippines in Congress assembled:
Section 1. Short Title. - This Act shall be known as "The AntiRape Law of 1997."
Sec. 2. Rape as a Crime Against Persons. - The crime of rape
shall hereafter be classified as a Crime Against Persons
under Title Eight of Act No. 3815, as amended, otherwise
known as the Revised Penal Code. Accordingly, there shall be
incorporated into Title Eight of the same Code a new chapter
to be known as Chapter Three on Rape, to read as follows:
"When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim

has become insane, the penalty shall become reclusion
perpetua to death.
"When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by
reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty shall be
"When by reason or on the occasion ofthe rape, homicide is
committed, the penalty shall be death.
"The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape
is committed with any of the following aggravating/qualifying
circumstances:
"l) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and
the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian,
relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil
degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim;
"2) When the victim is under the custody of the police or
military authorities or any law enforcement or penal institution;
"3) When the rape is committed in full view of the spouse,
parent, any of the children or other relatives within the third
civil degree of consanguinity;
"4) When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate
religious vocation or calling and is personally known to be
such by the offender before or at the time of the commission
of the crime;
"5) When the victim is a child below seven (7) years old;
"6) When the offender knows that he is afflicted with the
Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune
Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually
transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted
to the victim;
"Chapter Three
"Article 266-A. Rape: When And How Committed. - Rape

is committed:
"7) When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of

the Philippines or para-military units thereof or the Philippine
National Police or any law enforcement agency or penal
institution, when the offender took advantage of his position to
facilitate the commission of the crime;
"1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman

under any of the following circumstances:
"8) When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim

has suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability;
"a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
"9) When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended

party at the time of the commission of the crime; and
"Rape
"b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or

otherwise unconscious;
"c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of
authority; and
"d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of
age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances
mentioned above be present.
"2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances
mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of
sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person's
mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the
"10) When the offender knew of the mental disability,

emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the offended
party at the time of the commission of the crime.
"Rape under paragraph 2 of the next preceding article shall
be punished by prision mayor.
"Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly
prision mayor to reclusion temporal.
"When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim
has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal.

"When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by
reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua.
committed, the penalty shall be recluion perpetua.
"Reclusion temporal shall be imposed if the rape is committed
with any of the ten aggravating/ qualifying circumstances
mentioned in this article.
"Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon. - The subsequent valid
marriage between the offended party shall extinguish the
criminal action or the penalty imposed.
"In case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party
shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty: Provided,
That the crime shall not be extinguished or the penalty shall
not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio.
"Article 266-D. Presumptions. - Any physical overt act
manifesting resistance against the act of rape in any degree
from the offended party, or where the offended party is so
situated as to render her/him incapable of giving valid
consent, may be accepted as evidence in the prosecution of
the acts punished under Article 266-A."
And if you notice that the second kind of rape (Rape by sexual
assault) the offender is any person. Ang first kind (rape by sexual
intercourse) yanyungdati: by a man who shall have carnal
knowledge with a woman. That is basically the old concept of
rape.
Now, the CIRCUMSTANCES are what make it rape.
a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
When you force a woman or you threaten a woman, or
intimidate a woman. It is also basi and laid down in jurisprudence
that the force, threat or intimidation depends on the case. There
is no hard anfd fast rule there na kung anongklaseng force,
threat or intimidation bayan. It depends if there is a relationship
between the parties. Usually, if there is a relationship between
the parties, lesser ang violence, threat opr intimidation is
required to make it rape kasimeron man ascendancy, etc yang
mgaganyan. Especially if anakyan, then, the force required is
lesser.
People vs. ____: The woman need not bite, kick, slap or scratch
the offender with her nails to successfully claim that she had
been raped. It is enough that intercourse was undertaken
against her will. It is sufficient that there was carnal knowledge
after the woman gave in because of the real fear of immediate
death or any other bodily harm.
There is this concept naiba-ibaang reaction ng rape victim. There
are some that sill really fight while there are some that will
become immobilized. There are some victims who can no longer
move because of the fear, etc. So dependesyasaklase ng
resistance, force or intimidation.
Sec. 3. Separability Clause. - If any part, Sec., or provision of

this Act is declared invalid or unconstitutional, the other parts
thereof not affected thereby shall remain valid.
With respect to the STAGES. The issue raised here is when can
it be an attempt or when can it be considered as consummated.
We all know that there is no frustrated rape.
Sec. 4. Repealing Clause. - Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as

amended, and all laws, acts, presidential decrees, executive
orders, administrative orders, rules and regulations
inconsistent with or contrary to the provisions of this Act are
deemed amended, modified or repealed accordingly.
When is it consummated? If there is penetration, then that is

already consummated already. Penetration is not measured by
inches or full penetration, half, or 1/5 lang. the slightest
penetration is sufficient to consummate the rape. It is not
necessary that there be full penetration. Bombardment of the
draw bridge is evasion enough even if the troops do not succeed
in entering the castle.
Sec. 5. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days
after completion of its publication in two (2) newspapers of
general circulation.
What is rape? It used to be a crime against chastity. Then came

the law on rape where it made it a crime against persons. Article
266-A. effectively, it was taken out as a crime against chastity to
a crime against persons. It is taken out of those crimes which
cannot be prosecuted de oficio. Anglabasnyan is it can be
prosecuted de oficio, meaning it does not need the complaint of
the private offended party. Kasidiba if you remember that private
crimes can only be prosecuted upon the instance of the offended
party. But now, since it is already a crime against persons,
apparently the complaint can be instituted even if it is not at the
instance of the private offended party.
Rape is basically sexual intercourse without consent. That is the
essence of rape because there is no problem with sexual
intercourse itself. Lami man nasya. then, why is it crime?
Because the sexual intercourse itself is not a crime, it becomes a
crime if you force it; if there is no consent. So dapatyes! You
want to establish clearly that there was no consent.
Dati, in the concept of rape, the offender could only be a male
and the victim can only be a female. But then this new law on
rape (RA 8353), there are 2 kinds of rape now.
1.
2.
Rape by sexual intercourse

By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of
a woman under any of the following
circumstances: x xx
Rape by sexual assault
By any person who, under any of the
circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1
hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault x
xx
Mere entry of the lips or labia of the female organ. Even without
rupture of the hymen. That is enough to convict the offender for
consummate rape.
Another case naman. The male member was very big. It could
not enter. Ganunsyakalakiperohnditalagasyamakapasok. Is that
attempted or consummated?
Remember that the slightest penetration is sufficient. In that
case,
syarowalaynasulodbsaggamay?!
Kalakilakinyataposgiforcemonaipasokkahitnahndinapasok.
There
would have been slight penetration kahitna dun sa outer lips lang
and that is sufficient to consummate the case.
Another case, the de la Pea case. Sigesyaughirit,
sigesyahiritperoangproblema is he could not get it up.
Gikapoynlangsigurosya,
iyanlanggifingeruggitila-tilaan.
Nakontentonasyaato. Prosecutred and convicted sya for
statutory rape. Pag-abotsa SC, the SC said its true that the
slightest penetration is enough to consummate the rape. But that
principle is premised upon the existence of an erect penis. In
other words, there has to be an erection in order for there to be a
penetration. Once there is penetration, there is consummation.
Erection + penetration = consummation. If there is no erection,
there can be no penetration. Therefore, no penetration-no
consummation.
People vs. De la Pea

Settled is the rule that full penetration of the vaginal orifice is
not an essential ingredient in the commission of the crime of
rape. The mere touching of the external genitalia by a penis
capable of consummating the sexual act constitutes carnal
knowledge. When accomplished together with the other
elements defined in the Revised Penal Code, the offense
constitutes rape.However, our decisions finding a case for
rape even if the attacker's penis merely touched the external

portions of the female genitalia were made in the context of
the presence of the existence of an erectile penis capable of
full penetration. The physiologic impossibility of penetration
absent an erection-complete or otherwise-cannot be gainsaid
This is now a crime against person. Ang scenario ditos is

physiological impossibility. Can we now connect that to Article 4,
meaning impossible crime. Hindi yansyanaging impossible crime
in the past. Why? Because crime against personif you
remember ang impossible crime it could have been a crime
against persons or property were not for the inherent
impossibility of its accomplishment, etc. And now, rape is now a
crime against person. If you are saying that there is no erection,
it would bheimpssible to penetrate. Pwedenasyamaging
impossible crime. It could have been a crime against person if it
were not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment. But
anyway, just consider that when you study rape.
10
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of

age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances
mentioned above be present.
This is what you know as statutory rape. Same ito dun sa
deprivation of reason because it does not matter if there is
consent. Because the law presumes that the minor or girl under
12 is incapable of giving consent. That is a given already.
Legally, she could not give consent. Hence, any act of sexual
intercourse with a minor under 12 is automatically rape because
she is legally incapable of giving consent.
Demented. Parangbuang. Pero, based on jurisprudence, it is
more on feeble-mindedness.
2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances
mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of
sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person's
mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the
genital or anal orifice of another person.
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or

otherwise unconscious;
Dati,
sexual
ingtercourselangtalaga.
Ngayon,
blowjob
apilnanisya. Gilubotapilna.or any instrument so kung penis ang
vagina eh #1 ka! Kung penis and or anal orifice eh #2 ka. Take
note na kung penis eh sa mouth, genital or anal orifice. But kung
instrument or object eh sa genital or anal lang.
When you say deprived of reason, unsa man na? buang?

Insane. Take note of the prevailing jurisprudence on this. When
the victim is insane or deprived of reason, it is not an element
that the offender has knowledge of the insanity or deprivation of
reason
of
the
offended
party.
If
it
turns
out
nanaaybuangngananitsit psssttsir, come here. Jerjertayo sir,
no strings attached. Ugbuangnasya eh rape na! rape is sexual
assault without consent. Dito eh sya pa ngaang nag-invite eh.
Paano man mangyariyanna rape na that was sexual intercourse
upon invitation. Can you raise that as a defense? No. Hindi
kailangannaalamnyana insane or depreived of reason yunsya.
Simpley because knowledge is not an element.
Ano kaya itong any instrument or object? well, anything! May

ibanganasaging eh. Perodapatwala pa rin consent. But the
question really is what happens if what is inserted is the finger?
Can it be considered an instrument? Kasi when you talk about
instrument or object, it is inanimate. Is a finger included, can it
fall under instrument or object? Jurisprudence says YES, it is an
object. Therefore, if you insert your finger without the consent, it
is rape. That leads us back to de la Pea. Bakit attempted
yunnapinasoknya man yung finger nya? Because the law on
rape came after kaya attempted sya. Kasikungbeforeyun ng de
la Pea eh pasoksya, it could be consummated and not merely
attempted.
Etong otherwise unconscious, anoyansya? Tulog. Its rape

because the victim was asleep when sexual intercourse took
place. (Sir talks about a movie he saw where the wife was raped
when she was asleep or half asleep. She thought that the one
having sex with her was her husband because the offender did
all the things that her husband used to do before and during said
husband would have sex with her. He followed all the actions
and activities that led the wife to think that it was his husband
having sex with her while she was laying down in the bed and
half asleep.)
Principles as to proof:
Lets go back to the circumstances.
Can the woman be unconscious while having sexual

intercourse.Pwdeba? Im asking you. Sigurokungpina-inomka ng
pampatulog.
Perokungyung
normal
langnatulog
eh
dibamagisingka man tlgakapagmerongsumundotsaiyosalikod.
(Haha)
If the victim is asleep or otherwise unconscious then it would be
rape. Ito yungmga cases napina-inom ng something or yungmga
beer pram aging drowsy. Kasimerong case nasabi ng offender
na the victim was aware of what was happening. Yes, she was
aware. But if you take away their ability to resist, then, that is still
rape. It is not really that the victim is unconscious. It could be
that the ability to resist is taken away.
Merong case that was decided against the victim kasiang
allegation dun is maypina-inomdawsakanya so naging
unconscious or half conscioussya. But during the time she
testified, she could clearly remember the chronology of event
that transpired when she was supposedly raped. Paano man yun
eh unconscious ka man kaya so paanomomaremember
accurately lahat ng nagyari?! So it could be that you knew what
was happening and you gave your consent.
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of
authority; and
Kasikung grave abuse of authority, dapatwalang consent parin.
Otherwise, that can be seduction, sexual intercourse
nameronkang abuse of authority.
1.
The testimony of the victim, if credible, is enough to

support a conviction.
Kasi usually dibaang evidence sa rape is the

word of the offended party only. This is a crime
that is not done publicly. In most cases, the
only testimony you will have is the testimony of
the victim herself.
2.
That no decent Filipino woman would publicly admit

having been a victim of rape unless the charges were
true.
Maramingnaga-objection dito. This could have

been true a long time ago because, in the
past, angbabaengpilipina would not accuse
anyone of raping her kasinakakahiya man yan
on her part. But then, this is just a principle. It
can be overcome by evidence.
3.
The resulting force(?) need not be great but simply

irresistible under the circumstances.
It would depend on the parties, whether or not

there is a relationship for example.
Principles in reviewing evidence:

1.
An accusation for rape can be easily made(?).
Meaning it is very easy to accuse somebody of

rape.
2.
It is difficult to prove but it is more difficult to disprove.
It is more difficult for the accused, although

innocent, to disprove it.
In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of

rape where there are only 2 persons involved,
the testimony of the complainant must be
scrutinized with extreme caution. Thats the
reason.
3.
The evidence for the prosecuition must stand or fall on

its own merits. It cannot be allowed to draw strength
from the weakness of the evidence of the defense.
Is there such a thing as MARITAL RAPE? If you look at Art. 266C, it says that In case it is the legal husband who is the offender
x xx. obviously, the husband can be the offender. Kasi in the
past, sinasabina there can be no marital rape. Why? Because
the concept was..kasidiba we say that rape is basically sexual
intercourse without consentin the case of spouses, the
consent was given when they said I do to each other which
included the act of sexual intercourse at any time. Walang
rape2x! but now, pwedena under sa C where it says that In
case it is the legal husband who is the offender. This means that
there can be now a case for marital rape.
Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon. - The subsequent valid

marriage between the offended party shall extinguish the
criminal action or the penalty imposed.
"In case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the
subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party
shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty: Provided,
That the crime shall not be extinguished or the penalty shall
not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio. x xx
This article talks about pardon. the subsequent forgiveness by

the wife as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action
or the penalty. When you say pardon, it extinguishes criminal
action. Pardon will take care of the remission as well as the
extinction of the criminal action.
The subsequent valid marriage between the offended party shall
extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed. This is the
same rule as dun sa private crimes dba!
But what you should remember here is that this is one of the
modes of extinction of criminal liability. But this does not apply in
case of multiple offenders. You are an offender because of the
rape you committed. Perokungmarami kayo, you are also a
principal for the rapes committed by the others.
There is this case nung mayor ng Palawan. Sanchez vs.
Demetrio. Boyfriend girlfriend ito. Girapenyayung girlfriend.
Pagkataposnyanggirape,angkanyangmga
buddy
eh
nangrapepudsagirlfiend. 7 silakabuok. After nilamahuman kay
gipataynila. They were charged with rape with homicide. For
mayor Sanchez kay 7 counts kasi you are also a principal for the
other rapes. Hiritsi mayor napaanodawnangyarina 7 counts of
rape with homicide na granting that she was raped 7 times but
pinataysya 7 times? Yun anghiritnya.
11
loses its character as an independent offense, but assumes a

new character, and functions like a qualifying circumstance.
However,by fiction of law, it merged with rape to constitute an
constituent element of a special complex crime of rape with
homicide with a specific penalty which is in the highest
degree, i.e. death (reduced to reclusion perpetua with the
suspension of the application of the death penalty by the
Constitution).
It is clearly provided in Rule 110 of the Rules of Court that:
Sec. 13. Duplicity of offense. A complaint or information must
charge but one offense, except only in those cases in which
existing laws prescribe a simple punishment for various
offenses.
Rape with homicide comes within the exception under R.A.
2632 and R.A. 4111, amending the Revised Penal Code.
The petitioner and his six co-accused are not charged with
only one rape committed by him in conspiracy with the other
six. Each one of the seven accused is charged with having
himself raped Sarmenta instead of simply helping Sanchez in
committing only one rape. In other words, the allegation of the
prosecution is that the girl was raped seven times, with each
of the seven accused taking turns in abusing her with the
assistance of the other six. Afterwards, their lust satisfied, all
seven of them decided to kill and thus silence Sarmenta.
Every one of the seven accused is being charged separately
for actually raping Sarmenta and later killing her instead of
merely assisting the petitioner in raping and then slaying her.
The separate informations filed against each of them allege
that each of the seven successive rapes is complexed by the
subsequent slaying of Sarmenta and aggravated by the killing
of Allan Gomez by her seven attackers. The separate rapes
were committed in succession by the seven accused,
culminating in the slaying of Sarmenta.
It is of course absurd to suggest that Mary Eileen Sarmenta
and Allan Gomez were killed seven times, but the
informations do not make such a suggestion. It is the
petitioner who does so and is thus hoist by his own petard.
Let us now go to PENALTY. Article 266-B.

Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly
Sabi ng SC: Anyway, the homicide is considered as a constituent

element of the crime of rape with homicide. The victim does not
need to die several times because its just a constituent of the
crime of rape with homicide. The homicide committed on the
occasion or by reason of each
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim

has become insane, the penalty shall become reclusion
perpetua to death.
Sanchez vs. Demetrio (November 9, 1993)

committed, the penalty shall be death.
The petitioner submits that the seven informations charging

seven separate homicides are absurd because the two
victims in these cases could not have died seven times.
This argument was correctly refuted by the Solicitor General
in this wise:
Thus, where there are two or more offenders who commit
rape, the homicide committed on the occasion or by reason of
each rape, must be deemed as a constituent of the special
complex crime of rape with homicide. Therefore, there will be
as many crimes of rape with homicide as there are rapes
committed.
In effect, the presence of homicide qualifies the crime of rape,
thereby raising its penalty to the highest degree. Thus,
homicide committed on the occasion or by reason of rape,
When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by

reclusion perpetua to death. (So walanang frustrated)
It does not matter how the homicide occurs or how the homicide
results. If the homicide result because of the rape or on the
occasion of the rape, it does not matter. It is a special complex
crime under 266-B.
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of
rape is committed with any of the following
aggravating/qualifying circumstances:
l) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and
the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian,
relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil
degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the
victim;
Just be familiar with these relatives who are the offenders. Then,
the penalty is mandatory death.
In the case of People vs. Atop, the victim is the granddaughter of
the accuseds common-law spouse. Is their relationship
qualifying?
People vs. Atop (286 SCRA 157)

Neither can we appreciate relationship as an aggravating
circumstance. The scope of relationship as defined by law
encompasses (1) the spouse, (2) an ascendant, (3) a
descendant, (4) a legitimate, natural or adopted brother or
sister, or (5) a relative by affinity in the same degree.
Relationship by affinity refers to a relation by virtue of a legal
bond such as marriage. Relatives by affinity therefore are
those commonly referred to as in-laws, or stepfather,
stepmother, stepchild and the like; in contrast to relatives by
consanguinity or blood relatives encompassed under the
second, third and fourth enumeration above. The law cannot
be stretched to include persons attached by common-law
relations. Here, there is no blood relationship or legal bond
that links the appellant to his victim. Thus, the modifying
circumstance of relationship cannot be considered against
him.
Merongcommon-law relation peroyung spouse. Ditto sa case kay

granddaughter man ng accuseds common-law spouse.
Another case. In People vs. Deleverio, the accused is the stepgrandparent of the victim. Ganun din. Angsabisihindikasamaang
step-grandparent.
People vs. Deleverio (289 SCRA 547)

The mandatory death penalty is imposed under the first case,
immediately above, when the victim is under eighteen years
of age and the offender is "a parent, ascendant, step parent,
guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third
civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the
victim." The trial court has thus held incorrectly in considering
appellant, who is legally married to Roxans natural
grandmother, as among those named in the enumeration.
Appellant is merely a step-grandparent who obviously is
neither an "ascendant" nor a "step-parent" of the victim. In
the recent case of People vs. Atop, the Court rejected the
application of the mandatory death penalty to the rape of a
12-year old victim by the common-law husband of the girl's
grandmother. The Court said:
"It is a basic rule of statutory construction that penal statutes
are to be liberally construed in favor of the accused. Court's
must not bring cases within the provision of a law which are
not clearly embraced by it. No act can be pronounced
criminal which is not clearly made so by statute; so, too, no
person who is not clearly within the terms of a statute can be
brought within them. Any reasonable doubt must be resolved
in favor of the accused."
2) When the victim is under the custody of the police or

military authorities or any law enforcement or penal
institution;
3) When the rape is committed in full view of the spouse,
parent, any of the children or other relatives within the third
civil degree of consanguinity;
4) When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate
religious vocation or calling and is personally known to be
such by the offender before or at the time of the
commission of the crime;
This time, the offender has to have knowledge that the victim is a
religious.
5) When the victim is a child below seven (7) years old;
12
Ibayung below 12 kasi statutory rape yun.Itong below 7, itoyung

qualified.
6) When the offender knows that he is afflicted with the
Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune
Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually
transmissible disease and the virus or disease is
transmitted to the victim;
So kasaliyungmga ordinary STDs.
7) When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of
the Philippines or para-military units thereof or the
Philippine National Police or any law enforcement agency or
penal institution, when the offender took advantage of his
position to facilitate the commission of the crime;
8) When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim
has suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability;
9) When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended
party at the time of the commission of the crime; and
Knowledge here is important with respect to the victim being
pregnant.
10) When the offender knew of the mental disability,
emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the
offended party at the time of the commission of the crime.
Knowledge here also.
Now, Article 266-D.
Article 266-D. Presumptions. - Any physical overt act
manifesting resistance against the act of rape in any degree
from the offended party, or where the offended party is so
situated as to render her/him incapable of giving valid
consent, may be accepted as evidence in the prosecution of
the acts punished under Article 266-A."
So it is really a case to case basis.
OCTOBER 9 Crim
Serious Illegal detention
Article 267, it says there kidnapping , but this article has
nothing to do with kids. Kaya sa 267 gilagayjanna and serious
illegal detention. So when you say 267, that refers to serious
illegal detention. So kung may serious meron ding hindi serious
slight (but there is nothing slight about slight illegal detention
because the penalty is a grave penalty nevertheless).
Title 9 is crimes against liberty, which is divided into 2. Crimes
against personal liberty and crimes against personal security.
When you say illegal detention it just means that you detain
another or you restrain the freedom of another. As to when they
are serious and when they are slight, you have to look at the
circumstances under 267. If they are present, then it is serious.
kidnap or detain another, or in any other manner deprive
him of his liberty so it is not necessary that you chain
somebody or handcuffs. That includes the restriction of freedom.
There are cases where the victims was allowed to roam the
house or even patisa yard. The SC said that still consists of
deprivation of liberty. If all the other elements are present it
would still constitute serious illegal detention. There was a case
where the child was allowed to do just that, perokasi he didnt
know how to go home. So the SC ruled that that is serious illegal
detention.
It will be serious if 1. If the kidnapping or detention shall
have lasted more than 3 days.2. If it shall have been
committed simulating public authority. Meaning you pretend
to be a police officer, you usurp the position of a public officer.
This would qualify to make the crime serious. Just take note of
these circumstances:3. If any serious physical injuries shall
have been inflicted upon the person kidnapped or detained;
or if threats to kill him shall have been made.4. If the person
kidnapped or detained shall be a minor, except when the
13
accused is any of the parents, female or a public officer.So if

you kidnap a public officer, it becomes serious illegal detention.
detain somebody or in any manner deprive him of his

liberty or his freedom.
What you have to remember here this next paragraph: The

penalty shall be death where the kidnapping or detention
was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom from the
victim or any other person, even if none of the
circumstances above-mentioned were present in the
commission of the offense. So the penalty there is mandatory,
death, if it is for the purpose of extorting or obtaining ransom. So
take note ha nafor the purpose, meaning even if you were not
successful in getting ransom. If the purpose is for ransom,
mandatory death nayan. The ransom is not required to be
demanded from the victim only, you can demand it from any
other person also. This is true even if none of the
circumstances
above-mentioned
were
present.
So
kahitnawalayung 3 days, yung simulating public authority etc. the
moment you detain a person illegally for the purpose of obtaining
ransom
Also be careful about yung #4 except when the accused is any

of the parents, kasi if the accused is any of the parents, it will
not fall here. So etotalagayung kidnapping because it involves a
minor. Perokunganak, hindidito. Usually that happens kung may
away nasa custody, meronnang Habeas Corpus. You cannot
treat that as serious illegal detention under this article (its in a
subsequent article we will discuss later)
Yung mas anoditoyung composite crime, special complex

crime, where the victim is killed or dies as a consequence of
the detention or is raped, so you have there Serious illegal
Detention with Homicide/Murder or Serious Illegal Detention
with Rape or is subjected to torture or dehumanizing acts,
the maximum penalty shall be imposed. So in the past there
used to be a controversy here, because before RA 7659, when
the victim is killed or dies while in detention minsanang ruling is
separate crime xa - Kidnapping/serious illegal detention or
murder thru serious illegal detention or serious illegal detention
with murder - parangganyan, ginawang complex ba. Sometimes
its complex sometimes its separate. Now, because of this, they
changed it to where the victim is killed or diesso you need not
have an intent to kill. Kung pinataykasinabadripkasiwalang
ransom, yan special complex crime.Perokungnamataylangxa
dun, walanamanxagiano, ginapakain, peronikiriglangxagkalit,
unyakaygidetainnimo, maolanggihapon, special complex crime
or dies as a consequence.
Remember also that the detention must be the primary objective.
Because in certain crimes, detention is necessary although it is
temporary, like if you want to kill somebody, you take him from
his house (thats detention), and you take him somewhere else
and you kill him. For example robbery where the robber says
taasangkamaytaposbirahonkadidto, that is detaining somebody,
that is restraining, yet that does not constitute a separate offense
the temporary detention.
How do you distinguish this from ARBITRARY? Ang arbitrary
crime against the fundamental laws of the state, the offender
there is a public officer. Dito the offender is a private individual,
or pwede din a public officer when it is not part of his duty to
arrest or detain people because that would fall under the crime
against personal liberty.
Going back to ransom, what is a ransom? It is the money, price,
or consideration paid or demanded for the redemption of the
captured person/s. The payment that releases from captivity. A
demand or receipt of money as a prerequisite for releasing a
person from captivity whatever motive they intended to do so, it
is still ransom.
PP vsKapiran(?) where the purpose of the detention

was to compel the payment of the hospitalization
expenses of the brother of one of the accused. That is
still ransom.
Rayon (?) 217 scra 334 a woman was detained for 2
days to compel her to sign a promissory note. You
should be careful about this class ha, if you say
compel you should also relate that to coercion
because coercion is also compelling somebody. If you
compel somebody to stay, diba that is illegal detention?
So asa man ka? sa coercion or sa illegal detention? It is
confusing sometimes. Take note naang detention is
basically detention, illegal ngalang, you dont have
the authority to detain. Yang ransom etc, purpose nay
an, that will affect the penalty. As to the crime itself,
yunlangyun, you detain without the authority to detain.
Coercion naman, youreforcing somebody to do
something or not to do something. We will go to that
later. When you say illegal detention, yunlang, you
Slight illegal detention

Lets go to slight. So as I said ang slight, is not really slight
because ang penalty is grave or afflictive penalty reclusion
temporal. The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be
imposed upon any private individual who shall commit the
crimes described in the next preceding article without the
attendance of any of circumstances enumerated therein. So
meaning the detention did not last for more than 3 days, the
detention was made without simulating public authority etc. then
it will be slight illegal detention. But again be careful here kasi for
example you detain somebody for the purpose of extorting
ransom, now after 2 days napul-annasiguroang kidnapper
saimuha, sigiulinalangka! maramina man akongpera! paaak!
Hahaha! Pinauwikangayon.Serious illegal detention parinyan,
because the purpose was to extort ransom which means it is
taken away from the coverage of slight. So pag for ransom, kahit
after 1 day pinauwikana, art 267 parinyan.
The same penalty shall be incurred by anyone who shall
furnish the place for the perpetration of the crime. So same
penalty, ang example dito usually is where the act of the principal
as well as the accomplice are penalized in the same degree.
Same penalty, meaning, the penalty for the principal is the same
penalty for anyone who shall furnish the place for the
perpetration of the crime usually the person who does that,
when you cooperate in the commission of the offense by a
simultaneous or previous act, is an accomplice. But here the law
itself says that the penalty for you, although the act is that of an
accomplice, is the same with the penalty of a principal for slight
illegal detention.
If the offender shall voluntarily release the person so
kidnapped or detained within three days from the
commencement of the detention, without having attained
the purpose intended, and before the institution of criminal
proceedings (meaning there is already a case against you)
against him, the penalty shall be prision mayor in its
minimum and medium periods and a fine not exceeding
seven hundred pesos. Anglabasnito, in effect its like a
privileged mitigating therefore the penalty goes down to prision
mayor. If there is already a case against you, sorry nalang, youll
have be considered as privileged mitigating circumstance. Take
note also that this does not apply even if without having
attained the purpose intended, and before the institution of
criminal proceedingsif you detain somebody for the purpose of
extorting ransom.
Unlawful arrest
any person who, in any case other than those authorized by
law, or without reasonable ground therefor, shall arrest or
detain another for the purpose of delivering him to the
proper authorities.
Etoyungkay Bong Navarro. Gi arrest nila to deliver to the proper
authorities kungbagacitizens arrest. It will be unlawful if it will not
fall under citizens arrest, in other words, you are not authorized
to arrest the victim under the law. Similarly, this may apply to
public officers in as far as those who are not authorized to arrest.
Kidnapping and failure to return a minor
Etonangayonang kidnapping because it involves kids. What you
want to remember here is that the crime is not the detention. The
crime is the failure to return. any person who, being entrusted
with the custodyof a minor person, shall deliberately fail to
restore
the
latter
to
his
parents
or
guardians.kasinasakanyaang minor, it becomes a crime
because he deliberately failed to deliver the minor to his parents
or guardians. So dapatnasakanya, hindilangnya gusto ibalik.
So those are the elements : 1) that the person is entrusted with
the custody of a minor person 2) and he deliberately fails to
restore the latter to his parents or guardians.
When you say deliberate well advised, carefully considered,
not sudden or rushed. Bastakaydeliberate,gituyo. The refusal
must be deliberate and persistent to oblige the parent or the
guardians to seek the aid of the courts to obtain the custody of
the minor.
Ppvs Ty the word deliberate as used in the article

must imply something more than mere negligence; it
must be premeditated, obstinate, headstrong, foolishly
daring or intentionally and maliciously wrong.
Inducing a minor to abandon his home

Sa title pa langalammonaang crime. upon anyone who shall
induce a minor to abandon the home of his parent or
guardians or the persons entrusted with his custody.Saato
pa imonggigalgalngalayas. Take note that the motive here is not
material. Walangsinabi about sa motive, bastakaygi induce. Of
course, because this is a felony, it must be intentional, committed
with dolo/malice.
The penalty is lower if If the person committing any of the
crimes covered by the two preceding articles shall be the
father or the mother(hindi BOTH ha) of the minor, the penalty
shall be arresto mayor or a fine not exceeding three
hundred pesos, or both.
SLAVERY
upon anyone who shall purchase, sell, kidnap or detain (so
parang illegal detention) a human being for the purpose of
enslaving him(but this time the purpose is to enslave).
If the crime be committed for the purpose of assigning the
offended party to some immoral traffic, the penalty shall be
imposed in its maximum period.Now take note ito, this will
also fall under Trafficking (well talk about that later). Trafficking is
under a special law, and technically there is no conflict, the
elements are different.
Exploitation and Services Renedered
Art 273 and 274, anoang difference nyangdalawa? Take note sa
273 this talks about utang eh. under the pretext of
reimbursing himself of a debt incurred by an ascendant,
guardian or person entrusted with the custody of a minor,
shall, against the latter's will, retain him in his service.So the
person who is being exploited is the child. Angutangdiliutangsa
child, utangsaascendant guardian or person entrusted with
the custody of a minor. And the offender will detain the minor in
his service against the will of the minor.So etoyung defense dun
nisugot man!
3.
14
Anyone who, having found an abandoned child

under seven years of age, shall fail to deliver said
child to the authorities or to his family, or shall fail
to take him to a safe place.
Just take note that prosecution under this article is not a bar for
the prosecution of the quasi-offense. Reckless imprudence etc.
Abandoning a minor
Kung
sabihinmong
minor,
hanapanmonalangkungsaanxamahulogdito!Actually
kadamingkailanganiconsider, child abuse etc, child and youth
welfare code. So sometimes magulonga! Kung saantalaga mag
fall ba. Therefore hindikonamaxado tong iano (iano sir?!
Haha.Kapoyna.) Just know that kung minors pwededito,
pwede din sa 7610 or the child and youth welfare code.
Mabuangmosa specifics.
What am I saying? All these laws, you just have to read them
Abandonment of minor by person entrusted with his custody;
indifference of parents
277 upon the parents who shall neglect their children by not
giving them the education which their station in life require
and financial conditions permit.Naapudnisa special law. If
bataka and you are not given an education, that is a crime.
Exploitation of minors
Etobasahinnyonalangkasimga circus circuseto e.
1. Any person who shall cause any boy or girl under sixteen
years of age to perform any dangerous feat of balancing,
physical strength, or contortion.So bakitmeron paring
mgaganon?Meronyang permit and age requirement.
2. Any person who, being an acrobat, gymnast, rope-walker,
diver, wild-animal tamer or circus manager or engaged in a
similar calling, shall employ in exhibitions of these kinds
children under sixteen years of age who are not his children
or descendants.
3. Any person engaged in any of the callings enumerated in
the next paragraph preceding who shall employ any
descendant of his under twelve years of age in such
dangerous exhibitions.
Yung mga child actors/actresses, etc. bawal din kasiyan.
hingisilang permit sa DOLE pati working hours regulated yan. Its
not only stated here, it is also in RA 7610. Even in commercial
dilisilapwede in advertisements for alcohol, nicotine etc. kaya
puro toothbrush toothpaste, dirapwedenasila, ketchup.
So etongsa 274 were talking about here about the utangdiba.

Etodito, the offender is the creditor and the offended party who
works for him is the one who has the debt. any person who,
shall compel the debtor to work for him, against his will, as
household servant or farm laborer.And the purpose is:in
order to require or enforce the payment of a debt. In other
words, if walay relationship of debtor creditor, dilinaxapwdediri.
Section Two. Trespass to dwelling
CRIMES AGAINST SECURITY

Abandonment of person in danger and abandonment of one's
own victim
Trespass - Any private person who shall enter the dwelling

of another against the latter's will. Yun langyun, against the
will of the owner.
Ditoang cases na Hit and Run - abandonment of one's own

victim.
Compare that to violation of domicile, diba 3 ways ang violation

of domicile? 1)any public officer or employee who, not being
authorized by judicial order, shall enter any dwelling against
the will of the owner thereof; 2) search papers or other
effects found therein without the previous consent of such
owner, or 3) having surreptitiously entered said dwelling,
and being required to leave the premises, shall refuse to do
so.Dito, against the will langanggibutang. Saato pa, kung
abrinaimongpultahannyanaaytaomusulod, against the will na?
although here, pwede implied prohibition to enter. But if its
open, thats an invitation to enter, so it cannot be trespass.
Angmagigingproblemalangdito is when the entrance is implied.
1.
2.
Any one who shall fail to render assistance to any

person whom he shall find in an uninhabited place
wounded or in danger of dying, when he can render
such assistance (you have to help! Of course if )
without detriment to himself, unless such omission
shall constitute a more serious offense.
Anyone who shall fail to help or render assistance
to another whom he has accidentally wounded or
injured.Etoyung hit and run.
So again, seemingly (or paranglang) may counterpart eto dun sa

crimes against the fundamental law yungviolation to domicile,
pagangpublic officer enters the dwelling against the will. Now
kung private person anggumawanyan, almost the same thing, it
will fall under trespass.
In a case, may room sa boarding house

anggilagaykaytalilang, the defense raised was hindi
man yan prohibition to enter, open man yan. SC said
that is implied prohibition, gitaliangani meaning do not
enter.
15
Section Three. Threats and coercion
Art. 282. Grave threats. Any person who shall threaten another with t
property of the latter or of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime, sh
So against the will, yanang trespass. This is qualified by the

second part - If the offense be committed by means of
violence or intimidation. What I want you to remember is: if
committed with violence or intimidation, hindinakailanganyung
prohibition.Pinugsanaynagani.
1. The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for t
the offender shall have made the threat demanding money or impos
not unlawful, and said offender shall have attained his purpose. If the
purpose, the penalty lower by two degrees shall be imposed.
Merong exempting dito, ang 3rd part. It is exempting even if you

entered against the will of another if
(1)for the purpose of preventing some serious harm to
himself, you are being chased by a person with a bolo
unyanisulodkasabalasa
lain,
ay
ayawgsulod!Dilimusulodjudkobahalaka! hahaha. So unsa man
na? against the will pero exempted.
If the threat be made in writing or through a middleman, the penal

period.
(2)the occupants of the dwelling or a third person,
There are many kinds of threats. basically Any person who shall
(3) nor shall it be applicable to any person who shall enter a

dwelling for the purpose of rendering some service to
humanity or justice, good Samaritan ka.you see somebody
nagikulatasasulod, imonggitabangan.
(4) nor to anyone who shall enter cafes, taverns, inn and
other public houses, while the same are open.Etomaka smile
ako always. ALANGAN! Open gani! Public place man na,
dilikabawal!
Of course, you know the principles here ha. The aggravating
circumstances of dwelling, or unlawful entry, they are inherent in
this crime.
What about the violence or intimidation? When should the
violence or intimidation be present in order to qualify the crime?
Usually, right before or simultaneously. Kasi thats how you enter,
with violence or intimidation.Peromeron din kasing right after ang
violence or intimidation.
When you say violence according to the SC need not be
against persons. Pwedengpersonspwedeng violence against the
door/gate/window.
2. The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos, i
subject to a condition
threaten another with the infliction upon the person, honor or

property of the latter or of his family of any wrong amounting to a
crime. Any wrong amounting to a crime. Now when we say
infliction upon the person, honor or property, do not equate that
sa titles ng revised penal code. dibakasimerong crimes against
persons, crimes against property, crimes against honor. this has
nothing to do with that . It's a generic kind of thing. say murder, I
will threaten you with death, if you do not giver me money I will
kill you. that's crimes against persons, mag tama din yanxadito.
Or i will burn down you house if you do not see to my demands.
yan, that's a crime against property. panokasi if yung, if you do
not see to my demands I will detain you. serious illegal
detention,
which
is
what?
crime
against
personal
liberty.Panoyan di napapasoktayodito? that is why actually this is

not limited to crimes against persons, crimes against property, or
crime against honor. It is really a crime against the person, honor
of the person and the property of the person. So that's the first
You allowed him to enter the terrace or veranda or

something, according to a case Invitation to enter the
court(?) is not invitation to enter the house. Kung
nisulodkasabalay against the will, that is still trespass.
thing. Second, take note that the penalty is different, it depends
Also please take note of the principle that anyone in the

household is presumed to have authority to invite people in.
thats a legal presumption. Generally all members of the
household are presumed to have the authority to extend an
invitation to enter. So the authority to invite people is not limited
to the owner, any member of the household can do so.
money. So medyomalaki din yun ha, reclusion temporal on
Other forms of trespass
like an aggravating circumstance.
You distinguish that from 280. Here youre talking about closed
premises. any person who shall enter the closed premises
(example warehouse)or the fenced estate of another, while
either or them are uninhabited, if the prohibition to enter be
manifest(that is the key phrase there)and the trespasser has
not secured the permission of the owner or the caretaker
thereof.
prohibition to enter be manifest, how is that shown? This is
usually shown by posting a no trespassing sign. Kung
walangganyan and there is no manifest prohibition, then the
crime is not committed.
Another distinction, dito uninhabited, sa trespass naman should
be inhabited. And there is no such thing as an implied
prohibition ha, ditokasidapat manifest. The prohibition must
always be express or manifest.
October 10, 2013
Crim 2
on whether the purpose of the demand is attained. So if the

crime that you threatened to commit is homicide, the penalty
there would be your penalty if you made the threat demanding
homicide, prison mayor on grave threats. if you do not attain
your purpose, the penalty lower by two degrees shall be
imposed. soparang attempted. If the threat be made in
writing or through a middle man, maximum. so this operates
So grave threats, there are two kinds. One where you

impose a condition and those where you do not impose a
condition or you do not demand money. but it is still threats,
why is that? because you are threatening to inflict a wrong
amounting to a crime against another. So it really doesn't
matter if there is a condition or not, although kung may
condition mas mataasang penalty mo. well a demand of
money is klaro. if you do not give me money i will kill you.
klaroyan, it's a threat to inflict a wrong amounting to a
crime. And what is a condition? and take note that the
condition may not be unlawful. So why is it a crime then?
Why is there a crime of grave threat when the condition that
you
said
is
not
unlawful.
dyanyungitanananganakmo,
So
example
usually
nagalityungtatay,
kungdilinimominyuanakonganakpatyon taka! what is wrong
with diliminyuan, that is not an unlawful demand, unlawful
condition but what makes a crime is not the demand per se,
what makes it a crime is that you said, I will kill you.if you do
not
marry
my
daughter.
kayaxa
crime.
walanglabotdoonyung phrase na even tough unlawful

because that refers to the condition. Also, one thing with
grave threat is that, the threat should be in the future pa.
hindiyanxa threat ngayon. I will kill you. I'm not saying I'm
going to kill you now. I you don't do this, or if you don't give
me money, I will kill you later. kasi kung now yan, diba?
16
subdivision 1, meaning there is a demand for money or a

condition that is imposed. ok, yanang light threat. but
thenthat something that you threaten does not amount to
any crime. bakitman naging crime yanxana threat? this time
because of the (inaudible) of the demand. yun grave threats
kasi, what your threatened to do amounts to a crime. Here
ang light threats, hindi, well ang best example dito usually is
yung black mail. kayaangtawagdyan light threats, black
mail actually ang example nyan. Anoba yang black mail? for
example, you know a secret, sometimes you threaten to
divulge
the
secret.
I
post
nakosa
internet
imongsecretougdilikonimotagaanugkwarta
or
kung
dilikonimoi.kiss (weeeee! lol) conditionyun, imposed. kiss
me! otherwise I will post your secret all over the internet.
unsa may kuanana? is that a crime? the secret does not
amount to a crime.
Patyon taka! patyondayon nimo. humannamatay. walana,

the threat is not separate. it is not a separate crime.
kulatahon taka unyasigenanimogkulata. there is serious
physical injuries tapossabihinmo pang meron pang grave
Art. 284. Bond for good behavior. In all cases falling within the tw
making the threats may also be required to give bail not to molest the
to give such bail, he shall be sentenced to destierro.
threat? you are already doing it, the threat will already be
absorbed now by the crime of physical injuries, there is no
long a separate crime of grave threats because the threats
here should be in the future.
Art. 285. Other light threats. The penalty of arrestomenor in its min
200 pesos shall be imposed upon:
The threat itself. Let's try to define that. It is the declaration
1. Any person who, without being included in the provisions of the

another with a weapon or draw such weapon in a quarrel, unless it be
of the intention or determination to injure another person,

his honor or property of some wrong amounting to a crime.
it is often that threat may be deluded purpose creating in the
mind of the person threatened that the threat will be carried
on. It is something that the threatened party really believe
nagagawin, it does not come across as a joke. it is
2. Any person who, in the heat of anger, shall orally threaten anothe
crime, and who by subsequent acts show that he did not persist
provided that the circumstances of the offense shall not bring it withi
Code.
3. Any person who shall orally threaten to do another any harm not co
something to be feared kasitotoo, totohaninnya.

let's go back to the example, if you do not marry my
ang problemaditomeronnangang light threats meron pang

other light threats. ano tong other light threats? (readcodal
above)
daughter, i will kill you. It is still a kind of grave threat

because of the phrase that you said that i will kill you, so if
ang problemaditomeronnangang light threats meron pang
you say to the guy, if you do not marry my daughter I will
other light threats. ano tong other light threats?
sue you of seduction. that is no longer a threat because

your threat is to file a case which you can very well do. yung
par. 1.
previous threat mo is a crime because you said I will kill
yan treats yan, you threaten another may mgabaril, kutsilyo,
you.
that
is
threat,
you
tiunannimougkutsilyo,
do
that
not
is
even
other
kasi
kung
say
light
anything.
threats.
Now, what about intent to gain. Is intent to gain an element
kasiwalakanangibangginawala.
tirahinmosya,
here? well, when you are charged under grave threats
dependeya. there is thin line between an attempt with this.
taposditokasa may demand of money of course that
because you are holding a weapon gamaylangnaana,
demand should be an element.
mahimonanang attempt. Unless, you draw your weapon in

self defense.
Now can this be a continuing offense? pwede. like in the

case of somebody who wrote a letterna ongoing xaba, unya
par.2.
installment. You give me one million otherwiswe I will kill

you
your
family,
your
relatives
ubusinkosilanglahat.
Please remove that word "not" there otherwise there will no
balance.
difference between two and three. so in paragraph 2, it
isanganolangyun, hindiyun separate. It's like a continuing
should be some harm constituting a crime. take note that
offense yan.
this is similar to grave threats because you are threatening
binigyanxa
500k
muna.
kulnag
pa
ug
another with some harm that amounts to a crime. that

constitutes a crime. but it falls under light threats because
did itmade
out of
anger,
in the
heat, or inin the moment so to
Art. 283. Light threats. Any threat to commit a wrong not constitutingyou
a crime,
in the
manner
expressed
subdivision 1 of the next preceding article, shall be punished by arrestospeak.
mayor.sonasukoka, then gagokangbataakapatyon taka! ana,
but your subsequent act show that you did not insist. pag
cool mona, nag ngisingisinaka. it's the same act, yungsa
Now next article. light threats. and light naman, the penalty
is arresto mayor which is not really light. expressed in
17
grave threats at dito. the difference is this is said in anger.
money, now! nag.unsa man ka, you are compelling him to
paggalittayodaminatingnasasabi which we regret later.
do something against his will, will that amount to coercion?

ediba hold-up yan? that's robbery. saato pa, san kangayon?
please take note of 284. what is that? that is an additional
dunkasa robbery! well, for one thing meron dung intent to
penalty for threats, grave threats and light threats. well of
gain
course because this is an additional penalty bahalanasi
kayaunahimmomunayung kung saanxa properly mag fall na
judge. kung gusto niyangdungagan pa ka ng bond for good
article.
diba?
but
seemingly
parehosila.
behavior. and if you cannot put up a bond, then destierroka.

yanangsinasabinga 284, you're supposed to put up a bond
Now, the nature will depend on the parties. kay kung ang
para magbehaveka, you will not threaten the offended party,
party being compelled or forced is somebody like tyson.
now if you cvannot put up a bond, paalisinkanalangnya.
kusogkusogna violence and intimidation angkailanganana.
now also please distinguish that from, diba may isa pang
or
bond? bond to keep the peace. ibayun, itokasi when yu say
baskinpaganaanaonlangnimo,
bond for good behavior it applies only to threats. yung
sodependeyan. the nature of the violence will depend on the
bond to keep the peace it applies in general to felonies.
person. because actually this is not really limited to physical
saanbayung bond to keep the peace? dunsa 35. and if you
violence. pwede man moral pressure or intimidation. but it
fail to post a bond dun sa 35, subsidiary imprisonment and
is sufficient if the other ____ of the offender is notoriously
labasdoon.
menacing as to amount to a grave intimidation or would
kung
bataangano,
gamaykaau,
pwedenama.violence.
create a situation that would necessarily intimidate the

par.3.
victim. because the preventing of the compulsion, this is
andyung number three, dyanmagpasokyung not.
depicted by violence either by material force where such

display of force as would produce intimidation and control
the will of the offender. So for example if people who have a
of land
taposmerong
squatters
Art. 286. Grave coercions. The penalty of arresto mayor and apiece
fine not
exceeding
500 pesos
shall be doonngayon gusto
imposed upon any person who, without authority of law, shall, by mosilangpaalisin
means of violence,
prevent
another
from or intimidation you
so by violence, threat
doing something not prohibited by law, or compel him to do something against his will, whether it be right
eject them, is that a crime, is that coercion? that is my
or wrong.
property they are there unlawfully, so I ejected them
If the coercion be committed for the purpose of compelling another
to perform
any
religious
act or to gi.file.an ngamga
physically
remove
them.
ngayonikawang
prevent him from so doing, the penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed.
squatters ng coercion. Will it propser? Again, the essence
of coercion is taking the law into your own hands. so by
Lets go to coercion.
removing
grave coercion. you prevent somebody in doing something
intimidation you are committing the crime of grave coercion.
not prohibited by law. gustoniyamutabokugkalsada, dilika
Even if that is your property. You have no right to do that,
gusto, ayawtabok kay maligsanka! ano man yan? practically
you go to court. Ask the court for unlawful detainer or
compelling him not to cross street. that is a crime.
whatever.
them
physically
with
force
violence
and
kayadilikadapatmagboot. that is the point of coercion. you

should not take the law into your own hands. kung gusto
It's a different story if the squatters are trying to set up their
niyamukanta,
whatever in that area, because you go to the civil code,
gusto
pugongpugongpakadha,
niyamusayaw.
ng
yung 429, yung doctrine of self help. I can use reasonable
coercion that you should not take the law into your own
force to protect my property..yung self defense of property
hands or compel him to do something against his will.
remember? If they are still entering, you can prevent them
"kanta!
kahit pa you use physical force. but if they are already there
karonna!
ayawna!
pabayai!
kitakaani,
yanangsinasabi
kitakaaningkumonako?
dilikamukantakatilawkaani." that's compulsion, compelling
you cannot do that you have to go now to court.
somebody, which is coercion. now, take note dito,

kasiangsabinga coercion whether it be right or wrong. now
Suppose somebody wants to kill himself. pugngannimo by
the thing is sometimes, ang coercion kasi, you should
violence pajud. kulatahon taka if ipadayonnimona! is that a
consider coercion as a last resort. you try to find out first
crime? you are preventing somebody from doing something
whether the act will fall under other acts, other crimes.
that he wants to do. Let's go back to the basics in criminal
likediba we already talked about interruption of legislative
law, the act is not criminal when the mind is not criminal.
meetings. so you prevent the legislator from attending the
He must have criminal intent. When you prevent him from
meeting, there is a specific article which deals with that,
killing himslef actually, your intention is not to commit a
preventing them from attending dun kamagcharge, wag dito.
crime.
or
interruption
of
religious
imonggimanduanangparingaayawpagmisa!
worship.
that
is
interruption religious worship. you consider this if there is
Art. 287. Light coercions. Any person who, by means of violence,
no other article in the revised penal code. and like i said
debtor for the purpose of applying the same to the payment of the de
last time , you go to a person, sabimo, give me all your
mayor in its minimum period and a fine equivalent to the value of th
pesos.
18
Art. 288. Other similar coercions; (Compulsory purchase of merchand

of tokens.) The penalty of arresto mayor or a fine ranging from
Any other coercions or unjust vexations shall be punished by arrestomenor

or a fine
pesos
imposed upon
any ranging
person, from
agent5 or
officer, of any association or co
to 200 pesos, or both.
directly or indirectly, or shall knowingly permit any laborer or employ
or corporation to be forced or compelled, to purchase merchandise o

So there is firstly a relationship of creditor and debtor and
The same penalties shall be imposed upon any person who shall pay
the person here seizes property belonging to debtor for the
employed by him, by means of tokens or objects other than the leg
purpose of applying the same to the payment of the debt.
employee.
Dili man kamubayad, ambinalangna, naa man kay plasma

ngatvlcd, akoanani, maonaningbayad. that is light coercion.
of course diliniya gusto. dilixamubayad, dili pod xa gusto
ngakuhaonniyaimonggamit.
but
Basahanalangninyona.
still,
ikawyungnagpa.utangmeronkatalagang right. well not right

to get the thing. you have the right to demand payment.
ehayawngamagbayad. so what you do is, with violence
kinuhamoyunggamitnya. actually that's dacionenpago but
with violence.
Art. 289. Formation, maintenance and prohibition of combination of

threats. The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine not exceeding 30
person who, for the purpose of organizing, maintaining or preventin
of laborers or lock-out of employees, shall employ violence or threa
force the laborers or employers in the free and legal exercise of their
constitute a more serious offense in accordance with the provisions o
Of course this would not be light if you hold a gun to his

head, you do not pay now? I'll kill you! It cannot be robbery
because there is not intent to gain but that will be coercion.
gravena.because you are threatening to inflict a wrong that
amounts to a crime. I will kill you if you do not pay. that
cannot be light.
And second half nyan, itong 287, take note, that is the crime
for unjust vexation which is not defined by the revised penal
code. angsinabilangdyan, any other coercion or unjust
vexation shall be punished by ganyanganyan. taposang
cute pa talagadito, when you read the ganyanganyan,
Chapter Three
DISCOVERY
AND
REVELATION
Art. 290. Discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence.
its minimum and medium periods and a fine not exceeding 500 peso
individual who in order to discover the secrets of another, shall seiz
contents thereof.
If the offender shall not reveal such secrets, the penalty shall be arr
500 pesos.
The provision shall not be applicable to parents, guardians, or pe

minors with respect to the papers or letters of the children or minors
to spouses with respect to the papers or letters of either of them.
anodaw and vexation. how do you define that, so itoyung

definition nya... to vex, to irritate, to annoy, etc. pastilan!
(lol) so angnangyari, this appears to be a catch all provision.
kunghindiyanmahulogsaibang article, because it annoys
me, o sige fights na! file tag unjust vexation. kasi nag cause
ka nag irritation. that's a very broad ano. ofcourse we go
back to the basic principle that there should be dolo.
Anything that will irritate you, or will vex you or annoy you
though shall not commit chismis. take note that exempted

ditoyung parents, guardians and persons entrusted with the
custody
of
minors.
kayayanangmga
mothers
sigegpanghilabotsamgagamitsaanak. sigegpangbasa, mga
account safacebook pang hilabtan. Ipadabrihan. unsa man
nisi mother wui. exempteddilina crime. also take not
exempted gihaponang spouse. kungmagminyomo, open
judnangmga papers nimosaimongasawa. sorrykanalang
kung naaymgasulodnangakuan. soyan, take note of the
exceptions.
basta kay may doloyun.

there is no serious material harm here kaya nga any other
coercion but the act is intended to vex annoy irritate etc.
Art. 291. Revealing secrets with abuse of office. The penalty of arr
500 pesos shall be imposed upon any manager, employee, or serva
the secrets of his principal or master and shall reveal such secrets.
example, remember that case nganaaypabasasa chapel

human naay nag sigeug construct ug fence. hindi man ito
interruption of religious worship, unjust vexation langdaw.
itomagandang
example,
kissing
an
ex
girl
friend,
paanonaging unjust vexation yan? kaygi-kiss mo because
Art. 292. Revelation of industrial secrets. The penalty of prisio

medium periods and a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be im
employee or workman of any manufacturing or industrial establishme
thereof, shall reveal the secrets of the industry of the latter.
you wanted to vex, annoy or irritate her. kay kung kiss

yanna may lewd intent ka, edi acts of lasciviousness pero if
ewewyan!
trade secrets, kung magbuhatkag brownie, haloanniuggulay
waladapat lewd intent, otherwise walana. and the essence
para masarap. tingalakasa party, lipay man tanan, enjoy
is the same you cannot take the law into your own hands.
lahatba. yan trade secrets, isabimoyan divulge that...yan.
naglagotka,
saimopajudkalagotgitilapannimo.
we are a government of laws not of men.

that's a practice now, pagnandaynkasa industry, before you
are allowed to go on separation, you are required to sign a
contract non-disclosure. but even if you don't have that,
pwedeka ma.file.an dito.
19
3. Penalty to be imposed on (sorry, inaudible) 4. Prescribed in

fine imposed in an ordinance.
I would like to emphasize some important points in Crim 1 and

Crim 2. Distinctions between crimes mala in se and mala
prohibita.We say that in mala in se intent is necessary while in
mala prohibita, it is not. Remember the case of People vs.
Sunico (C.A., 50 o.g. 5880) about schoolteachers as to the
deprivation of their right to suffrage, according to the CA
decision, its the kind that is inherently bad or wrong and
therefore should be pleaded as such. Kailangan may intent even
if the charge was under a special law.
Homicide committed by a band, robbery with homicide. Theres

robbery, theres also a special complex crime, robbery with
homicide or robbery with rape. Paanoipagsabayyan? Since
theres a special complex crime provided by the RPC for
Robbery with Homicide, what happens if there is multiple
homicides? How do you plead the other homicides? If there are
two or three people killed. Or Robbery with Rape, then the victim
was also killed. People vs. _ (inaudible). The court erred in
finding the appellants guilty with Robbery with Homicide
committed by a band. This is an erroneous denomination of the
crime committed. There is no crime of Robbery with Homicide
committed by a band. If Robbery with Homicide is committed by
a band, it is indictable offense denominated as Robbery with
Homicide, the element of band will be ordinary aggravating.
People vs. Sunico
People vs. Sultan
Criminal Law Review 2

October 13, 2014 full hour
Jen Yanto
The omission or failure to include a votersname in the registry list of voters

not only
it ishas
prohibited;
With is
respect
to wrong
rapes,because
the court
declared in some cases that the
it is wrong per se because it disenfranchises a voter and violates one occasion
of his fundamental
for such
act
of robberyrights.
do notHence,
increase
the penalty.
There were also cases
to be punishable, it must be shown that it has been committed with malice.
There
is nocommitted
clear showing
the instant as an aggravating circums
additional
rapes
wereinconsidered
case that the accused intentionally, willfully and maliciously omitted or Regala,
failed to the
include
the registry
of voters
the committed SHOULD NOT
courtinheld
that the list
additional
rapes
names of those voters. They cannot be punished criminally.
CIRCUMSTANCE despite a resultant anomalous situation wherein Robbe
Robbery with Multiple Rape in terms of gravity. The court realized that the
rapes or homicides for that matter to be considered as aggravating c
enumeration of aggravating circumstances under Article 14 is exclusive
Plunder (RA 7080) I told you the predicate crimes of Plunder
circumstances analogous to. Hence, the remedy lies with the legislatur
cannot be committed by a single act, it should be a series of
passed providing for the additional rapes and homicides as aggravating,
acts. These are separately filed by themselves but when they are
favor of the offender as no person may be brought within its terms, if he is
used to charge under Plunder, they become component crimes
of Plunder which are like common crimes absorbed in Rebellion.
Common crimes are mostly felonies, like malversation, robbery.
Accordingly, it is said that the component crimes of plunder are
Doctrine of Common Element. An element used to complete one
inherently immoral (mala in se), even if punished by a special
crime cannot be legally reused to complete the requisites of
law and accordingly, criminal intent must be established. Take
another crime. Example, Estafa through falsification of private
note, because the component crimes establish the intent of the
document.
crime under RA 7080.
Robbery with Homicide
With respect to Habitual Delinquents, first is retroactivity. We say
that laws are retroactive if favorable to the accused but it does
not apply to habitual delinquents. Now, also, the period of
People vs. Baron 2010
preventive suspension shall not be credited in the service of the
sentence when the convict is a HD under Article 39. Also under
A Conviction of homicide needs certainty that the Robbery is the central p
the ISL, he is not entitled to it and neither is he eligible for parole.
made incidental to the robbery. Precisely there is Robbery as the main c
Being a HD applies whether the stage is consummated,
taking of human life, but the killing may occur before, during or after the
frustrated or attempted and does not apply only to
place by reason of or on the occasion of robbery, all those who took part s
consummated. It applies in the same manner, even if your
of Robbery with Homicide, whether they actually took part in the killing un
participation is only that of an accomplice or accessory.
killing.
Liability of conspirators in relation to Art.2.
RA 9344.A child in conflict with the law commits a crime, he is 15
old orforunder,
the effectcases)
is exempting. There is an
People vs. Fontanil, (not sure about the case title, not clear, but rulingyears
is the same
many conspiracy
intervention program in 9344. 15 years and 1 day above, without
discernment, again it is exempting. There is still intervention
each conspirator is responsible for everything done by his confederates which are complementary in the execution
program. 15 years and 1 dayabove and below 18, with
of the common design so as its probable and natural consequences, even if it is not intended as part of the original
discernment, that becomes a privilege mitigating. Under 9344,
design, so hindisiyakasamasa original agreement. The responsibility of a conspirator is not confined to the
the intervention now becomes a diversion program. When is a
accomplishment of a particular purpose of conspiracy but extends to matter or acts incident to and growing out of the
minor not qualified for diversion?
purpose intended. Conspirators are there to have intended the consequences of their act and by purposely engaging
conspiracy which necessarily produces the prohibited result. They are in contemplation of law chargeable with
a. when the penalty imposable exceeds 6 years imprisonment.
intending that result. Conspirators are necessarily liable for the acts of another conspirator unless such act differs
(RA 9344 states that diversion measures may be resorted to only
radically and substantially from that which they intended to make.
by the court if penalty exceeds six years imprisonment, while
other diversion programs do not require court proceedings. See
Sec. 23 of RA 9344)
Application of Aggravating Circumstances.Specific privilege,
slight illegal detention, xx (inaudible). Special mitigating, those
b. if the child, his parents or guardians, do not consent with
are the two mitigating circumstances, no aggravating (Art 64, par
diversion. The records of the case of the child shall be forwarded
5). The principle is that the aggravating circumstances under the
to the law enforcement officer, prosecutor or the appropriate
RPC do not apply to special laws but take note of RA 8294, on
court, as the case may be.
the unlicensed firearms, it is ordinary aggravating, therefore,
subject to the offset rule.
Also, Section 58, persons below eighteen (18) years of age shall
be exempt from prosecution for the crime of vagrancy and
Also, special aggravating under RA 9262, the acts committed
prostitution under Section 202 of the Revised Penal Code. Now
against a woman who is pregnant or committed in the presence
remember nawalana yang Vagrancy under Act 1824. Also, of
of a child, elevates it to maximum. Special aggravating,
mendicancy under Presidential Decree No. 1563, and sniffing of
therefore, offset is not applicable.
rugby under Presidential Decree No. 1619, such prosecution
being inconsistent with the United Nations Convention on the
Mitigating or aggravating not considered in the imposition of a
Rights of the Child: Provided, That said persons shall undergo
penalty when: 1. Penalty is single and indivisible. 2. Negligence
appropriate counseling and treatment program.
20
What are status offenses under that? "Status Offenses" refers to

offenses which discriminate only against a child, while an adult
does not suffer any penalty for committing similar acts. Example:
curfew violations.
(a)
the kidnapping or detention lasts for more than three days;
(b)
it is committed by simulating public authority;
Distinctions between PD 603 and RA 9344.Suspension of

sentence is automatic in 9344, while you have to apply in 603.
(c)
any serious physical injuries are inflicted upon the person kidna
made or
Declarador vs. Gubaton
(d)
the person kidnapped or detained is a minor, female or a public offic
The essence of the crime of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of the vic
Thus, it is clear that a person who is convicted of an offense punishable
death,
or reclusion
of thebyintent
of life
the imprisonment,
accused to effect
the same. Moreover, if the victim i
perpetua is disqualified from availing the benefits of a suspended sentence.
"Punishable"
is defined
as "deserving
of, ransom, the duration of
illegally
detained for
the purpose
of extorting
or capable, or liable to punishment; liable to be punished; may be punished;
liablemeans
to punishment."
15orThe
word
Ransom here
money, price
consideration
paid or demanded for
"punishable" does not mean "must be punished," but "liable to be punished"
as specified.
16 In U.S. v. Villalon, the
will release
him from captivity.
Court defined punishable as "deserving of, or liable for, punishment." Thus, the term refers to the possible, not to the
actual sentence. It is concerned with the penalty which may be, and notAs
which
the is
CAimposed.
correctly stated, although the accused testified that he was
November 12, 2001, he had no duty under the law to detain Ma. Angel
The law merely amended Article 192 of P.D. No. 603, as amended by A.M.
No. 02-1-18-SC,
in thatofthe
suspension
of from her family.
undertaken
for the purpose
extorting
ransom
sentence shall be enjoyed by the juvenile even if he is already 18 years of age or more at the time of the
pronouncement of his/her guilt. The other disqualifications in Article 192 of P.D. No. 603, as amended, and Section 32
of A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC have not been deleted from Section 38 of Rep. Act No. 9344. Evidently, the intention of
Congress was to maintain the other disqualifications as provided in Article 192 of P.D. No. 603, as amended, and
Pp vs. Marquez
Aprilthe
13,imposable
2011
Section 32 of A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC. Hence, juveniles who have been convicted
of a crime
penalty for
which is reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or reclusion perpetua to death or death, are disqualified from having
their sentences suspended.
Art. 270. Kidnapping and failure to return a mi
perpetua shall be imposed upon any person who, being entrus
person, shall deliberately fail to restore the latter to his parents or
But consider Sec. 42 of RA 9344 which is probation as an alternative to imprisonment.
SEC. 42. Probation as an Alternative to Imprisonment. - The court may, after it shall have convicted and sentenced a
child in conflict with the law, and upon application at any time, place the child on probation in lieu of service of his/her
sentence taking into account the best interest of the child. For this purpose, Section 4 of Presidential Decree No. 968,
This crime has two essential elements:
otherwise known as the "Probation Law of 1976", is hereby amended accordingly.
The filing of the application in Section 4 shall be deemed a waiver of the right to appeal, or the automatic withdrawal
of a pending appeal. In other words, a child in conflict with the law can apply for probation anytime pursuant to Article
42 of RA 9344. On the other hand, Sec. 9 of PD 968 states that probation shall not to those sentenced to serve a
maximum term of imprisonment of more than six years imprisonment.
1. The offender is entrusted with the custody of a minor person
Sec. 5 par (m) of RA 9344 on the rights of the child in conflict with the law states the right to probation as an
alternative to imprisonment, if qualified under the Probation Law;
2. The offender deliberately fails to restore the said minor to his
Thus, pursuant to Declarador, Hence, juveniles who have been convicted of a crime the imposable penalty for which
is reclusion perpetua, life imprisonment or reclusion perpetua to death or death,
disqualified
from having
Thisare
Court,
in elucidating
on the their
elements of Article 270, stated
sentences suspended. Neither can they apply for probation since Sec. 9 of the Probation Law was not amended.
this crime is that the offender was entrusted with the custody of the minor
Parricide
kidnapping but the deliberate failure of that person to restore the minor to
such an offense is so severe, the Court further explained what deliberate
Pimentel vs. Pimentel, Sept. 13, 2010
Indeed, the word deliberate as used in Article 270 of the Revise
The annulment is not a prejudicial question in a criminal case for Parricide.

offender and headstrong, foolishly darin
than The
mererelationship
negligencebetween
- it mustthe
be premeditated,
the victim is the key element of the crime of parricide. The relationship between the offender and the victim xxx
however the issue xxx further, the relationship bet the victim and the offender is not victim is a key element in
parricide.
Rape.
Kidnapping
People vs. Dahilig June 13, 2011
Under Section 5(b), Article III of RA 7610 in relation to RA 8353, if the v

age, the offender should not be prosecuted for sexual abuse but for stat
Revised Penal Code and penalized with reclusion perpetua. On the other
In this case, the prosecution was able to prove all the elements of kidnapping:
offender should be charged with either sexual abuse under Section 5(b
(except paragraph 1[d]) of the Revised Penal Code. However, the offende
same
because
his right
against
jeopardy will be prejudiced. A pe
(1)
The offender is a private individual; not either of the parents of
the act
victim
or a public
officer
who double
has a duty
liability for a single criminal act. Likewise, rape cannot be complexed wi
under the law to detain a person;
Under Section 48 of the Revised Penal Code (on complex crimes), a felon
rape) cannot be complexed with an offense penalized by a special law.
(2)
He kidnaps or detains another, or in any manner deprives the latter of his liberty;
People vs. Abad. June 15, 2010
(3)
(4)
The act of detention or kidnapping must be illegal; and
Sometimes, some people might be confused. One of the general

principles is that there is no problem with respect to charges
In the commission of the offense, any of the following circumstances
present:
arisingisfrom
the same act where in fact one charge is under a
general law and the other is a special law. They have different
elements, but here, when we talk about rape, it is not allowed.
Anyway, it cannot be because this will be tantamount to double
jeopardy.
Transport in Drugs Cases.
The sweetheart offense
San Juan vs. People (May 30, 2011)
21
Transport as used under the Dangerous Drugs Act is defined to mean

another. The essential element of the charge is the movement of the dan
the present case, although petitioner and his co-accused were arrested in
The sweetheart theory or sweetheart defense is an oft-abused justification
they werethat
accosted.
rashly derides
From the
thefacts
intelligence
found byofthe RTC, that car was parke
this Court and sorely tests our patience. For the Court to even consider
show
giving
thatcredence
any distance
to such
wasdefense,
travelledit by
must
petitioner
be
with the drugs in his p
proven by compelling evidence. The defense cannot just present testimonial
transported
evidence
the drugs
in support
merelyofbecause
the theory,
he as
was
in in a motor vehicle when he
the instant case. Independent proof is required -- such as tokens, and
mementos,
is mere and
speculation.
photographs.
The There
rule is is
clear
none
that the guilt of the accused
presented here by the defense.
doubts should be resolved in favor of the accused. It is the responsibility
transport of dangerous drugs, namely, that transportation had taken place
some distance.
People vs. Olseco (April 11, 2011)
Delay in making accusations.

People vs. Saludo(April 6, 2011)
Anti-graft Law.
We have declared in a number of cases that delay or vacillation in making a criminal accusation does not necessarily
People
3, 2010 familial
impair the credibility of witnesses if such delay is satisfactorily explained.
Fearvs.
of SantillanoMarch
reprisal, social humiliation,
considerations, and economic reasons have been considered as sufficient explanations.
Section 3 (e). While Section 3(e) does not contain reference to private in
same law, nonetheless may be prosecuted under Sec 3(e) thereof if he
official to commit any offenses defined under Sec 3 (e). Clearly, the law pu
Dangerous drugs
prohibited acts enumerated under Sec 3. This is by Sec 9 which includes
3,4,5 and 6.
People vs. Manlangit(June 12, 2010)
Settled is the rule that the absence of a prior surveillance or test buy
does not ofaffect
the legality of the buy-bust
Description
RA 3019
operation. There is no textbook method of conducting buy-bust operations. The Court has left to the discretion of
police authorities the selection of effective means to apprehend drug
dealers. A prior
much lessCOMMITTEE
a
PRESIDENTIAL
ADsurveillance,
HOC FACT-FINDING
ON BEHEST LO
lengthy one, is not necessary, especially where the police operatives are
accompanied by their informant during the
14, 2001)
entrapment. Flexibility is a trait of good police work. We have held that when time is of the essence, the police may
dispense with the need for prior surveillance. In the instant case, having been accompanied by the informant to the
Under
Actany
No.prior
6770,
the Ombudsman
person who was peddling the dangerous drugs, the policemen need not
have Republic
conducted
surveillance
before has the power to investiga
public officer or employee when such act or omission appears to be illega
they undertook the buy-bust operation.
Ombudsman has the power to dismiss a complaint without going through
Administrative Order No, 07 of the Office of the Ombudsman, otherwise
Office of the Ombudsman."
Chain of custody
The rationale underlying the Court's ruling has been explained in numero
respect for the investigatory and prosecutory powers granted by the Const
upon practicality as well.
While a perfect chain of custody is almost always impossible to achieve, an unbroken chain becomes indispensable
and essential in the prosecution of drug cases owing to its susceptibility to alteration, tampering, contamination and
even substitution and exchange. Hence, every link must be accountedSec.
for. 15 Art 11, of the 1987 Constitution, provided that the
Ombudsmans power to investigate shall not be barred by
prescription, laches or estoppels. It applies only to civil action for
recovery of ill-gotten wealth and not criminal action including
Like I said in chain of custody, your evidence is only as strong or
those involving offenses under RA 3019.
as weak as it can be. Pagmeronyan unaccounted na link,
walakangkaso, because of its susceptibility to alteration and
So yungsinabikona petition for forfeiture, the 1987 constitution
substitution.
effectively repealed that. But this refers only to civil forfeiture.
Although angsabi, there is a case under 1379, they are akin or
the nature is that of criminal, against property, it is only the
People vs. Ramolete (case not found but ruling is same as in other drugs cases)
nature. Under 1379, it does not prescribe. Pero if its criminal
forfeiture, there is a distinction. What is an example? We go back
Provided, further, that non-compliance with these requirements under justifiable
as long as
the is
integrity
andpenalty but that is
to Plunder.grounds,
You remember,
there
a specific
evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending
officer/team,
shall notprocedure
render void
only for forfeiture.
That is criminal
in nature.
and invalid such seizures of and custody over said items.
Acts of lasciviousness.
Pp. vs. Lorena (January 10, 2011)
What is of utmost importance is the preservation of the integrity

of the items seized. You have to go back to the chain of custody,
it is basic. If it is intact, the evidence still retains its integrity.
People vs. Bonaagua (June 6, 2011)
Presumption of Regularity
Section 5 (b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610, defines and penalizes acts of la
follows:
Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual Abuse. -- Children, whethe

any other consideration or due to the coercion or influence of any adu
intercourse or lascivious conduct, are deemed to be children exploited in p
This presumption, it must be stressed, is not conclusive. It cannot, by itself, overcome the constitutional presumption
of innocence. Any taint of irregularity affects the whole performance and
should make the presumption unavailable.
x xxx
The presumption, in other words, obtains only when nothing in the records suggests that the law enforcers involved
deviated from the standard conduct of official duty as provided for in the law. But where the official act in question is
Thoseof who
commit the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious condu
irregular on its face, as in this case, an adverse presumption arises as (b)
a matter
course.
subject to other sexual abuse; Provided, That when the victims is under
shall be prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape and Articl
Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case may be
People vs. Capuno (January 19, 2011)
22
3. other forms of coercion,

4. abduction,
conduct when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion
temporal in its medium period.
1. threat, or
5. fraud,
6. deception,
Paragraph (b) punishes sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct not 7.
onlyabuse
with a of
childpower
exploited
in prostitution,
2. use ofbut
force, or
or of
also with a child subjected to other sexual abuses. It covers not only a situation
where a child is abused for profit, but
position,
also where one through coercion, intimidation or influence, engages in8.sexual
intercourse
or lascivious
conduct
taking
advantage
of the
3.
otherwith
forms of coercion,
a child.
vulnerability
of
the
person, or,
4. abduction,
9. the giving or receiving of
payments or benefits to
Illegal possession of firearms.
5. fraud,
achieve the consent of a
person having control
over another person
6. deception,
Fajardo vs. People (January 10, 2011)
7. abuse of power or of
Certainly, illegal possession of firearms, or, in this case, part of a firearm, is committed when the holder thereof:
position,
(1)
possesses a firearm or a part thereof
(2)
lacks the authority or license to possess the firearm.
8.
taking advantage of the

vulnerability
of
the
person, or,
The rule is that ownership is not an essential element of illegal possession of firearms and ammunition. What
thegiving
law or receiving of
9. the
requires is merely possession which includes not only actual physical possession but also constructive possession
or or benefits to
payments
the subjection of the thing to ones control and management. This has to be so if the manifest intent of the lawachieve
is to bethe consent of a
effective. The same evils, the same perils to public security, which the law penalizes exist whether the unlicensed
person having control
holder of a prohibited weapon be its owner or a borrower. To accomplish the object of this law, the proprietaryover
concept
another person
of the possession can have no bearing whatsoever.
Cybercrime Law. (RA 10175)Cited libel as one of the contentrelated offenses under Chapter II in Punishable Acts.
Libel. The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in
Article 355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, committed
through a computer system or any other similar means which
may be devised in the future.
October 14, 2014
The special law covering Trafficking in Persons is R.A. 9208
[Anti-trafficking in Persons Act of 2003], but there is an
amendatory law R.A. 10364 [Expanded Anti-trafficking in
Persons Act of 2012].
R.A.
9208
Section
3.
Definition of Terms
(a) Trafficking in Persons refers to the [Act of]:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
for
the
purpose
of
exploitation which includes
at a minimum:
1. the exploitation or
2. the prostitution of others
or
3. other forms of sexual
exploitation,
4. forced labor or services,
5. slavery,
6. servitude or
7. the removal or sale of
organs.
R.A. 10364 Section 3.

Definition of Terms
(a) Trafficking
in
Persons refers to the [Act
of]:
recruitment,
1.
recruitment,
2.
obtaining,
3.
hiring,
4.
providing,
5.
offering,
6.
transportation,
7.
transfer,
8.
maintaining,
9.
harboring, or
transportation,
transfer or
harboring, or
receipt of persons with or
without
the
victim's
consent or knowledge,
within or across national
borders
10. receipt of persons with or

without
the
victims
consent or knowledge,
within or across national
borders
by means of:
1. threat or
2. use of force, or
by means of:
The
recruitment,
transportation,
transfer,
harboring or receipt of a child
for the purpose of exploitation
shall also be considered as
"trafficking in persons" even if
it does not involve any of the
means set forth in the
preceding paragraph.
for
the
purpose
of
exploitation which includes
at a minimum:
1.
the exploitation or
2.
the prostitution of others

or
3.
other forms of sexual

exploitation,
4.
forced labor or services,
5.
slavery,
6.
servitude or
7.
the removal or sale of

organs.
The
recruitment,
transportation,
transfer,
harboring,
adoption
or
receipt of a child for the
purpose of exploitation or
when the adoption is
induced by any form of
consideration
for
exploitative purposes shall
also be considered as
trafficking in persons even if
it does not involve any of the
means set forth in the
preceding paragraph.
The definition provided under Section 3(a) of R.A. 9208 and R.A.
10364 respectively provides for the elements of Trafficking in
persons. As mentioned above, there are many acts e.g.
recruitment, transportation etc. So you have ACTS then you
have MEANS e.g. threat, use of force etc. Now what makes TIP
(trafficking in persons) different is its PURPOSE. The purpose in
TIP is exploitative e.g. exploitation, prostitution or other forms of
sexual exploitation, servitude and even the removal of organs.
Yan
ang
dapat
ninyong
tandaan
sa
TIP.
ACTS+MEANS+EXPLOITATIVE PURPOSE=TIP!
Another type of TIP is that which involves a child. The
recruitment, transportation, transfer, harboring, adoption or
receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation or when the
adoption is induced by any form of consideration for
exploitative purposes shall also be considered as trafficking in
persons.
Now what distinguishes the manner of the offense when it comes
to a child is that the presence of the means as provided under
Section 3(a) is not required. The law provides, when a child is
involved it shall also be considered as trafficking in persons.
even if it does not involve any of the means set forth in the
preceding paragraph. You only have to consider the ACT and
the exploitative purpose even if there is no MEANS as
enumerated are present, it will still be TIP! It is no longer
necessary to prove the means. ACTS and EXPLOITATIVE
PURPOSE yan lang ang elements ng TIP basta child ang pinaguusapan.
These are the exploitative purposes in TIP:
(c) Prostitution
(d) Forced Labor
(e) Slavery .
(f) Involuntary Servitude
(g) Sex Tourism
(h) Sexual Exploitation
(i) Debt Bondage
(j) Pornography [R.A. 10364]
So these are the exploitative purposes. Again, TIP cannot exist
without its 3 elements ACTS, MEANS and EXPLOITATIVE
PURPOSES. But if the TIP involves a child then you can do
away with the means. Under the law [R.A. 10364], a child is
defined as:
(b) Child refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age
or one who is over eighteen (18) but is unable to fully take
care of or protect himself/herself from abuse, neglect, cruelty,
exploitation, or discrimination because of a physical or mental
disability or condition.
So Child is not necessarily under 18, but one who is over 18 but
is unable to fully take care of or protect himself/herself. Under
the TIP, considered ka pa rin as a child.
Now the exploitative purposes under the TIP are defined as
follows:
(c) Prostitution refers to any act, transaction, scheme or design
involving the use of a person by another, for sexual intercourse
or lascivious conduct in exchange for money, profit or any other
consideration.
23
services and practices offered during rest and recreation periods

for members of the military.
(h) Sexual Exploitation refers to participation by a person in
prostitution, pornography or the production of pornography, in
exchange for money, profit or any other consideration or where
the participation is caused or facilitated by any means of
intimidation or threat, use of force, or other forms of coercion,
abduction, fraud, deception, debt bondage, abuse of power or of
position or of legal process, taking advantage of the vulnerability
of the person, or giving or receiving of payments or benefits to
achieve the consent of a person having control over another
person; or in sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct caused or
facilitated by any means as provided in this Act.
(i) Debt Bondage refers to the pledging by the debtor of his/her
personal services or labor or those of a person under his/her
control as security or payment for a debt, when the length and
nature of services is not clearly defined or when the value of the
services as reasonably assessed is not applied toward the
liquidation of the debt.
(j) Pornography refers to any representation, through
publication, exhibition, cinematography, indecent shows,
information technology, or by whatever means, of a person
engaged in real or simulated explicit sexual activities or any
representation of the sexual parts of a person for primarily
sexual purposes. [R.A. 10364]
SEC. 4. Acts of Trafficking in Persons. It shall be unlawful for
any person, natural or juridical, to commit any of the following
acts:
(a) To recruit, obtain, hire, provide, offer, transport, transfer,
maintain, harbor, or receive a person by any means, including
those done under the pretext of domestic or overseas
employment or training or apprenticeship, for the purpose of
prostitution, pornography, or sexual exploitation;
Is there any distinction between prostitution in TIP with that
defined under the RPC? Yes! Under the TIP, hindi kailangang
HABITUALLY INDULGED! In the RPC, dapat may pattern ka,
you should have habitually indulged in it. Now under TIP, even if
it only involves a single transaction involving sexual intercourse
or lascivious conduct, pasok ka na sa TIP without the need of
establishing habituality.
(b) To introduce or match for money, profit, or material, economic
or other consideration, any person or, as provided for under
Republic Act No. 6955, any Filipino woman to a foreign national,
for marriage for the purpose of acquiring, buying, offering, selling
or trading him/her to engage in prostitution, pornography, sexual
exploitation, forced labor, slavery, involuntary servitude or debt
bondage;
(d) Forced Labor refers to the extraction of work or services

from any person by means of enticement, violence, intimidation
or threat, use of, force or coercion, including deprivation of
freedom, abuse of authority or moral ascendancy, debt-bondage
or deception including any work or service extracted from any
person under the menace of penalty.
Debt bondage, you work for somebody in payment of a debt.

Now if these are the exploitative purposes, then it would fall
under TIP. You are forced to serve but that does not include
when you are in penal institution. Slavery, you have no rights of
ownership dahil ikaw mismo you are owned.
(e) Slavery refers to the status or condition of a person over

whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership
are exercised.
(c) To offer or contract marriage, real or simulated, for the

purpose of acquiring, buying, offering, selling, or trading them to
engage in prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, forced
labor or slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
(f) Involuntary Servitude refers to a condition of enforced and

compulsory service induced by means of any scheme, plan or
pattern, intended to cause a person to believe that if he or she
did not enter into or continue in such condition, he or she or
another person would suffer serious harm or other forms of
abuse or physical restraint, or threat of abuse or harm, or
coercion including depriving access to travel documents and
withholding salaries, or the abuse or threatened abuse of the
legal process.
(g) Sex Tourism refers to a program organized by travel and
tourism-related establishments and individuals which consists of
tourism packages or activities, utilizing and offering escort and
sexual services as enticement for tourists. This includes sexual
This involves mail order bride scheme. But we have to

remember that there is a separate law covering Mail order
brides. So what is the difference? Basta sa TIP remember that
there is an exploitative purpose while sa Mail order bride law,
hindi kailangan na may exploitative purpose! Basta remember, to
fall under TIP dapat may exploitative purpose siya either to
engage in prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, forced
labor or slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage.
(d) To undertake or organize tours and travel plans consisting of
tourism packages or activities for the purpose of utilizing and
offering persons for prostitution, pornography or sexual
exploitation;
(e) To maintain or hire a person to engage in prostitution or
pornography;
(f) To adopt persons by any form of consideration for exploitative
purposes or to facilitate the same for purposes of prostitution,
pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor, slavery,
involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
(g) To adopt or facilitate the adoption of persons for the purpose
of prostitution, pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor,
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
(h) To recruit, hire, adopt, transport, transfer, obtain, harbor,
maintain, provide, offer, receive or abduct a person, by means of
threat or use of force, fraud, deceit, violence, coercion, or
intimidation for the purpose of removal or sale of organs of said
person;
(i) To recruit, transport, obtain, transfer, harbor, maintain, offer,
hire, provide, receive or adopt a child to engage in armed
activities in the Philippines or abroad;
Before they are called CISAC or Children in situations of Armed
Conflict.
(j) To recruit, transport, transfer, harbor, obtain, maintain, offer,
hire, provide or receive a person by means defined in Section 3
of this Act for purposes of forced labor, slavery, debt bondage
and involuntary servitude, including a scheme, plan, or pattern
intended to cause the person either:
(1) To believe that if the person did not perform such
labor or services, he or she or another person would
suffer serious harm or physical restraint; or
(2) To abuse or threaten the use of law or the legal
processes; and
(k) To recruit, transport, harbor, obtain, transfer, maintain, hire,
offer, provide, adopt or receive a child for purposes of
exploitation or trading them, including but not limited to, the act
of baring and/or selling a child for any consideration or for barter
for purposes of exploitation. Trafficking for purposes of
exploitation of children shall include:
(1) All forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery,
involuntary servitude, debt bondage and forced labor,
including recruitment of children for use in armed
conflict;
(2) The use, procuring or offering of a child for
prostitution, for the production of pornography, or for
pornographic performances;
(3) The use, procuring or offering of a child for the
production and trafficking of drugs; and
(4) The use, procuring or offering of a child for illegal
activities or work which, by its nature or the
circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm
their health, safety or morals; and
(l) To organize or direct other persons to commit the offenses
defined as acts of trafficking under this Act. [R.A. 10364]
Just remember the 3 basic elements - ACTS, MEANS &
EXPLOITATIVE PURPOSES.
Introduced in the amendatory law are provisions penalizing
Attempted Trafficking and providing liability for accomplice
and accessories in TIP. Because as you remember, usually
under Special Laws, there is no attempted stage, unless of
course as in this case, it is expressly provided for in the
special law. So under R.A.10364 even the attempted stage of
TIP is punished. Sec. 4-A provides:
SEC. 4-A. Attempted Trafficking in Persons.
Where there are acts to initiate the
commission of a trafficking offense but the
offender failed to or did not execute all the
24
elements of the crime, by accident or by

reason of some cause other than voluntary
desistance, such overt acts shall be
deemed as an attempt to commit an act of
trafficking in persons. As such, an attempt to
commit any of the offenses enumerated in
Section 4 of this Act shall constitute attempted
trafficking in persons.
In cases where the victim is a child, any of the
following acts shall also be deemed as
attempted trafficking in persons:
(a) Facilitating the travel of a child who travels
alone to a foreign country or territory without
valid reason therefor and without the required
clearance or permit from the Department of
Social Welfare and Development, or a written
permit or justification from the childs parent or
legal guardian;
(b) Executing, for a consideration, an affidavit
of consent or a written consent for adoption;
(c) Recruiting a woman to bear a child for the
purpose of selling the child;
(d) Simulating a birth for the purpose of selling
the child; and
(e) Soliciting a child and acquiring the custody
thereof through any means from among
hospitals, clinics, nurseries, daycare centers,
refugee or evacuation centers, and low-income
families, for the purpose of selling the child.
SEC. 4-B. Accomplice Liability. Whoever
knowingly aids, abets, cooperates in the
execution of the offense by previous or
simultaneous acts defined in this Act shall be
punished in accordance with the provisions of
Section 10(c) of this Act.
SEC. 4-C. Accessories. Whoever has the
knowledge of the commission of the crime, and
without having participated therein, either as
principal or as accomplices, take part in its
commission in any of the following manners:
(a) By profiting themselves or assisting the
offender to profit by the effects of the crime;
(b) By concealing or destroying the body of the
crime or effects or instruments thereof, in order
to prevent its discovery;
(c) By harboring, concealing or assisting in the
escape of the principal of the crime, provided
the accessory acts with abuse of his or her
public functions or is known to be habitually
guilty of some other crime.
Acts defined in this provision shall be punished
in accordance with the provision of Section
10(d) as stated thereto.
Now when is TIP Qualified? R.A. 9208 as amended by R.A.
10364 provides:
SEC. 6. Qualified Trafficking in Persons.
Violations of Section 4 of this Act shall be
considered as qualified trafficking:
(a) When the trafficked person is a child;
(b) When the adoption is effected through
Republic Act No. 8043, otherwise known as
the "Inter-Country Adoption Act of 1995" and
said adoption is for the purpose of prostitution,
pornography, sexual exploitation, forced labor,
slavery, involuntary servitude or debt bondage;
(c) When the crime is committed by a
syndicate, or in large scale. Trafficking is
deemed committed by a syndicate if carried
out by a group of three (3) or more persons
conspiring or confederating with one another. It
is deemed committed in large scale if
committed against three (3) or more persons,
individually or as a group;
(d) When the offender is a spouse, an
ascendant, parent, sibling, guardian or a
person who exercises authority over the
trafficked person or when the offense is
committed by a public officer or employee;
(e) When the trafficked person is recruited to
engage in prostitution with any member of the
military or law enforcement agencies;
(f) When the offender is a member of the
military or law enforcement agencies;
(g) When by reason or on occasion of the act
of trafficking in persons, the offended party
dies, becomes insane, suffers mutilation or is
afflicted with Human Immunodeficiency Virus
(HIV) or the Acquired Immune Deficiency
Syndrome (AIDS);
(h) When the offender commits one or more
violations of Section 4 over a period of sixty
(60) or more days, whether those days are
continuous or not; and
(i) When the offender directs or through
another manages the trafficking victim in
carrying out the exploitative purpose of
trafficking.
Under the special law on TIP as amended, even promoting
TIP is punishable. What acts are considered as promoting
TIP?
SEC. 5. Acts that Promote Trafficking in
Persons. The following acts which promote
or facilitate trafficking in persons, shall be
unlawful:
(a) To knowingly lease or sublease, use or
allow to be used any house, building or
establishment for the purpose of promoting
trafficking in persons;
(b) To produce, print and issue or distribute
unissued, tampered or fake counseling
certificates, registration stickers, overseas
employment certificates or other certificates of
any government agency which issues these
certificates, decals and such other markers as
proof of compliance with government
regulatory and pre-departure requirements for
the purpose of promoting trafficking in
persons;
(c) To advertise, publish, print, broadcast or
distribute, or cause the advertisement,
publication,
printing,
broadcasting
or
distribution by any means, including the use of
information technology and the internet, of any
brochure, flyer, or any propaganda material
that promotes trafficking in persons;
(d)
To
assist
in
the
conduct
of
misrepresentation or fraud for purposes of
facilitating the acquisition of clearances and
necessary exit documents from government
agencies that are mandated to provide pre-
25
departure registration and services for

departing persons for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
(e) To facilitate, assist or help in the exit and
entry of persons from/to the country at
international and local airports, territorial
boundaries and seaports who are in
possession of unissued, tampered or
fraudulent travel documents for the purpose of
promoting trafficking in persons;
(f) To confiscate, conceal, or destroy the
passport, travel documents, or personal
documents or belongings of trafficked persons
in furtherance of trafficking or to prevent them
from leaving the country or seeking redress
from the government or appropriate agencies;
and
This
includes
victims
abroad
whose
documents are confiscated by their employers.
Kasali ito dito!
(g) To knowingly benefit from, financial or
otherwise, or make use of, the labor or
services of a person held to a condition of
involuntary servitude, forced labor, or slavery.
(h) To tamper with, destroy, or cause the
destruction of evidence, or to influence or
attempt to influence witnesses, in an
investigation or prosecution of a case under
this Act;
(i) To destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate or
possess, or attempt to destroy, conceal,
remove, confiscate or possess, any actual or
purported passport or other travel, immigration
or working permit or document, or any other
actual or purported government identification,
of any person in order to prevent or restrict, or
attempt to prevent or restrict, without lawful
authority, the persons liberty to move or travel
in order to maintain the labor or services of
that person; or
(j) To utilize his or her office to impede the
investigation, prosecution or execution of
lawful orders in a case under this Act.
Confidentiality. Closed-door investigation, prosecution or
trial. The name and personal circumstances of the trafficked
person or any other information tending to establish the
identity of the trafficked person and his or her family shall
not be disclosed to the public. It shall be unlawful to cause
publicity of the name, personal circumstances, or any
information tending to establish the identity of the trafficked
person.
SEC. 7. Confidentiality. At any stage of the
investigation, rescue, prosecution and trial of
an offense under this Act, law enforcement
officers, prosecutors, judges, court personnel,
social workers and medical practitioners, as
well as parties to the case, shall protect the
right to privacy of the trafficked person.
Towards this end, law enforcement officers,
prosecutors and judges to whom the complaint
has been referred may, whenever necessary
to ensure a fair and impartial proceeding, and
after considering all circumstances for the best
interest of the parties, order a closed-door
investigation, prosecution or trial. The name
and personal circumstances of the trafficked
person or any other information tending to
establish the identity of the trafficked person
and his or her family shall not be disclosed to
the public.
It shall be unlawful for any editor, publisher,
and reporter or columnist in case of printed
materials, announcer or producer in case of
television and radio, producer and director of a
film in case of the movie industry, or any
person utilizing tri-media facilities or electronic
information technology to cause publicity of the
name, personal circumstances, or any
information tending to establish the identity of
the trafficked person except when the
trafficked person in a written statement duly
notarized knowingly, voluntarily and willingly
waives said confidentiality.
Law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges,
court personnel, social workers and medical
practitioners shall be trained on the importance
of maintaining confidentiality as a means to
protect the right to privacy of victims and to
encourage victims to file complaints.
SEC. 8 Initiation and Prosecution of Cases.
(a) Initiation
of
Investigation.
Law
enforcement agencies are mandated to
immediately initiate investigation and countertrafficking-intelligence gathering upon receipt
of statements or affidavit from victims of
trafficking, migrant workers, or their families
who are in possession of knowledge or
information about trafficking in persons cases.
(b) Prosecution of Cases. Any person who
has personal knowledge of the commission of
any offense under this Act, such as the
trafficked person, the parents, spouse,
siblings, children or legal guardian may file a
complaint for trafficking.
(c) Affidavit of Desistance. Cases involving
trafficking in persons should not be dismissed
based on the affidavit of desistance executed
by the victims or their parents or legal
guardians. Public and private prosecutors are
directed to oppose and manifest objections to
motions for dismissal.
Any act involving the means provided in this
Act or any attempt thereof for the purpose of
securing an Affidavit of Desistance from the
complainant shall be punishable under this
Act.
Where do you file a complaint for TIP?
Where the crime is committed or any of its essential elements
occured because it is considered as a continuing crime or where
the victim actually resides at the time of the commission of the
offense.
Note that Use is also punishable under TIP!
SEC. 11. Use of Trafficked Persons. Any
person who buys or engages the services of a
trafficked person for prostitution shall be
penalized with the following: Provided, That
the Probation Law (Presidential Decree No.
968) shall not apply:
(a) Prision Correccional in its maximum period
to prision mayor or six (6) years to twelve (12)
years imprisonment and a fine of not less than
Fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00) but not
more than One hundred thousand pesos
(P100,000.00): Provided, however, That the
following acts shall be exempted thereto:
(1) If an offense under paragraph (a) involves
sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct with a
child, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal in
its medium period to reclusion perpetua or
seventeen (17) years to forty (40) years
imprisonment and a fine of not less than Five
26
hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) but

not
more
than
One
million
pesos
(P1,000,000.00);
(2) If an offense under paragraph (a) involves
carnal knowledge of, or sexual intercourse
with, a male or female trafficking victim and
also involves the use of force or intimidation, to
a victim deprived of reason or to an
unconscious victim, or a victim under twelve
(12) years of age, instead of the penalty
prescribed in the subparagraph above the
penalty shall be a fine of not less than One
million pesos (P1,000,000.00) but not more
than Five million pesos (P5,000,000.00) and
imprisonment of reclusion perpetua or forty
(40) years imprisonment with no possibility of
parole; except that if a person violating
paragraph (a) of this section knows the person
that provided prostitution services is in fact a
victim of trafficking, the offender shall not be
likewise penalized under this section but under
Section 10 as a person violating Section 4;
and if in committing such an offense, the
offender also knows a qualifying circumstance
for trafficking, the offender shall be penalized
under Section 10 for qualified trafficking. If in
violating this section the offender also violates
Section 4, the offender shall be penalized
under Section 10 and, if applicable, for
qualified trafficking instead of under this
section;
(b) Deportation. If a foreigner commits any
offense described by paragraph (1) or (2) of
this section or violates any pertinent provision
of this Act as an accomplice or accessory to,
or by attempting any such offense, he or she
shall be immediately deported after serving his
or her sentence and be barred permanently
from entering the country; and
(c) Public Official. If the offender is a public
official, he or she shall be dismissed from
service and shall suffer perpetual absolute
disqualification to hold public, office, in addition
to any imprisonment or fine received pursuant
to any other provision of this Act.
Now Prescription. TIP shall prescribe in 10 years, if
committed by a syndicate or in large scale or against a
child, prescribes in 20 years.
SEC. 12. Prescriptive Period. Trafficking
cases under this Act shall prescribe in ten (10)
years: Provided,
however, That
trafficking
cases committed by a syndicate or in a large
scale as defined under Section 6, or against a
child, shall prescribe in twenty (20) years.
The prescriptive period shall commence to run
from the day on which the trafficked person is
delivered or released from the conditions
of bondage, or in the case of a child victim,
from the day the child reaches the age of
majority, and shall be interrupted by the filing
of the complaint or information and shall
commence to run again when the proceedings
terminate without the accused being convicted
or acquitted or are unjustifiably stopped for any
reason not imputable to the accused.
Note also that the consent of the trafficked persons is
irrelevant under the law. This is usually defense. But in TIP,
once the 3 elements are established it doesnt matter if it is
with or without consent of the Trafficked person.
SEC. 17-B. Irrelevance of Past Sexual
Behavior, Opinion Thereof or Reputation of
Victims and of Consent of Victims in Cases of
Deception, Coercion and Other Prohibited
Means. The past sexual behavior or the
sexual predisposition of a trafficked person
shall be considered inadmissible in evidence
for the purpose of proving consent of the victim
to engage in sexual behavior, or to prove the
predisposition, sexual or otherwise, of a
trafficked person. Furthermore, the consent of
a victim of trafficking to the intended
exploitation shall be irrelevant where any of
the means set forth in Section 3(a) of this Act
has been used.
Also note that trafficked persons as well as to law enforcer
and social workers and other persons acting by virtue of a
valid order are all given legal protection under the law.
SEC. 17. Legal Protection to Trafficked
Persons. Trafficked persons shall be
recognized as victims of the act or acts of
trafficking and as such, shall not be penalized
for unlawful acts committed as a direct result
of, or as an incident or in relation to, being
trafficked based on the acts of trafficking
enumerated in this Act or in obedience to the
order made by the trafficker in relation thereto.
In this regard, the consent of a trafficked
person to the intended exploitation set forth in
this Act shall be irrelevant.
Victims of trafficking for purposes of
prostitution as defined under Section 4 of this
Act are not covered by Article 202 of the
Revised Penal Code and as such, shall not be
prosecuted, fined, or otherwise penalized
under the said law.
SEC. 17-A. Temporary Custody of Trafficked
Victims. The rescue of victims should be
done as much as possible with the assistance
of the DSWD or an accredited NGO that
services trafficked victims. A law enforcement
officer, on a reasonable suspicion that a
person is a victim of any offense defined under
this Act including attempted trafficking, shall
immediately place that person in the
temporary custody of the local social welfare
and development office, or any accredited or
licensed shelter institution devoted to
protecting trafficked persons after the rescue.
SEC. 17-C. Immunity from Suit, Prohibited
Acts and Injunctive Remedies. No action or
suit shall be brought, instituted or maintained
in any court or tribunal or before any other
authority against any: (a) law enforcement
officer; (b) social worker; or (c) person acting
in compliance with a lawful order from any of
the above, for lawful acts done or statements
made during an authorized rescue operation,
recovery or rehabilitation/intervention, or an
investigation or prosecution of an antitrafficking case: Provided, That such acts shall
have been made in good faith.
The prosecution of retaliatory suits against
victims of trafficking shall be held in abeyance
pending final resolution and decision of
criminal complaint for trafficking.
27
Next is a very important provision on extraterritorial jurisdiction:

SEC. 26-A. Extra-Territorial Jurisdiction. The
State shall exercise jurisdiction over any act
defined and penalized under this Act, even if
committed outside the Philippines and whether
or not such act or acts constitute an offense at
the place of commission, the crime being a
continuing offense, having been commenced
in the Philippines and other elements having
been committed in another country, if the
suspect or accused:
(a) Is a Filipino citizen; or
(b) Is a permanent resident of the Philippines;
or
(c) Has committed the act against a citizen of
the Philippines.
No prosecution may be commenced against a
person under this section if a foreign
government, in accordance with jurisdiction
recognized by the Philippines, has prosecuted
or is prosecuting such person for the conduct
constituting such offense, except upon the
approval of the Secretary of Justice.
The government may surrender or extradite
persons accused of trafficking in the
Philippines to the appropriate international
court if any, or to another State pursuant to the
applicable extradition laws and treaties.
Let us now go to the related laws. Meron similar
prohibitions under the Child Abuse Law. The difference is
that the Means and Exploitative Purposes are not necessary
in the Anti-Child Abuse Law [R.A. 7610]. May child
trafficking din under R.A. 7610. Section 7 of R.A. 7610
provides;
Section 7. Child Trafficking. Any person
who shall engage in trading and dealing with
children including, but not limited to, the act of
buying and selling of a child for money, or for
any other consideration, or barter, shall suffer
the penalty of reclusion temporal to reclusion
perpetua. The penalty shall be imposed in its
maximum period when the victim is under
twelve (12) years of age.
So similar diba. Pero for example wala kang
evidence on exploitative purpose and or the means,
so punta ka nalang under R.A. 7610.
Now there is also USE OF CHILDREN. Under the
RPC it is only aggravating. However, under R.A.
7610 it is considered as an offense. Note however
that under R.A. 7610 exploitative purpose is not
needed.
Section 10. Other Acts of Neglect, Abuse,
Cruelty or Exploitation and Other Conditions
Prejudicial to the Child's Development.
It shall be prohibited for the DFA, the

DOLE, and the POEA officials, law
enforcement officers, prosecutors and
judges to urge complainants to abandon
their criminal, civil and administrative
complaints for trafficking.
(e) Any person who shall use,

coerce, force or intimidate a street
child or any other child to;
The remedies of injunction and attachment of

properties of the traffickers, illegal recruiters
and persons involved in trafficking may be
issued motu proprio by judges.
(2) Act as conduit or

middlemen in drug trafficking
or pushing; or
(1) Beg or use begging as a

means of living;
(3) Conduct any illegal
activities, shall suffer the
penalty
of
prision
correccional in its medium
period to reclusion perpetua.
(c) The employer shall formulate and

implement, subject to the approval
and
supervision
of
competent
authorities, a continuing program for
training and skill acquisition of the
child.
Section 9. Obscene Publications and Indecent

Shows. Any person who shall hire, employ,
use, persuade, induce or coerce a child to
perform in obscene exhibitions and indecent
shows, whether live or in video, or model in
obscene
publications
or
pornographic
materials or to sell or distribute the said
materials shall suffer the penalty of prision
mayor in its medium period.
If the child used as a performer, subject or
seller/distributor is below twelve (12) years of
age, the penalty shall be imposed in its
maximum period.
Any ascendant, guardian, or person entrusted
in any capacity with the care of a child who
shall cause and/or allow such child to be
employed or to participate in an obscene play,
scene, act, movie or show or in any other acts
covered by this section shall suffer the penalty
of prision mayor in its medium period.
Employment of Children:
Section
12. Employment
of
Children.
Children below fifteen (15) years of age may
be employed except:
(1) When a child works directly under
the sole responsibility of his parents
or legal guardian and where only
members of the employer's family are
employed: Provided, however, That
his employment neither endangers
his life, safety and health and morals,
nor impairs his normal development:
Provided, further, That the parent or
legal guardian shall provide the said
minor child with the prescribed
primary and/or secondary education;
or
(2) When a child's employment or
participation in public & entertainment
or information through cinema,
theater, radio or television is
essential: Provided, The employment
contract concluded by the child's
parent or guardian, with the express
agreement of the child concerned, if
possible, and the approval of the
Department
of
Labor
and
Employment: Provided, That the
following
requirements
in
all
instances are strictly complied with:
(a) The employer shall ensure the
protection, health, safety and morals
of the child;
(b) the employer shall institute
measures to prevent the child's
exploitation or discrimination taking
into account the system and level of
remuneration, and the duration and
arrangement of working time; and;
28
In the above exceptional cases where any

such child may be employed, the employer
shall first secure, before engaging such child,
a work permit from the Department of Labor
and Employment which shall ensure
observance of the above requirement.
The Department of Labor Employment shall
promulgate rules and regulations necessary
for the effective implementation of this Section.
OCTOBER 16, 2014

PD 1405 SECRECY OF BANK DEPOSITS ACT
You cannot inquire into the bank deposits of anybody as a rule.
Section 2 All deposits of whatever nature with banks or
banking institutions in the Philippines including investments or
bonds issued by the Government of the Philippines and political
subdivisions, instrumentalities are hereby considered as of
absolutely confidential nature and may not be examined,
inquired or looked into by any person, government official or
office EXCEPT:
1.
2.
Upon written permission of the depositor

In cases of impeachment
Corona Impeachment He did not want to disclose his

dollar accounts. Why? he was standing on strong legal
grounds.
RA 6426 Foreign Currency Deposits Act
Section 8 all foreign currency deposits authorized under
this act as well as other foreign currency deposits are
hereby declared, considered an absolutely confidential
nature and EXCEPT upon written permission of the
depositor, in no instance shall his deposit be examined,
reviewed, inquired or looked into by any person, official,
bureau or office whether judicial, administrative or legislative
or any other entity whether private or public. Provided
however, this foreign currency shall be exempt from
attachment, garnishment or any other lawful order or
process of the court, or any government agency.
Here, written consent is the ONLY exception.
3.
In case of order of the court in cases of bribery,

dereliction of duty of public officials
But this is allegedly useless because you are supposed to

be looking for ill-gotten wealth, you can only inquire when
the case is already filed in court, precisely. How can you
know na marami yung laman, ang alam mo lang marami
siyang pera. In the first place, we should be looking,
investigating.
4.
In cases where the money deposited or invested is the

subject matter of the litigation
But it presupposes na alam mo magkano ang laman. You

know very well it is there. But you cannot inquire!
Section 3 It shall be unlawful for any official or employee or
banking institution to disclose to any person any information
concerning deposits.
This is my introduction to ANTI MONEY LAUNDERING ACT.
This relaxes the above-mentioned laws.
It is a crime whereby the proceeds of unlawful activity are
transacted thereby making them appear to have been liquidated
from legitimate sources. From criminal activities introduced into
the financial system and then pag labas nyan from various
transactions, from that account transferred to another account
pasok mo sa corporation until later the money launderer will get
that money clean na siya making them appear to originate from
legitimate sources.
Salient Features:
1.
Criminalizes money laundering.
Before this Act, there was no law punishing money

laundering.
2.
Identifies predicate offenses.
All these money comes from somewhere. We are after

those money kaya tinatawag silang dirty money, because
these are from criminal offenses, called predicate offenses.
Compliance Requirements:
1.
2.
3.
Institutionalize the reporting of suspicious transcations.

Freezing accounts / forfeiture of money for ill gotten
money transactions.
Elements:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Covered transactions in excess of 500K in 1 day, the bank is

supposed to report to the AMLA. The following day naa pud
withdrawal or deposit in excess of 500K, report ka nanaman.
Suspicious Transactions
However even if it does not exceed 500K, you are still mandated
to report if it is a suspicious transaction. It includes the following:
when there is no underlying trade, economic justification, money
does not commensurate to the business of the client, there is
structuring like depositing only 400K a day, there is a pattern, or
deviating from the pattern of his financial transactions.
Whether it be covered transactions exceeding 500K or
suspicious transactions not exceeding 400K, the covered
institutions are sanctioned to report to AMLA.
Who are the offenders?
1.
2.
3.
Identify _____.
Di na pwede yung ginawa ni Erap dati na Velarde Account.

Must be identified already.
Unlawful activity / predicate crimes

Monetary instrument or property
Attempt to transact
Knowledge that monetary instrument or property
proceeds from the unlawful activity
UNLAWFUL ACTIVITY /PREDICATE CRIMES

Any act or omission, series or combination of unlawful acts.
Unlike Plunder na serious or combination, dito pwede single act
lang talaga. But it can also be combination of acts. Basta it has
something to do with:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Kidnapping with ransom

Drug trafficking RA 3019
Plunder
Robbery extortion
Qualified theft
Swindling
Smuggling
Arson
Murder
SEC
Felonies and offenses of a similar nature (trans-national
offense) where money will be introduced here and goes
out somewhere in the Bahamas,etc.
12. Terrorism financing
13. (marami pa, not mentioned by sir until 34)
29
The person who transacts or attempts to transact the

money launderer himself or herself.
The facilitator who assists the money launderer
Covered institutions that do not report to the AMLA the
suspicious and the covered transactions
How do you launder money?

1.
2.
3.
You introduce it first to the financial system by

depositing.
Layering, you distance yourself from that money
through various transactions.
Integration where it is made available to you again but
its clean already.
If you have money from illegal sources, what can you do with
money?
1.
2.
3.
You spend the money, makikita yan. The point is, it will
somehow be noticed.
You deposit it into the system.
You keep it para hindi makita ng government.
Freeze order
It only takes a resolution from AMLA filing ex parte petition to the
CA who will issue the freeze order after finding probable cause.
It is effective for 20 days unless extended by CA upon motion by
AMLA not exceeding 6 months. During the effectivity, AMLA can
avail itself of other remedies, inquiries, forfeiture,
filing of AMLA case. Covered institutions shall not lift the freeze
order without securing the official confirmation of the AMLA.
No court may issue TRO or Writ of preliminary injunction except
the SC. This is to protect the politicians wala silang funds pang
election. No asset of an electoral candidate shall be frozen
during an election period.
Civil Forfeiture
Recovery of ill gotten wealth is imprescriptible, that is civil
forfeiture. There is no need of prior conviction. AMLA, under this
law, only grants civil forfeiture. It is only a petition directed to the
property. Jurisdiction over the person is not necessary.
MONETARY INSTRUMENT OR PROPERTY
Attachment bond
Kahit ano nalang dito. Cash, checks, notes,negotiable

instruments, bonds, acontracts of insurance, suretyship, or other
similar instruments with the title assets.
When the State litigates, it is not required to put up a bond for

damages or even an appeal bond. This is not required.
What are reportable transactions?

There are transactions in cash or other equivalent monetary
instrument involving a total money in excess of 500K within 1
day. It covers suspicious transactions and covered transactions
of covered institutions.
What are covered institutions?
These are the banks or entities required under the law to report
covered and suspicious transactions. This includes banks, all
other entities, subsidiaries affiliated, regulated by the BSP.
Insurance companies, pre-need companies, all other institutions
regulated by the Insurance Commission. Securities dealers and
all other entities regulated by the SEC. Kasama ang jewelry
dealers if the transaction involves 1million or above. Including
also the LRA for real estate purchases of 500K and above. But
the casinos are not included kay di musugot ang Congress.
Covered Transactions
Criminal Forfeiture
There is a need of prior conviction because he amassed illgotten wealth. Jurisdiction over the person is necessary.
October 17, 2014
Article 293. Who are guilty of robbery. - Any person who, wi

property belonging to another, by means of violence or intimid
anything shall be guilty of robbery.
This felony you have to give attention to because this is similar
to other felonies.
Elements of Robbery
1. There subject matter is personal property
Personal property that is why, the oft repeated quote I was
robbed of my land that land is mine. That is not robbery
because in robbery, it involves personal property.
2. The property belongs to another
Take note, it doenst say about ownership, the personal property
that you got from another, even if he is not the owner, that is still
robbery. Suppose A, the personal property of A was stolen by B,
and you also stole that property. Reklamo ka nga di mana
robbery kay gikawat man gihapon na niya. Wala mang sinabi
ditto na ikaw ang owner. Personal property belonging to
another it doesnt require that you have to be the owner.
Distinctions:
ROBBERY
There is intent to gain
Article 294. Robbery with violence against or intimidation of p

robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of any per
1. The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, when by reason o
homicide shall have been committed.
2. The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period to reclu
been accompanied by rape or intentional mutilation, or if by reas
the physical injuries penalized in subdivision 1 of Article 263 sha
that when the robbery accompanied with rape is committed with a
persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death (As ame
3. The penalty of reclusion temporal, when by reason or on oc
injuries penalized in subdivision 2 of the article mentioned in the
inflicted.
4. The penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclu
violence or intimidation employed in the commission of the rob
clearly unnecessary for the commission of the crime, or when the
have inflicted upon any person not responsible for its commissi
sub-divisions 3 and 4 of said Article 23.
5. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to p
cases. (As amended by R. A. 18).
3.
There must be unlawful taking of the personal property

(ASPORTATION)
This is what you call asportation. You dont have to, as long
as the property is under your control, that is robbery already,
even if your possession is momentary. That is already
robbery. If he got the property sandal tapos pagtakbo may
pulis pala, even if momentary that is robbery, already
consummated.
4. There must be intent to gain on the part of the offender
5. The offender takes the property by:
a. means of violence or intimidation against persons, or
b. using force upon things
Eto pa, Robbery there must be 5. The offender takes the

property by means of violence or intimidation against persons, or
using force upon things. So yan.
going back to taking of property belonging to another, example
nawala mo yung laptop mo, then you force someone to give up
his laptop to you and it turns out na iyo yun, since it doesnt
belong to him, because it belongs to you then that is not robbery.
That is an impossible crime.
What is asked by dean Inigo is this, what if you rob not for your
self but for others?
You rob rich people to give to poor people, there is still intent to
gain because there is some satisfaction from doing an act. That
is still intent to gain.
There is also a similar crime, Bribery. Similar.
Suppose somebody is red handed in possessing illegal
substance, pero ikaw police, binigyan ka nya ng pera. So that
you will not arrest the offender. Kunyari sabihin mo if you dont
give us money, we will fabricate a case against you, nasa kotse
mo yan ano man yan? that is bribery. It can be qualified bribery,
depending on the penalty, depending on the crime committed. It
can be privaricacion. So becareful with the elements. Twist the
facts then meron nang ibang crime.
Distinctions:
ROBBERY
1. The threatened harm is
present and actual
2. The gain is immediate, he
is getting the money or thing
now
3. The person threatened is
the victim of the robbery
4. The intimidation is
personal
Robbery v. Grave Coercion
GRAVE THREATS
The threat is conditional or
future
The gain is conditional or in
future
The threat might be on your
person or that of your family
It might be in writing or
through a middleman
GRAVE COERCION
There is NO intent to gain
In the next section, you will see various kinds of committing

robbery. These are variations of robbery.
Suppose at gun point, you got the sachet of shabu belong to A, it

is illegal, is that robbery? Wala ding sinabi na legal ang dapat
mong i-rob. For academic purposes, that is, even if it is illegal,
still robbery because personal property belonging to another.
Robbery is with intent to gain. All the elements are there- a

public officer or a private individual may be an offender in a
robbery. Usually robbery, hold up with violence against persons
Give me money or I will kill you that could also be a threat, I
will kill you. Tapos made a condition. But the difference is, the
threat is carried out in the future, not now. Kung ganyan, you
demand from me for money tapos merong threat and the threat
is in the future, doon ka sa threat. So similarly, hold up, if you
dont give me money now, I will kill you, the threat is absorbed by
robbery. The threat is now, not in the future. If there is no intent
to gain, suppose someone owes you money, patyon tika ron
kung di ko nimo bayran so you compel somebody to do
something against his will but there is no intent to gain there, that
will be coercion. There must be element of intent to gain.
30
Robbery with violence against and intimidation against persons.

1.
The penalty of reclusion perpetua to death, when by

reason or on occasion of the robbery, the crime of
homicide shall have been committed.
This is a special complex crime.

What if you rob your mother and father? Then you kill them, is it
robbery with homicide? Diba parricide mana kay gipatay man
nimo sila? Or suppose there was qualifying circumstance for
murder. Should it be robbery with murder? When you say robber
with homicide, it is generic. It refers to any kind of killing
parricide, infanticide, murder. It does not solely refer to homicide
under 248. It is generic, any killing.
And the issue there, in the case of PEOPLE vs
MANGULABNAN, tung naa sa kisame, iyang mga anak, asawa
naa sa baba, siya naa sa kisame, human isa ka robber to control
the crowd, he fired a shot in the air and unfortunately, the guy he
was there. The robbers didnt know that he shot somebody. Mao
gifilan silag robbery with homicide. So tingan mo jan, robbery
with homicide when homicide shall have been committed, they
questioned why they should be guilty, because committed
means intentional. This is erroneous translation of the Spanish
text because the Spanish text says Resultare in other words,
this should be the crime of homicide shall have resulted it
doesnt mean intentional. It can be intentional or not. It simply
means that during the course of the robbery, death shall have
resulted. It doesnt matter kung intentional or not. It doesnt even
matter even if the one who was killed was the robber, it is still
robbery with homicide. Okay? It is not necessary that the one
who was killed be the victims or one of the victims. Even if one of
the robbers dies in the course of robbery, it is still robbery with
homicide.
Now, is there such a thing, a robbery is committed by a band and
the person dies during the course of robbery, is it proper to
charge them with robbery with homicide in a band? Diba?
Pwede bay an? Robbery with homicide in a band or robbery in a
band with homicide?
PEOPLE vs SUGDAN(SUGAN) March 23, 2011: SC said, if
robbery is committed by a band and a homicide results, it would
still be denominated as Robbery with Homicide. The element of
band is considered as an aggravating circumstance. Not robbery
by a band with homicide, there is no such thing.
Another issue, when should the death occur? Kasi nga sinasabi
jan, by reason of or on the occasion of robbery, will it be robbery
with homicide If death occurs before? During? After? Its still the
same. Pero if after, not be 1 day after, it must be a reasonable
time after. The killing still has a relation to the robbery. Anyway,
the ruling, the death may occur during, before or after PEOPLE
vs BARONG/BARON June 28, 2010. 2 points: you are charging
somebody with robbery with homicide. Is it robbery or is it
homicide? Ipinagsama mo sila, robbery crimes against property,
homicide is crimes against persons. Take not when you commit
robbery with homicide, the main offense is robbery. And in this
case, the conviction, there must be certainty that robbery was
the main intention of the malefactor and that the killing is merely
incidental. The intent to rob must precede the taking of human
life. But the killing may occur before, during or after the robbery.
The premise is that, there is intent to rob. When a homicide
takes place, all those who took part shall be guilty of robbery
with homicide, W/N they actually participated in the killing.
Unless there is proof, there was an endeavor to stop the killing.
There must be an attempt to stop the assault, otherwise, apil ka.
Now, the same thing is true with respect to, when there is a
robbery, not only 1 person was killed, there are many. Would that
be, robbery with multiple homicide? There is no such thing. The
crime is really, robbery with homicide only even if several
persons were killed.
If robbery shall be committed with rape, arson. Supposing
daghan ang girape, still the same. Robbery with rape.
The issue actually here is, how are you going to treat the other
killings or other rape. Still robbery with homicide or rape, other
killings or other rape shall be treated as aggravating
circumstance. May mga cases na ganyan.
In the case of Regala and People vs Sultan, April 27, 2007, the
SC said, on several cases, the additional rapes in the same
occasion committed in a robbery shall not be treated as separate
offense or serve to aggravate the offense but there are also
certain cases wherein this court said that multiplicity of rapes
committed shall be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance.
Finally, in the case of Regala, additional rapes, SC said it shall
not be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance despite the
anomalous situation wherein robbery with rape shall be treated
as robbery with multiple rape despite the multiplicity. The court
realized that there was no law which provides that it must be
appreciated as aggravating circumstance. Article 14 is exclusive
unlike article 13, which provides for analogous circumstances.
The remedy is with the legislature.
If committed by a band, aggravating pero if multiple rapes or
homicide, hindi aggravating kasi there is no law. Although of
course, walang law, yung band, article 14 because it is an
aggravating circumstance.
Again, the SC admits that it is an anomalous situation because it
is equal footing, robbery with rape/homicide and robbery with
multiple rape and homicide. It is unfair.
Let us go back to the time when the death occurs.
Example of that is this
1. Suppose, I take your wallet, my intention is to take your
wallet, but in order to do that without resistance, I will
kill you first. There must be intent to rob, so the killing is
before the robbery. That is still robbery with homicide
2. During the taking, sige kag struggle samuka nimo uy.
3. After, pagkakuha mo ng property, pinatay mo siya.
Before during after is homicide.
It would be different story if we talk about physical injuries.
So the purpose, if the purpose is the other way around, meaning,
your purpose is to kill, tapos after you kill, maganda yung relo
niya ah or necklace, so you start getting all these ano, it cannot
be robbery with homicide. It should be murder or homicide.
Paano yan maging robbery na patay na man yang kinuhaan
mo?? That will be theft. No more intimidation, no violence
against for the reason na patay na. there will be 2 separate
crimes.
31
This one, with respect to robbery with rape. Remember the case
of Angeles? Kadtong gi rob ang babae tapos after robbing,
gidala siya ng robbers, ang ibang robbers nag uwian tapos yung
isa, nang rape. They were all charged with Robbery with rape.
SC said, that cannot be because yung after niya matagal na
talaga, is separated by time and distance it cannot be
considered as in the course of or after robbery. SC said, there is
robbery. What about the rape? Remember, kinuha mo muna
siya, ibang intent yun. Tapos ni rape. Iba yung robbery, that is a
separate offense and another offense, a complex crime of
forcible abduction with rape under Article 48, not special complex
but complex under 48.
Robbery with serious physical injuries. Again, the determining
factor, by reason or on occasion of robbery there was serious
physical injuries which results and it refers to, anyway. Related to
sub divisions in 263. So this will cover also, not only serious
physical injuries but also, less serious. Because if you will notice,
basahin nyo jan. as long as there is violence or initimidation, so
yung less serious PI, dun siya papasok sa violence, there was
violence committed in the course of robbery. Yung sa slight, dun
siya sa other cases.
Now, what you have to be careful is this. There is a different
story if physical injuries ang kasama ng robbery. Because it says
here in paragraph 4, when the course of its execution, the
offender shall have inflicted upon any person not responsible for
its commission any of the physical injuries covered by subdivisions 3 and 4 of said Article 23. Nawala na yung by reason
of that is found in the law, is in the course of execution. These
injuries must be committed in the course of execution and not by
reason of.
Sa paragraphs 1, 2,3, the death, serious PI, may be committed
before during after.
One who is divested of his wallet, by a pickpocket, dinukutan
siya. Anyway. Kasi diba, if there is no, the personal property is
taken, now, tapos nagsisigaw ngayon, after na. binalikan mo
ngayon, imong kinulata. Is that robbery? Wala man yung
violence with initimidation, pero if serious PI, or gipatay gyud
nimo, that would fall under robbery with homicide. Violence
against, ang importante, which paragraph, 1,2,3,, ang
importante, on the occasion of, or by reason of robbery. Because
even if the violence is committed after, it is still robbery. Pero
yung itong last sub division, ang naka lagay nalang is in the
course of. Kung after, like slight PI, dinukutan, tapos nagsisikaw,
gibalikanm gisagpa paghilom what is that? Robbery with
serious physical injuries? Di na pwedeng mangyari yun, the
violence should be in the course of robbery, kani di man siya
mag fall under paragraph 1,2,3 and it was not committed in the
course of. Unsa mana? Intimidation lang. ang labas non, merong
theft. Pero kunyari sinabihan mo ng paghilom ha kundi patyon
tika that is also intimidation, pero din a yan yung robbery with
force or intimidation because wala naman ikaw ginawa, no
violence there. Gi threaten mo after, then there will be 2 separate
crimes. Theft and threats.
Be careful about that. It makes a lot of difference by reason of
as to what crime was committed, depending when the violence
or intimidation was committed and kung ano ang nangyari.
Okay.
Article 295. Robbery with physical injuries, committed in an uninhabi

of firearm on a street, road or alley. - If the offenses mentioned in s
next preceding article shall have been committed in an uninhabited
moving train, street car, motor vehicle or airship, or by entering the p
in any manner, taking the passengers thereof by surprise in the respe
highway, or alley, and the intimidation is made with the use of a fire
the maximum period of the proper penalties.
In the same cases, the penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed
Committed in an uninhabited place or by a band.
With physical injuries ni siya, or with use of fire arms. So specific
ang grounds niya. Take note of use of fire arm, if violence is
used, then maximum penalty.
Now, lets go back sandali sa 294.
Paragraph 4 of 294: in the course of its execution. I told you
earlier, that the victim of the violence may be one of the robbers
(robbery with homicide even if one of the robbers was killed). In
paragraph 4, it must not be one of the robbers, not responsible,
yung kanina, if responsible kasama sya dun, in paragraph 4,
should not be one of the robbers. Okay ha. So.
Definition of band, more than 3 armed men or women. Armed,
alam niyo nay an.
Firearm is unlicensed, maximum.
32
Let us first look at the definition of an inhabited house, public

building or building dedicated to religious worship and their
dependencies.
Art. 301. What is an inhabited house, public building or
building dedicated to religious worship and their
dependencies. Inhabited house means any shelter, ship
or vessel constituting the dwelling of one or more persons,
even though the inhabitants thereof shall temporarily be
absent therefrom when the robbery is committed.
Article 296. Definition of a band and penalty incurred by the members

thereof.courts, corrals, waterhouses, granaries, barns,
All interior
malefactors take part in the commission of a robbery, it shall be deemed
to
have beenstables
committed
a band.
When
coach-houses,
or by
other
departments
or inclosed
any of the arms used in the commission of the offense be an unlicensed
firearm,
the
penalty
to
be
imposed
upon
all
places contiguous to the building or edifice,
having an
the malefactors shall be the maximum of the corresponding penalty provided by law, without prejudice of the criminal
interior entrance connected therewith, and which form part
liability for illegal possession of such unlicensed firearms.
of the whole, shall be deemed dependencies of an inhabited
publicshall
building
or building
dedicated
to religious
Any member of a band who is present at the commission of a robberyhouse,
by the band,
be punished
as principal
of
any of the assaults committed by the band, unless it be shown that he attempted
worship. to prevent the same.
So 297, special.
Article 297. Attempted and frustrated robbery committed under certain circumstances.
Orchards and other lands used for cultivation or production
occasion of an attempted or frustrated robbery a homicide is committed, the person guilty of such offenses shall be
are not unless
included
in the terms
of shall
the next preceding
punished by reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua,
the homicide
committed
paragraph, even if closed, contiguous to the building and
deserve a higher penalty under the provisions of this Code.
having direct connection therewith.
This is special complex but, it only applies by reason of or on
occasion of attempted or frustrated robbery. And then death
occurs.
Can this apply the other way around? Suppose it is the
homicide, frustrated or attempted, and the robbery was baliktad
ba. No, that cannot apply because the law specifically provides
na, frustrated robbery or attempted robbery, human, may
homicide. Yun lang yun siya. So that if there is consummated
robbery and attempted homicide, iba yun. We cannot use 48 for
that. It can be separate. It will fall under 48 if one crime is
committed to perpetrate the other, then apply 48, or if one
offense results to 2 or more grave or less grave, then doon ka sa
48. If not, then separate.
The term "public building" includes every building owned by

the Government or belonging to a private person not
included used or rented by the Government, although
temporarily unoccupied by the same.chanrobles virtual law
library
Under this definition, a ship or a vessel can be an inhabited

house as long as it constitutes the dwelling of a person, even if
you are temporarily absent therein at the time the robbery is
committed.
Article 298. Execution of deeds by means of violence or intimidation.
another, by means of violence or intimidation, shall compel him to sign,
or deliver
any public
or
Theexecute
second
paragraph
of instrument
the provision
talks about
documents, shall be held guilty of robbery and punished by the penalties
respectively prescribed
in this Chapter.
dependencies.
To be considered
a dependency, the following
requisites must be present:
Just take note, there is attempt to defraud, by means of violence.
It has specific applicability only to the execution or delivery of
public instrument.
It is very similar to grave coercion. But here there is intent to
gain. You compel somebody, with force and intimidation with
intent to gain, then 298 siya. So specific siya ang application.
Article 296, ang sabi, merong circumstances, merong band,
merong fire arm unlicensed. Both are supposed to aggravate the
crime. Iakyat mo. Maximum na kasi band, paano na yung
unlicensed firearm? Basta mga ganyan, you always go back to
crim 1, when you say divisible penalties, it will always be divisible
by 3. It can only be divided by 3 even if only a period, kasi
divisible man parin ang period, you can divide that using the
formula, apply mo yun.
So here, robbery with a band, maximum period ka na. ngayon,
may unlicensed fire arm. Doon ka sa maximum, divide mo yung
period, get the maximum period of the maximum period. So yan.
Hanggang jan lang muna tayo. Any questions?
October 20, 2014, Criminal Law 2
Robbery by the use of force upon things
Two Articles are involved here, one is in an inhabited house, the
other is in an uninhabited house.
1.
It should be contiguous to the house (Magkatabi)
2.
It should form part of the whole
3.
There should be a direct connection therewith.
Therefore, for a garage to be considered a dependency, it should

be contiguous and must have a direct connection to the house.
The last paragraph gives you the definition of a public building.
So even if it is rented, as long as it is being used by the
government, it will be considered a public building.
Art. 299. Robbery in an inhabited house or public building or
edifice devoted to worship. Any armed person who shall
commit robbery in an inhabited house or public building or
edifice devoted to religious worship, shall be punished by
reclusion temporal, if the value of the property taken shall
exceed 250 pesos, and if:
(a) The malefactors shall enter the house or building in
which the robbery was committed, by any of the following
means:
1. Through a opening not intended for entrance or egress.
2. By breaking any wall, roof, or floor or breaking any door
or window.
3. By using false keys, picklocks or similar tools.
4. By using any fictitious name or pretending the exercise of
public authority.
Or if
(b) The robbery be committed under any of the following
circumstances:
1. By the breaking of doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other
kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle;
2. By taking such furniture or objects to be broken or forced
open outside the place of the robbery.
When the offenders do not carry arms, and the value of the
property taken exceeds 250 pesos, the penalty next lower in
degree shall be imposed.
The same rule shall be applied when the offenders are
armed, but the value of the property taken does not exceed
250 pesos.
When said offenders do not carry arms and the value of the
property taken does not exceed 250 pesos, they shall suffer
the penalty prescribed in the two next preceding
paragraphs, in its minimum period.
If the robbery be committed in one of the dependencies of
an inhabited house, public building, or building dedicated to
religious worship, the penalties next lower in degree than
those prescribed in this article shall be imposed.
Q: How robbery is committed under this article?
33
A: The law says entering. That means that your body must
enter the house.
Q: What if you used your hand. You reached inside to get it?
A: Same answer. Your whole body must enter the house. That is
not robbery. That is only theft.
Q: Suppose you enter the house through the open door, but you
did not find anything interesting in the living room. So you forced
open the door to the masters bedroom, and there you saw a lot
of precious objects. You took as much as you can and left. Is that
robbery?
A: That is robbery but not under paragraph a but under
paragraph b breaking doors, wardrobes, chests, or any other
kind of locked or sealed furniture or receptacle.
So, if what you forced open is the main door, that would be
under paragraph a. But if you are already inside the house, and
you break the doors to the rooms, that would be under
paragraph b.
In boarding houses, the door to every room is considered the
main door of each room.
Q: What if what you stole is a locked chest, and as you were
exiting the house, you were apprehended, is that robbery under
this article? Take note that the chest was still locked. It was not
forced open yet. Is that a consummated act of robbery already?
A: Yes. What is important there is the intent. It is immaterial
whether the chest stolen was opened or not.
In determining the penalty under this article, there are two
considerations: the amount of the things stolen and whether or
not the offenders are armed or not.
A: The force need not always be physical force. It may be

constructive like when you enter a house or building thru an
opening not intended for entrance or egress.
Q: Suppose the robber, armed with a handgun, enters the house

and used the gun against one of the occupants? What is that?
Q: What about fire exits?
A: Thats robbery with violence against persons. That is not

under this article.
A: That is not a usual entrance into the house.

The first set of enumeration (Paragraph A) in the article is how
you gain entrance into the house. If you entered the house
through any of those ways, you may be liable under this article.
You can also commit robbery through any of the ways in the
second set of enumeration (Paragraph B), but this is regardless
of the manner through which you entered the house.
Outside of the enumerations above-explained, even if there be
force upon things, that will not be robbery. It can be theft, but not
robbery.
Let me just emphasize that this article focuses on the manner of
entering. It cares not on how you exit. So if you enter through the
open door, you stole a laptop and jumped out of the window, that
will not be robbery because the jumping off of the window is
immaterial. What this article cares about is the manner of
entrance, which must be one of those enumerated in the article.
If you broke the door open in order to enter, then that will be
robbery, or you used false keys.
If they are not false keys, but if they were stolen from the
owners, that will still be considered false keys.
Q: Suppose you pass by the house and the window is open, and
you saw something inisde that you want to steal so you used a
long stick to tuhog-tuhog (sorry wala ko natranslate, hindi ko
alam paano ) that thing, could that be considered robbery with
force upon things?
In this article, the circumstance of carrying arms will only lead to

a higher penalty because that law presumes that when you carry
a gun, you are willing to use it, meaning you are more depraved
than the one who robs without a gun.
The controversies under this article mostly centers on the door.
For example, the door is a sliding door, and in order to enter the
house, the offender craftily unbolted the panels of the door. So
literally, he did not break anything. He did not destroy the door.
And he even installed it back when he left. So that cannot be
under this article.
Another issue is the padlock. Padlocks are not part of the door. If
you destroy the padlock, is that destroying the door, such that
putting it under the operation of this article? One case says it is
part of the door. Another case says it is not. The most recent is a
CA decision saying that without the padlock, the door will be
useless. So if you break the padlock, that also tantamount to
breaking the door.
If you entered the house by using a fictitious name or pretending
the exercise of public authority, that means that you entered
through deceit. Like you will tell the kasambahay that you were
told by the amo to take something from the house, that is
constructive force. That is robbery by deceit.
Q: Suppose that the robbery is characterized by both violence or
intimidation against persons and force upon things, which will
prevail? Article 294 or 299? Take note that Article 294 is the
more serious crime.
A: Old decisions will tell us that it must be the penalty of the
more serious crime that must be imposed. So Article 294.
However, in the recent Napolis case, the Supreme Court ruled
that it may happen that even if circumstances in both articles are
present, it may be that Article 299 will prevail.
Q: How does this happen?
A: When there is forced entry but there was no injury upon the
occupants but there was only intimidation. Since only
intimidation upon the occupants was present, the penalty in
Article 294 is prision correctional in its maximum. If Article 299
will be used, the penalty is reclusion temporal. The whole
purpose will be defeated because the graver offense caries the
lower penalty. To cure that anomalous situation, when the
penalty under 299 will be higher, this would be treated as a
complex crime. Therefore the higher penalty will be imposed. So
if Article 299 carries the higher penalty, article 299 will prevail.
Art. 300. Robbery in an uninhabited place and by a band.
The robbery mentioned in the next preceding article, if
committed in an uninhabited place and by a band, shall be
punished by the maximum period of the penalty provided
therefor.
Remember that the uninhabited place and by a band are twin
requisites. They must both be present to distinguish it from the
other kinds of robbery that we have taken up before.
Art. 302. Robbery is an uninhabited place or in a private
building. Any robbery committed in an uninhabited place
or in a building other than those mentioned in the first
paragraph of Article 299, if the value of the property taken
exceeds 250 pesos, shall be punished by prision
correccional if any of the following circumstances is
present:
1. If the entrance has been effected through any opening not
intended for entrance or egress.
2. If any wall, roof, flour or outside door or window has been
broken.
3. If the entrance has been effected through the use of false
keys, picklocks or other similar tools.
4. If any dorm, wardrobe, chest or by sealed or closed
furniture or receptacle has been broken.
5. If any closed or sealed receptacle, as mentioned in the
preceding paragraph, has been removed even if the same to
broken open elsewhere.
When the value of the property takes does not exceed 250
pesos, the penalty next lower in degree shall be imposed.
In the cases specified in Articles 294, 295, 297, 299, 300, and
302 of this Code, when the property taken is mail matter or
large cattle, the offender shall suffer the penalties next
higher in degree than those provided in said articles.
This has almost the same circumstances as those enumerated
in Article 299. So let us look into the differences.
This article does not mention the ground pertaining to using of
fictitious names and pretending to be a person in authority,
precisely because this article talks about an uninhabited place.
So you really cannot have a robbery through deceit since there
is nobody to deceive in this case.
Here, the penalty depends on the amount of the property taken.
In Article 299, the other consideration is whether the offender is
carrying arms. In this article, WON you are carrying arms, it does
not matter.
Another important thing to remember is the last paragraph of this
article which says that if what is stolen is mail matter, the crime
will be qualified. It will be qualified robbery.
34
Disregard large cattle because that is already covered by a

special law, PD 533, Anti Cattle Rustling Act of 1974. Large cattle
include cows, carabaos, horses, mules, asses, etc. NB: Read the
law.
If the taking of these cattle is by intimidation or force, the penalty
is higher but that is not a requirement or a requisite of the crime.
Art. 303. Robbery of cereals, fruits, or firewood in an
uninhabited place or private building. In the cases
enumerated in Articles 299 and 302, when the robbery
consists in the taking of cereals, fruits, or firewood, the
culprit shall suffer the penalty next lower in degree than that
prescribed in said articles.chanrobles virtual law library
Q: What do we mean by cereals?
A: In Spanish, cereals mean semilya or seedlings. So in one
case, when what was stolen was a sack of rice, that did not fall
under this article because rice is not a cereal (seedling).
Art. 304. Possession of picklocks or similar tools. Any
person who shall without lawful cause have in his
possession picklocks or similar tools especially adopted to
the commission of the crime of robbery, shall be punished
by arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision
correccional in its minimum period.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any person who

shall make such tools. If the offender be a locksmith, he
shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in its medium
and maximum periods.
This is one offense where possession is already considered a
crime. So even if this is a preparatory act, this is already
punishable.
Art. 305. False keys. The term "false keys" shall be
deemed to include:
1. The tools mentioned in the
articles.chanrobles virtual law library
next
preceding
2. Genuine keys stolen from the owner.chanrobles virtual

law library
3. Any keys other than those intended by the owner for use
in the lock forcibly opened by the offender.
This includes the real keys stolen from the owner.
Brigandage
Art. 306. Who are brigands; Penalty. When more than
three armed persons form a band of robbers for the purpose
of committing robbery in the highway, or kidnapping
persons for the purpose of extortion or to obtain ransom or
for any other purpose to be attained by means of force and
violence, they shall be deemed highway robbers or
brigands.
Persons found guilty of this offense shall be punished by
prision mayor in its medium period to reclusion temporal in
its minimum period if the act or acts committed by them are
not punishable by higher penalties, in which case, they shall
suffer such high penalties.
If any of the arms carried by any of said persons be an
unlicensed firearms, it shall be presumed that said persons
are highway robbers or brigands, and in case of convictions
the penalty shall be imposed in the maximum period.
Art. 307. Aiding and abetting a band of brigands. Any
person knowingly and in any manner aiding, abetting or
protecting a band of brigands as described in the next
preceding article, or giving them information of the
movements of the police or other peace officers of the
Government (or of the forces of the United States Army),
when the latter are acting in aid of the Government, or
acquiring or receiving the property taken by such brigands
shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium
period to prision mayor in its minimum period.
It shall be presumed that the person performing any of the
acts provided in this article has performed them knowingly,
unless the contrary is proven.
The mere formation is what is punishable. The purposes of
forming the band are specified in the article.
Now what is always controversial here is the word highway.
What if the crime was committed not in a highway but in a small
city road, but it was committed by a band for the purpose of
robbery, will that still fall under this article?
Remember that the word highway here is generic. It includes
city streets.
So again, the mere formation is the crime.
Relate this to PD 532, anti piracy and highway robbery law.
Piracy is no longer included here because it is covered by a
different law. Whats left is highway robbery. So what is the effect
of this special law to Articles 306 and 307?
In a case, the Supreme Court ruled that PD 532 modified Article
306 and 307, but the essence is the same. The essence is
indiscriminate highway robbery. Indiscriminate. So meaning you
do not target a specific victim. That is the essence. If the purpose
is a specific robbery, that is only robbery. If it is indiscriminate,
then that is brigandage or PD 532.
PD 532 provides for higher penalties. In PD 532, there is also no
requirement that it must be done by four or more persons and no
presumption as to the use unlicensed firearms, unlike in Article
306 that there is that presumption that if what is used are
unlicensed firearms, the offenders are presumed to be brigands.
CRIM LAW REVIEW 2
OCT 21, 2014
35
THEFT is robbery without violence against or intimidation of

persons or without use of force upon things. Violence is replaced
by lack of consent. The other elements are the same. There is
intent to gain, taking of personal property and without the
elements which will make it robbery. This still covers personal
property.
If you will look at the full article, you will know that there are
different kinds of theft. Theft is likewise committed by Any
person who, having found lost property, shall fail to deliver
the same to the local authorities or to its owner. In other
words, there is no such thing as finders keeper. You are
supposed to return that thing to the owner or to the authorities.
Under civil law pwdmagingsayoyan, but you have to follow
certain procedure. Here if you found something, you may be
considered a thief if you keep it for yourself.
May nakitaka, lost and found. In this case somebody found a lost
property and went to the police. You gave it to the police for him
to find the owner. Ang police, walaniyagipangita, iyahana daw to.
Is he liable? Sabiniya, sabisa code, any person who found lost
property. I did not find this, so I cannot fall under this definition. Is
he correct? SC said, hindi. Yes it is true, you did not found it, not
the actual founder. The person who actually found the item is a
finder-in-fact. Ikaw, nanisingitsa finder-in-fact is a finder-in-law.
So finder by fiction of law. Ibigsabihin, he is still liable for theft.
Any person who, after having maliciously damaged the
property of another, shall remove or make use of the fruits
or object of the damage caused by him;
There was a question in the bar, actually mcq. This person killed
the goat of his neigborunyagipulutan. Unsaang crime? After
having maliciously damaged the property of another, shall
remove or make use of the fruits or object of the damage
caused by him. Theft! Kung gipatayranimo, thats malicious
mischief. But here, you made use of the object you maliciously
damaged.
Any person who shall enter an inclosed estate or a field
where trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another
and without the consent of its owner, shall hunt or fish upon
the same or shall gather cereals, or other forest or farm
products.
How is this different to other forms of trespass? May prohibition,
pumasokkatalaga. Ngayonpag may kinuhaka pa doon, that is
theft.
Lets go back to the elements of theft.
Art. 308. Who are liable for theft. Theft is committed by any
person who, with intent to gain but without violence against or
intimidation of persons nor force upon things, shall take personal
property of another without the latter's consent.
Theft is likewise committed by:
1. Any person who, having found lost property, shall fail to
deliver the same to the local authorities or to its owner;
2. Any person who, after having maliciously damaged the
property of another, shall remove or make use of the fruits
or object of the damage caused by him; and
3. Any person who shall enter an inclosed estate or a field
where trespass is forbidden or which belongs to another
and without the consent of its owner, shall hunt or fish upon
the same or shall gather cereals, or other forest or farm
products.
1. Shall take personal property parehosa robbery, the elements

are common. The principles with respect thereto are the same.
Taking, does it have to be with a character of permanence?
VillacortavsInsurance Commission. One of the issues here,
was there theft? Sabinila, it is not really taking because there is
an intention to return. Sabing court, theft pa rinyan, even if there
is a joyride only because you derived satisfaction already from
the moment you took the car. That is the gain that you received
by the taking. From the moment you took the car and enjoyed it
use, the crime is already consummated.
May pumuntang mall, may nagustuhansyang purse. Kinuhaniya,
peroiniwanniyaang purse niya. Is that theft? Walaka man
damage. You go back to the basics. Taking of personal property,
with intent to gain.
Another case is the filed insurance , a davao case, ganon din
ginamit, gibaangsakyanan. Saboing court it is theft. If the taking
is with a color of title or a claim of ownership, that would be a
defense. The premise here is a taking of personal property
belonging to another. If in your mind, you believe that it is yours,
you have a color of a title, nawalanayong taking of a personal
property of another. You are not liable.
Sabing law is without the consent of the owner. One example is,
naasasimbahannagluhod. Unyanaa nag pick pocket salikod,
because there was a mass going on, the owner did not do
anything to not disturb the proceeding. Sabing accuse, without
the consent, alam man nya! Anosabing court? The words of the
law is without the consent of the owner, di sabing law na without
the knowledge. He knew, pro walasya nag consent.
Also, reminder sa robbery with violence or intimidation at the
time of the taking, then he flew, but you shouted so he came
back and threaten you, shut up ha, sagpaonteka.Anoyan? 2
different crimes. Dependesa intimidation or violence. Peropag
mag serious physical injury, lahinayanxa. That is no longer by
reason of or on relation of the violence can come before,
during or after. Sa theft wala man violence yan. He left,
tapossumigawka, binaril. That is robbery na, may violence.
Robbery with homicide, even if violence came after the taking.
Homicide resulted by reason or in relation of.
36
Take note of #8, penalty is arrestomenor if the value of the thing

stolen is not over 5 pesos, and the offender shall have acted
under the impulse of hunger, poverty, or the difficulty of
earning a livelihood for the support of himself or his family.
So gigutomlangxa, arrestomenor or fine not exceeding 50
pesos.Pero kung pan ugsigarilyoanggikawat, kayusihonna pod
kouggigutomna pod ko. Anyway, walaylabotna.
Art. 309. Penalties. Any person guilty of theft shall be
Take note of #7, Arrestomenor or a fine not exceeding 200
punished by:
pesos, if the theft is committed under the circumstances
1. The penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium
enumerated in paragraph 3 of the next preceding article and
periods, if the value of the thing stolen is more than 12,000
the value of the thing stolen does not exceed 5 pesos. If
pesos but does not exceed 22,000 pesos, but if the value of
such value exceeds said amount, the provision of any of the
the thing stolen exceeds the latter amount the penalty shall
five preceding subdivisions shall be made applicable.
be the maximum period of the one prescribed in this

paragraph, and one year for each additional ten thousand
Art. 310. Qualified theft. The crime of theft shall be punished
pesos, but the total of the penalty which may be imposed
by the penalties next higher by two degrees than those
shall not exceed twenty years. In such cases, and in
respectively specified in the next preceding article, if committed
connection with the accessory penalties which may be
by a domestic servant, or with grave abuse of confidence, or if
imposed and for the purpose of the other provisions of this
the property stolen is motor vehicle, mail matter or large cattle or
Code, the penalty shall be termed prision mayor or
consists of coconuts taken from the premises of the plantation or
reclusion temporal, as the case may be.
fish taken from a fishpond or fishery, or if property is taken on the

occasion of fire, earthquake, typhoon, volcanic erruption, or any
2. The penalty of prisioncorreccional in its medium and
other calamity, vehicular accident or civil disturbance. (As
maximum periods, if the value of the thing stolen is more
amended by R.A. 120 and B.P. Blg. 71. May 1, 1980).
than 6,000 pesos but does not exceed 12,000 pesos.

You are still talking about theft, so the elements are the same. It
3. The penalty of prisioncorreccional in its minimum and
is qualified because of the circumstances mentioned and
medium periods, if the value of the property stolen is more
present. If they are present, it is no longer simple theft, it
than 200 pesos but does not exceed 6,000 pesos.
becomes qualified. And what is the effect? The penalty is 2

degrees higher. And I told you there is a counterpart in robbery,
4. Arresto mayor in its medium period to prisioncorreccional
but in robbery, the penalty is only 1 degree higher.
in its minimum period, if the value of the property stolen is

over 50 pesos but does not exceed 200 pesos.
When the penalty prescribed by law for a given offense is 2

degrees higher from a given penalty, when such penalty is theft,
5. Arresto mayor to its full extent, if such value is over 5
the same penalty for the accessory penalties shall be imposed.
pesos but does not exceed 50 pesos.
For example, nagkawatkang diamonds, the penalty will depend

on the value of the diamonds. Supposed that the penalty for the
6. Arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods, if
value of the diamonds taken is reclusion temporal. And
such value does not exceed 5 pesos.
supposed that the diamonds were placed inside a mailing

envelope, a mail matter. One of the qualifying circumstances of
7. Arrestomenor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos, if the
theft is mail matter. When mail matter is stolen, it becomes
theft is committed under the circumstances enumerated in
qualified, and therefore, the penalty should be 2 degrees higher.
paragraph 3 of the next preceding article and the value of
Since the penalty is for reclusion temporal, since this is qualified,
the thing stolen does not exceed 5 pesos. If such value
you should increase the penalty for 2 degrees, reclusion
exceeds said amount, the provision of any of the five
temporal to death. When that happens, you do not impose
preceding subdivisions shall be made applicable.
death, you impose the same penalty which is reclusion temporal

but the accessory penalty will be that of death when not
8. Arrestomenor in its minimum period or a fine not
executed by reason of commutation or pardon, because, death
exceeding 50 pesos, when the value of the thing stolen is
can only be executed if that is the penalty proscribed by law. If
not over 5 pesos, and the offender shall have acted under
you arrive at death, there can be no more 2 degrees higher.
the impulse of hunger, poverty, or the difficulty of earning a

livelihood for the support of himself or his family.
Another circumstance here is if committed by a domestic

servant. Take note that with respect to domestic servant,
Ditokailanganmo i-allege ang value, kasi the penalty depends on

the value of the personal property taken, at kung saanmo i-file
MTC or RTC.
walangnilagaydyanna whether or not there is abuse of

confidence. This states that the crime is qualified if committed by
a domestic servant. In other words, inherent na. Even if you
dont trust your kasambahay, gina lock moang room mo, the
following day, you discovered gikawatanka. Sabiniya, wala man
xa trust saakoa, bakit man qualified? If you are a domestic
helper, yon na yon. Of course, dapatdidtokanangawat kung
asaka domestic helper, hindisaibangbahaykanangawat.
Another one is with grave abuse of confidence, there must be
confidence reposed on you. In another words, you should be
trusted. The best example there is your personal assistant.
Kabalosyasaimo
PIN,
taposgisugonimosya
perogikawatnyatananimosulodsabanko.
That
mag
withdraw,
is
qualified.
Supposed sa office, ang janitor sigelimpyo, sige pod try sa

combination sa volt. Is that grave abuse of confidence? Wala,
only simple theft.
If the property stolen is a motor vehicle, when you say motor
vehicle,
of
course
kanang
nay
motor.
Kanagtrisikad,
imokawaton, dilinasyamao. Kanangtrisiboat, nay motor nadiba?

Kawatonnimona
qualified!
Basta
Kananggihinayhinayannimogkawatang
nay
parts
sa
motor.
motor,
gi-
unanimoang bolt. Is that qualified? Yes! What you are getting
37
used exclusively for agricultural purposes. Trailers having any

number of wheels, when propelled or intended to be propelled by
attachment to a motor vehicle, shall be classified as separate
motor vehicle with no power rating.
"Defacing or tampering with" a serial number is the erasing,
scratching, altering or changing of the original factory-inscribed
serial number on the motor vehicle engine, engine block or
chassis of any motor vehicle. Whenever any motor vehicle is
found to have a serial number on its motor engine, engine block
or chassis which is different from that which is listed in the
records of the Bureau of Customs for motor vehicles imported
into the Philippines, that motor vehicle shall be considered to
have a defaced or tampered with serial number.
"Repainting" is changing the color of a motor vehicle by means
of painting. There is repainting whenever the new color of a
motor vehicle is different from its color as registered in the Land
Transportation Commission.
"Body-building" is a job undertaken on a motor vehicle in order to
replace its entire body with a new body.
"Remodeling" is the introduction of some changes in the shape
or form of the body of the motor vehicle.
"Dismantling" is the tearing apart, piece by piece or part by part,
of a motor vehicle.
comes from a motor vehicle; it does not matter if the engine is

not running. Unya kung kakitakaugsakyanan, gisulodnimonaa pa
judangsusi. Peroangganahannimo, ang tires langjudniya
ibalhinmolang, taposbya-an molangang motor vehicle. Is that
qualified theft? Remember that you drove the motor vehicle to
some place, taking is complete! It doesnt matter if what you get
later
is
katolang
tires.
Bastapadulongdidto,
angtibuokimonggidala. It would be a different story if you get the

tires right there and then where you found the car, that would be
theft of the tire, not of the motor vehicle.
This is qualified diba, you steal a car. Supposing in taking the
car, you used violence against the driver. Diba robbery with
violence yan or with intimidation of persons, that cannot be theft
kasi
may
violence
nayan.
May
nangyarikasiditona
the
carnappers realize that the penalty for robbery with intimidation

was lesser than you steal a car, thats why carnapping law came
to be. If the taking off the car is by means of violence or
intimidation, mas mataastalagaang penalty.
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 6539AN ACT PREVENTING AND
PENALIZING CARNAPPING
Section 1. This Act shall be known and may be cited as the
"Anti-Carnapping Act of 1972."
Sec. 2.Definition of terms. The terms "carnapping", "motor
vehicle", "defacing or tampering with", "repainting", "bodybuilding", "remodeling", "dismantling", and "overhauling", as used
in this Act, shall be understood, respectively, to mean
"Carnapping" is the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor vehicle
belonging to another without the latter's consent, or by means of
violence against or intimidation of persons, or by using force
upon things.
"Motor vehicle" is any vehicle propelled by any power other than
muscular power using the public highways, but excepting road
rollers, trolley cars, street-sweepers, sprinklers, lawn mowers,
bulldozers, graders, fork-lifts, amphibian trucks, and cranes if not
used on public highways, vehicles, which run only on rails or
tracks, and tractors, trailers and traction engines of all kinds
"Overhauling" is the cleaning or repairing of the whole engine of

a motor vehicle by separating the motor engine and its parts
from the body of the motor vehicle.chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Sec. 3.Registration of motor vehicle engine, engine block and
chassis. Within one year after the approval of this Act, every
owner or possessor of unregistered motor vehicle or parts
thereof in knock down condition shall register with the Land
Transportation Commission the motor vehicle engine, engine
block and chassis in his name or in the name of the real owner
who shall be readily available to answer any claim over the
registered motor vehicle engine, engine block or chassis.
Thereafter, all motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis
not registered with the Land Transportation Commission shall be
considered as untaxed importation or coming from an illegal
source or carnapped, and shall be confiscated in favor of the
Government.
All owners of motor vehicles in all cities and municipalities are
required to register their cars with the local police without paying
any charges.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 4.Permanent registry of motor vehicle engines, engine
blocks and chassis. The Land Transportation Commission shall
keep a permanent registry of motor vehicle engines, engine
blocks and chassis of all motor vehicles, specifying therein their
type, make and serial numbers and stating therein the names
and addresses of their present and previous owners. Copies of
the registry and of all entries made thereon shall be furnished
the Philippine Constabulary and all Land Transportation
Commission regional, provincial and city branch offices:
Provided, That all Land Transportation Commission regional,
provincial and city branch offices are likewise obliged to furnish
copies of all registration of motor vehicles to the main office and
to the Philippine Constabulary.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 5. Registration of sale, transfer, conveyance, substitution or
replacement of a motor vehicle engine, engine block or chassis.
Every sale, transfer, conveyance, substitution or replacement of
a motor vehicle engine, engine block or chassis of a motor
vehicle shall be registered with the Land Transportation
Commission. Motor vehicles assembled and rebuilt or repaired
by replacement with motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and
chassis not registered with the Land Transportation Commission
shall not be issued certificates of registration and shall be
considered as untaxed imported motor vehicles or motor
vehicles
carnapped
or
proceeding
from
illegal
sources.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 6.Original Registration of motor vehicles. Any person
seeking the original registration of a motor vehicle, whether that
motor vehicle is newly assembled or rebuilt or acquired from a
registered owner, shall within one week after the completion of
the assembly or rebuilding job or the acquisition thereof from the
registered owner, apply to the Philippine Constabulary for
clearance of the motor vehicle for registration with the Land
Transportation Commission. The Philippine Constabulary shall,
upon receipt of the application, verify if the motor vehicle or its
numbered parts are in the list of carnapped motor vehicles or
stolen motor vehicle parts. If the motor vehicle or any of its
numbered parts is not in that list, the Philippine Constabulary
shall forthwith issue a certificate of clearance. Upon presentation
of the certificate of clearance from the Philippine Constabulary
and after verification of the registration of the motor vehicle
engine, engine block and chassis in the permanent registry of
motor vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis, the Land
Transportation Commission shall register the motor vehicle in
accordance
with
existing
laws,
rules
and
regulations.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 7.Duty of Collector of Customs to report arrival of imported
motor vehicle, etc. The Collector of Customs of a principal port of
entry where an imported motor vehicle, motor vehicle engine,
engine block chassis or body is unloaded, shall, within seven
days after the arrival of the imported motor vehicle or any of its
parts enumerated herein, make a report of the shipment to the
Land Transportation Commission, specifying the make, type and
serial numbers, if any, of the motor vehicle engine, engine block
and chassis or body, and stating the names and addresses of
the owner or consignee thereof. If the motor vehicle engine,
engine block, chassis or body does not bear any serial number,
the Collector of Customs concerned shall hold the motor vehicle
engine, engine block, chassis or body until it is numbered by the
Land Transportation Commission.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 8.Duty of importers, distributors and sellers of motor
vehicles to keep record of stocks. Any person engaged in the
importation, distribution, and buying and selling of motor
vehicles, motor vehicle engines, engine blocks, chassis or body,
shall keep a permanent record of his stocks, stating therein their
type, make and serial numbers, and the names and addresses
of the persons from whom they were acquired and the names
and addresses of the persons to whom they were sold, and shall
render an accurate monthly report of his transactions in motor
vehicles
to
the
Land
Transportation
Commission.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 9. Duty of manufacturers of engine blocks, chassis or body
to cause numbering of engine blocks, chassis or body
manufactured. Any person engaged in the manufacture of
engine blocks, chassis or body shall cause the numbering of
every engine block, chassis or body manufactured in a
convenient and conspicuous part thereof which the Land
Transportation Commission may direct for the purpose of
uniformity and identification of the factory and shall submit to the
Land Transportation Commission a monthly report of the
manufacture and sale of engine blocks, chassis or
body.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 10.Clearance and permit required for assembly or
rebuilding of motor vehicles. Any person who shall undertake to
assemble or rebuild or cause the assembly or rebuilding of a
motor vehicle shall first secure a certificate of clearance from the
Philippine Constabulary: Provided, That no such permit shall be
issued unless the applicant shall present a statement under oath
containing the type, make and serial numbers of the engine,
chassis and body, if any, and the complete list of the spare parts
of the motor vehicle to be assembled or rebuilt together with the
names and addresses of the sources thereof.
In the case of motor vehicle engines to be mounted on motor
boats, motor bancas and other light water vessels, the applicant
shall secure a permit from the Philippine Coast Guard, which
office shall in turn furnish the Land Transportation Commission
the pertinent data concerning the motor vehicle engines
including
their
type,
make
and
serial
numbers.chanroblesvirtualaw library
38
Sec. 11. Clearance required for shipment of motor vehicles,

motor vehicle engines, engine blocks, chassis or body. Any
person who owns or operates inter-island shipping or any water
transportation with launches, boats, vessels or ships shall within
seven days submit a report to the Philippine Constabulary on all
motor vehicle, motor vehicle engines, engine blocks, chassis or
bodies transported by it for the motor vehicle, motor vehicle
engine, engine block, chassis or body to be loaded on board the
launch, boat vessel or ship.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 12.Defacing or tampering with serial numbers of motor
vehicle engines, engine blocks and chassis. It shall be unlawful
for any person to deface or otherwise tamper with the original or
registered serial number of motor vehicle engines, engine blocks
and chassis.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 13.Penal Provisions. Any person who violates any
provisions of this Act shall be punished with imprisonment for not
less than two years nor more than six years and a fine equal in
amount to the acquisition cost of the motor vehicle, motor vehicle
engine or any other part involved in the violation: Provided, That
if the person violating any provision of this Act is a juridical
person, the penalty herein provided shall be imposed on its
president or secretary and/or members of the board of directors
or any of its officers and employees who may have directly
participated in the violation.
Any government official or employee who directly commits the
unlawful acts defined in this Act or is guilty of gross negligence of
duty or connives with or permits the commission of any of the
said unlawful act shall, in addition to the penalty prescribed in
the preceding paragraph, be dismissed from the service with
prejudice to his reinstatement and with disqualification from
voting or being voted for in any election and from appointment to
any public office.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 14.Penalty for Carnapping. Any person who is found guilty
of carnapping, as this term is defined in Sec. two of this Act,
shall, irrespective of the value of motor vehicle taken, be
punished by imprisonment for not less than fourteen years and
eight months and not more than seventeen years and four
months, when the carnapping is committed without violence or
intimidation of persons, or force upon things; and by
imprisonment for not less than seventeen years and four months
and not more than thirty years, when the carnapping is
committed by means of violence against or intimidation of any
person, or force upon things; and the penalty of life
imprisonment to death shall be imposed when the owner, driver
or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed in the
commission of the carnapping.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 15.Aliens. Aliens convicted under the provisions of this Act
shall be deported immediately after service of sentence without
further
proceedings
by
the
Deportation
Board.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 16.Reward. Any person who voluntarily gives information
leading to the recovery of carnapped vehicles and for the
conviction of the persons charged with carnapping shall be given
as reward so much reward money as the Philippine
Constabulary may fix. The Philippine Constabulary is authorized
to include in its annual budget the amount necessary to carry out
the purposes of this section. Any information given by informers
shall be treated as confidential matter.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 17.Separability clause. If any provisions of this Act is
declared invalid, the provisions thereof not affected by such
declaration shall remain in force and effect.chanroblesvirtualaw
library
Sec. 18.Repealing clause. All laws, executive orders, rules and
regulations, or parts thereof, inconsistent with the provisions of
this
Act
are
hereby
repealed
or
amended
accordingly.chanroblesvirtualaw library
Sec. 19.Effectivity. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.
Approved: August 26, 1972
killing of large cattle, or taking its meat or hide without the

consent of the owner/raiser.
Ordinary carnapping, imprisonment of 14 yrs and 8 months not

more
than
17yrs
and
39
months.
If
there
is
violence,imprisonment for not less than seventeen years and

four months and not more than thirty years. Penalty of life
imprisonment to death shall be imposed when the owner, driver
or occupant of the carnapped motor vehicle is killed in the
commission of the carnapping.
Sa large cattle, ang mag-apply nadito, anti-cattle rustling law.
Take note ha, large cattle.Angiro, iring, dilinasya large cattle.
Large cattle as herein used shall include the cow, carabao,
horse, mule, ass, or other domesticated member of the bovine
family.
PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 533 August 8, 1974THE ANTICATTLE RUSTLING LAW OF 1974
WHEREAS, large cattle are indispensable to the livelihood and
economic growth of our people, particularly the agricultural
workers, because such large cattle are the work animals of our
farmers and the source of fresh meat and dairy products for our
people, and provide raw material for our tanning and canning
industries;
WHEREAS, reports from the law-enforcement agencies reveal
that there is a resurgence of thievery of large cattle, commonly
known as "cattle rustling", especially in the rural areas, thereby
directly prejudicing the livelihood of the agricultural workers and
adversely affecting our food production program for selfsufficiency in rice, corn and other staple crops, as well as in fresh
meat;
WHEREAS, there is an urgent need to protect large cattle raising
industry and small time large cattle owners and raisers from the
nefarious activities of lawless elements in order to encourage our
hardworking cattle raisers and farmers to raise more cattle and
concentrate in their agricultural works, thus increasing our
source of meat and dairy products as well as agricultural
production and allied industries which depend on the cattle
raising industry;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of
the Republic of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in
me by the Constitution and pursuant to Proclamations No. 1081,
dated September 21, 1972 and No. 1104, dated January 17,
1973 and General Order No. 1 dated September 22, 1972, do
hereby order and decree as part of the law of the land, the
following:
Section 1.Title. This Decree shall be known as the "Anti-Cattle
Rustling Law of 1974."
Sec. 2.Definition of terms. The following terms shall mean and
be understood to be as herein defined:
a. Large cattle as herein used shall include the cow, carabao,
horse, mule, ass, or other domesticated member of the bovine
family.
b. Owner/raiser shall include the herdsman, caretaker, employee
or tenant of any firm or entity engaged in the raising of large
cattle or other persons in lawful possession of such large cattle.
c. Cattle rustling is the taking away by any means, method or
scheme, without the consent of the owner/raiser, of any of the
above-mentioned animals whether or not for profit or gain, or
whether committed with or without violence against or
intimidation of any person or force upon things. It includes the
Sec. 3.Duty of owner/raiser to register. The owner/raiser shall,

before the large cattle belonging to him shall attain the age of six
months, register the same with the office of the city/municipal
treasurer where such large cattle are raised. The
city/municipality concerned may impose and collect the fees
authorized by existing laws for such registration and the
issuance of a certificate of ownership to the owner/raiser.
Sec. 4.Duty of city/municipal treasurers and other concerned
public officers and employees. All public officials and employees
concerned with the registration of large cattle are required to
observe strict adherence with pertinent provisions of Chapter 22,
Sec. 511 to 534, of the Revised Administrative Code, except
insofar as they may be inconsistent with the provisions of this
Decree.
Sec. 5.Permit to buy and sell large cattle. No person,
partnership, association, corporation or entity shall engage in the
business of buy and sell of large cattle without first securing a
permit for the said purpose from the Provincial Commander of
the province where it shall conduct such business and the
city/municipal treasurer of the place of residence of such person,
partnership, association, corporation or entity. The permit shall
only be valid in such province.
Sec. 6.Clearance for shipment of large cattle. Any person,
partnership, association, corporation or entity desiring to ship or
transport large cattle, its hides, or meat, from one province to
another shall secure a permit for such purpose from the
Provincial Commander of the province where the large cattle is
registered. Before issuance of the permit herein prescribed, the
Provincial Commander shall require the submission of the
certificate of ownership as prescribed in Sec. 3 hereof, a
certification from the Provincial Veterinarian to the effect that
such large cattle, hides or meat are free from any disease; and
such other documents or records as may be necessary.
Shipment of large cattle, its hides or meat from one
city/municipality to another within the same province may be
done upon securing permit from the city/municipal treasurer of
the place of origin.
Sec. 7.Presumption of cattle rustling. Every person having in his
possession, control or custody of large cattle shall, upon demand
by competent authorities, exhibit the documents prescribed in
the preceding sections. Failure to exhibit the required documents
shall be prima facie evidence that the large cattle in his
possession, control or custody are the fruits of the crime of cattle
rustling.
Sec. 8.Penal provisions. Any person convicted of cattle rustling
as herein defined shall, irrespective of the value of the large
cattle involved, be punished by prision mayor in its maximum
period to reclusion temporal in its medium period if the offense is
committed without violence against or intimidation of persons or
force upon things. If the offense is committed with violence
against or intimidation of persons or force upon things, the
penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion
perpetua shall be imposed. If a person is seriously injured or
killed as a result or on the occasion of the commission of cattle
rustling, the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death shall be
imposed.
When the offender is a government official or employee, he shall,
in addition to the foregoing penalty, be disqualified from voting or
being voted upon in any election/referendum and from holding
any public office or employment.
When the offender is an alien, he shall be deported immediately
upon the completion of the service of his sentence without
further proceedings.
Sec. 9.Rules and Regulations to be promulgated by the Chief of
Constabulary. The chief of Constabulary shall promulgate the
rules and regulations for the effective implementation of this
Decree.
40
Section 10.Repealing clause. The provisions of Articles 309 and

310 of Act No. 3815, otherwise known as the Revised Penal
Code, as amended, all laws, decrees, orders, instructions, rules
and regulations which are inconsistent with this Decree are
hereby repealed or modified accordingly.
This is called robbery of real estate. There is no such thing as
Section 11.Effectivity. This Decree shall take effect upon

approval.
usurpation of the real rights in your property. These words by
robbery of land. You could only be subject of robbery with

respect of your personal property. If there is robbery of land then
this would be this.
It is the occupation over the land or the
means of violence against or intimidation of person, this reminds

us of robbery because there is a means of violence or
Done in the City of Manila, this 8th day of August, in the year of
Our Lord, nineteen hundred and seventy-four.
Coconuts taken from the premises of the plantation or fish
taken from a fishpond or fishery.
Kung ang coconut
naarasakilidsainyongbalay,
gitapokdidto,
didtokamangawatdilinasyaapil. Or katongnamaligyaug ice buko,

that is not qualified. Why does the law protect the coconut
industry? Mahirap daw bantayananglubi, naasataas. Ang fish, to
be
qualified,
didtokasa
fishpond
nangawat.
Kung
nanguhakaugbangusdidtosapunong, qualified theft. Unya kung

gikuhanimolukon, shrimp, crabs? Apilna! this is generic. When
you say fish, bastanaasa fishpond.
If property is taken on the occasion of fire, earthquake,
typhoon, volcanic erruption, or any other calamity, vehicular
accident or civil disturbance. After the Yolanda typhoon,
daghankawatan nag loot. That is qualified theft!
Special Laws on Theft
intimidation of persons kaya lang instead of personal property,

real property. What does it say? It shall take possession of any
real property or shall usurp any real rights in property belonging
to another.
In other words naakayyutanaay several persons
came to you and said pahawadinhi kung dilipatyonkanamo.

Nihawapudka, alanganpatyongudka.
Unsaangkaso?
That is
occupation of real property or usurpation of real rights in

property. By the use of violence against or intimidation of person
they managed to take possession of your property belonging to
another.
There was this case Pp vs. Peche(?) 211 SCRA 687, there is a
tenant
who
was
threatened
napahawadiri
kung
dilipatyonkanamo. Nihawapudang tenant. Tag-iya file ugkaso.

Tama
baang
charge?
Sabing
SC:
Mali
yankasisinobayungnasubject to violation or intimidation, yung

may-ariba? Hindi man. The complainant was the owner but the
one who was subjected to the intimidation and intimidation is the
tenant.
So mali, the information does not state a cause of
action.
Kinsay private
offended party dinhi, ikawbaang
1. Timber Smuggling PD 705
complainant? Dili. It is a crime against the tenant.
2. Electricity
Ang issue dito is yungpenalty provided. Sabiditoin addition to the

penalty incurred for the acts of violence executed by him, shall
3. Stealing gold highgrading
be punished by a fine from 50 to 100 per centum of the gain

which
he
shall have
obtained,
but
not less
than
75
Art. 311. Theft of the property of the National Library and
pesos.Anyway in this felony, it has a two-level penalty or two-tier
National Museum. If the property stolen be any property
penalty. Sabing SC it is a single penalty although two-tier or two
of the National Library or the National Museum, the penalty
level.
shall be arresto mayor or a fine ranging from 200 to 500
there is a single act although there are two crimes isang penalty
pesos, or both, unless a higher penalty should be provided
lang.Kasi in this crime there are threats and there are also
under other provisions of this Code, in which case, the
usurpation or occupation. It is still an issue, should this not be a
offender shall be punished by such higher penalty.
complex crime? But Complex crime is under Article 48 applied
Kasiparasiyangspecial complex crime-composite crime,
in crimes in general.
This should be amended. Imagine arresto mayor, tapos painting
ng national museum. Kahoy pa langmahalnamahalnayan. Sabi
Article 48. Penalty for complex crimes. - When a single act
dun, unless a higher penalty should be provided under the
constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an
provisions of this code. Didtonalangkasa theft judkay mas taas
offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the
pa ang penalty.
penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to
be applied in its maximum period.
Article 312. Occupation of real property or usurpation of real

rights in property. - Any person who, by means of violence
against or intimidation of persons, shall take possession of any
real property or shall usurp any real rights in property belonging
to another, in addition to the penalty incurred for the acts of
violence executed by him, shall be punished by a fine from 50 to
100 per centum of the gain which he shall have obtained, but not
less than 75 pesos.
If the value of the gain cannot be ascertained, a fine of from 200
to 500 pesos shall be imposed.
In this one the law itself provides for the penalty when there is
occupation, threat or intimidation taposmerong usurpation. The
SC said this is a special complex with a two-tiered penalty. The
penalty is for the penalty of the violence, threats and intimidation
plus fine. Now remember hindibayancomplexed?
Should it not be also that the penalty is absorbed or is there an
absorption badito.If absorption will apply here it will result to
absurdity. The crime here is really usurpation, yung threats kung
baga unless the higher penalty of threats but the real crime here
is really usurpation and occupation. This is to fine 50 to 100%
ibigsabihin if you consider the doctrine of absorption it would
result to absurdity where the crime of lesser penalty absorbs the
crime of a higher penalty.
It is not a complex crime it defines the penalizes a single and
special indivisible crime although the penalty is two-tiers.
If you notice that this is committed by means of violence or
intimidation of persons supposed that the possession or taking of
possession, occupation.
SC when tenant-- that could be called usurpation because the
tenant has real right over the property he has the right to
possession because he is the tenant. Hindi kailanganang owner
ang mag file.
Suppose the occupation, possession is by means of stealth. It
41
Article 313. Altering boundaries or landmarks. - Any person who

shall alter the boundary marks or monuments of towns,
provinces, or estates, or any other marks intended to designate
the boundaries of the same, shall be punished
by arrestomenor or a fine not exceeding 100 pesos, or both.
Article 314. Fraudulent insolvency. - Any person who shall
abscond with his property to the prejudice of his creditors, shall
suffer the penalty of prision mayor, if he be a merchant and the
penalty of prisioncorreccional in its maximum period to prision
mayor in its medium period, if he be not a merchant.
Penalty is different for merchants. The offender is a debtor who
shall abscond with his property to the prejudice of his creditors.
It does not mean that you really need to leave or part away from
the place. If you sell property in fraud of creditor or you transfer
property. Ang important dito is yung prejudice ng creditor. The
essence hereis any property of the debtor is made to disappear
for the purpose of evading the fulfilment of the obligations and
liabilities contracted with one or more creditors. The fraudulent
insolvency must result to the prejudice of the creditors. The
fraudulent concealment is not present if there are other
properties which he can make to satisfy the obligation. Unless
the prejudice is shown there can be no conviction. Supposed the
fraudulent concealment of property is committed after the
institution of insolvency proceedings meron special laws
requirements under the insolvency law.
-END-
may not be under Art. 312 because this requires violence against
persons or intimidation against persons. Kung meron stealth
diyan which usually happens samga squatters.
One day
gumisingka, may nag occupy ng land mo but it is not usurpation

kasi there is no intimidation or violence.
The squatters
committed through stealth or strategy.
You cannot just drag
them out, ikawangmafilanng coercion.
Although that is your
property, you cannot put the law in your own hands. You need to
file a case against them unlawful detainer. Forcible entry or
trespassing. That is why in the past there is an anti-squatting
October 22, 2014 full hour

Before we start ESTAFA, I just remembered in CARNAPPING, if
a car is stolen, under what charge are you going to file? Under
Article 310, QUALIFIED THEFT OR CARNAPPING? Kasi sabi
ng theft its qualified if the thing stolen is a motor vehicle and we
go back to theft, what are the elements, intent to gain, taking of
personal property belonging to another without consent. That is
the same thing with respect to ANTI-CARNAPPING, the same
elements are there, of course kasama na doon ang violence
against or intimidation against persons but if the taking of a
motor vehicle is without violence or intimidation against persons,
under what law are you going to file?
law RA 772. But girepealng RA 8368anti-squatting law repeal

act. What about the professional squatters?
Urban Devt Act of 1992. Also called the Lina Law. Under this
law is no longer a crime but it can be if there is squatters in the
traditional sense you can file trespassing or forcible entry or
unlawful detainer. But this law allows a summary eviction or
demolition of professional squatters and imposes criminal
penalties against them. If they can be covered under the term
professional squatters there is provision which allows summary
eviction and demolition of professional squatters.
Now who are professional squatters?
1) they refer to individuals or groups who occupy land without
the express consent of the land owners and who have sufficient
income for legitmitate housing.
Meronnamansilang sufficient
means of legitimate housing but what they do is occupy another

land without the consent of the owner .
2.It also covers those who are previously being awarded housing
benefits or they were awarded home lots by the government but
who sold, lease, transfer the same to settle illegally to the same
People vs. Bustinera, June 8, 2004. In that case, the law itself,
ANTI-CARNAPPING, it was mentioned that it exempts certain
motor vehicles from its coverage, pison, mga road-rollers, mga
tractor, walay labot. So according to the court, if these are the
vehicles stolen, you FILE UNDER QUALIFIED THEFT because
it is not covered by the anti-carnapping law. Now all others, they
are covered. Now one thing that should interest you is, in this
same case, the charge was QUALIFIED THEFT and he was
convicted of ANTI-CARNAPPING, SC said, no problem, because
the elements are the same. If you are able to prove the
elements, all of them, then even if the charge is qualified theft,
pwede ka macharge sa anti-carnapping law, because the
elements are the same, take note of that.
Now, SWINDILING. In ESTAFA, it has been said that man is
essentially good and essentially evil. Like in ESTAFA, ang haba.
Article 315. Swindling (estafa). - Any person who shall defraud another by
shall be punished by:
1st. The penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision ma

the fraud is over 12,000 pesos but does not exceed 22,000 pesos, and if
penalty provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in its maximum pe
10,000 pesos; but the total penalty which may be imposed shall not ex
connection with the accessory penalties which may be imposed under the
be termed prision mayor or reclusion temporal, as the case may be.
2nd. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium perio
pesos but does not exceed 12,000 pesos;
place or to another urban area.
3rd. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correcc
is over 200 pesos but does not exceed 6,000 pesos; and
3. And those non-bona fide occupant and intruders of land
4th. By arresto mayor in its maximum period, if such amount does not ex
cases mentioned, the fraud be committed by any of the following means:
reserved for socialized housing.
1. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence, namely:
42
(a) By altering the substance, quantity, or quality or anything

(a) of
Byvalue
altering
which
the the
substance,
offenderquantity,
shall or quality or anything of
deliver by virtue of an obligation to do so, even though such obligation
virtue of anbeobligation
based ontoan
doimmoral
so, evenorthough such obligation be ba
illegal consideration.
(b) By misappropriating or converting, to the prejudice of anoth

(b) By misappropriating or converting, to the prejudice of another,
property money,
receivedgoods,
by theor offender
any other
in trust or on commission,
personal property received by the offender in trust or on commission,
obligation
or involving
for administration,
the duty toormake
underdelivery of or to return the sa
any other obligation involving the duty to make delivery of or to
or return
partially
theguaranteed
same, even
bythough
a bond;such
or by denying having received s
obligation be totally or partially guaranteed by a bond; or by denying having received such money,
goods, or other property.
(c) By taking undue advantage of the signature of the offended p
above such signature in blank, to the prejudice of the offended pa

(c) By taking undue advantage of the signature of the offended party in blank, and by writing any
document above such signature in blank, to the prejudice of the offended party or of any third
person.
In other words, you are obliged to deliver something but you alter
the quality, quantity. Take note that this will apply even if the
2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or fraudulent
prior
to orif simultaneously
items acts
are executed
immoral or
even
the obligation is based on an
with the commission of the fraud:
immoral consideration. So mag order ka ng shabu. Sabi mo 95%
purity, unsa man ni 67 ra man ni. That is altering the quality of
something
like that.
Ang problema dito itong letter
(a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretendingthe
to substance,
possess power,
influence,
qualifications,
b, you or
have
MISAPPROPRIATING,
OR CONVERTING OR
property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions,
by means
of other similar deceits.
DENYING. So misappropriating the goods, money or other
personal property received by the defender in trust.
(b) By altering the quality, fineness or weight of anything
pertaining to his
artshould
or business.
Misappropriation,
you
be familiar with misappropriation,
with respect to crimes committed by public officers,
of public
funds
(c) By pretending to have bribed any Government misappropriation
employee, without prejudice
to the
actionorfor appropriation is
Now,
term, isInhere
calumny which the offended party may deem propermalversation.
to bring against
thethat
offender.
this again.
case, the
offender shall be punished by the maximum period of the penalty.
So how do you distinguish misappropriation under
misappropriation
mentioned here in
(d) By post-dating a check, or issuing a check in malversation
payment of anfrom
obligation
when the offender
therein were not sufficient to cover the amount of theestafa?
check. The failure of the drawer of the check
to deposit the amount necessary to cover his check within three (3) days from receipt of notice from
We know
that malversation
public officers,
the offenders
the bank and/or the payee or holder that said check has
been dishonored
for lackinvolves
of insufficiency
of
there arefalse
public
officers or
who
are not just
funds shall be prima facie evidence of deceit constituting
pretense
fraudulent
act.public
(As officers but also
amended by R.A. 4885, approved June 17, 1967.) accountable for that property or that funds which they have
custody of. Here, the offender in estafa with respect to
misappropriation is a private individual, private person. Or even
(e) By obtaining any food, refreshment or accommodation
at a hotel,
boarding
a public officer
but heinn,
mustrestaurant,
not have taken
advantage or he must
house, lodging house, or apartment house and the
without or
paying
therefor,
to
notlike
in custody
he must
not bewith
the intent
accountable
public officer.
defraud the proprietor or manager thereof, or by obtaining
credit
at
hotel,
inn,
restaurant,
boarding
Almost the same ang elements nya, malversation by
house, lodging house, or apartment house by the use
of any false pretense,
or also
by abandoning
misappropriationm,
that is
the case or
in estafa. Although
surreptitiously removing any part of his baggage from
a hotel,
restaurant, boarding
estafa
says, inn,
misappropriation,
althoughhouse,
there is conversion or
lodging house or apartment house after obtaining denial.
credit,And
food,
refreshment
orand
accommodation
of course,
private
public funds.
therein without paying for his food, refreshment or accommodation.
What is converting?
3. Through any of the following fraudulent means:
When you convert or even misappropriate, you treat that
something
as yours, you consider that something to be your
(a) By inducing another, by means of deceit, to sign any
document.
property, something like that. Ang problema is, sometimes, there
is a problem, how to distinguish that from a civil obligation. How
(b) By resorting to some fraudulent practice to insuredo
success
in a gambling
game. maremember nyo yung distinction
you distinguish
conversion,
ng commodatum and mutuum? When you borrow my book, you
are or
supposed
return
therecord,
very same
(c) By removing, concealing or destroying, in whole
in part, toany
court
officebook
files,to me. If you buy
from Rex Bookstore, hindi yan the same, you are supposed to
document or any other papers.
return the one that I gave you, that is commodatum. Mutuum,
you borrow money from me, php100, hindi mo kailangan ibalik
the very same bill I gave you. So that is not estafa, there is
You can subdivide this. Well sa haba nito but the elements can
transfer of ownership. But then you have to pay me but not
be brought down to two. What are these? Either you have:
necessarily the same money. Yung sa commodatum, if you dont
return the very same book, estafa yan. Yan ang isa sa mga
1) Abuse of Confidence plus damage or
distinctions that you have to take note.
2) Deceit plus damage.
Kasi kung lahat, kahaba nito, these are forms and variations of
Estafa but basically, yun lang ang kailangan mo, whatever
variation it is, you must prove EITHER, abuse of confidence OR
deceit and the damage, pecuniary damage.
We can classify this or divide this---what are the means; no. 1 is
with unfaithfulness and abuse of confidence, 2, by means of
false pretenses. Kanina ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE yung number
one diba, number two, DECEIT. Ang number 3, FRAUDULENT
MEANS PA RIN SO REFERRING TO DECEIT still. Itong first,
second and third, just take note of that because these are the
penalties kung magkano.
The penalties will depend on the amount involved in the
defraudation. So depende ang penalty kung magkano and
perhaps this should also be amended. Anyway, with unfailfuness
and or abuse of confidence.
Article 315
XXXXXX
1. With unfaithfulness or abuse of confidence, namely:
Now, the provision also mentions, DENYING. You borrow a book

from me and then you deny that you borrowed a book from me,
so pasok yan estafa yan. You have the duty to make delivery of
or to return the same.
What does in trust,
administration mean?
or
on
commission
or
for
Meaning, the personal property is received in TRUST or for

COMMISSION or FOR ADMINISTRATION. In TRUST, meaning,
there is NO TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP because you are
merely holding this item in trust, you are supposed to return it or
to deliver it later. So if you MISAPPROPRIATE, CONVERT or
DENY having received it, in trust, that is ESTAFA, under par. 1(b)
or on commission. Commission here, does not refer to
something where in you sell something and you get the
proceeds. Commission here is parang order ba, you are being
commissioned to do something. That is the meaning of the
commission here.
Based on some cases, you are supposed to pay something,
license, or tax or whatever, cedula or whatever. Mamalihog ka sa
bgy. Captain to pay your cedula and another also asked the bgy.
Official to pay the cedula, but he has no cash so, kani nalang isd,
and he did not get the ctc of these people, ano ngayon ang
liability nya? Estafa? Or simple loan for collection of money? The
answer to that was iba. The first one, he was commissioned to
go to the baranggay and pay the money there and bring back the
CTC because he misappropriated the money, that becomes
estafa. Pero yung isa hindi yun estafa, so you have to distinguish
yang mga ganyan.
Also, agency, agent and principal. Agent, he is not holding the
property in the concept of an owner. You are supposed to hold
on to it and sell it and then remit the proceeds back to the
principal. If you misappropriate the proceeds, that is estafa. Or
depositary ka, you are supposed to hold on to that and then if
you misappropriate the items deposited, liable ka for estafa. One
other example here is katong nagbaligya ug typewriter, pero trial
muna, bigay ko sayo, 5 days, kasi ang distinction dyan is
whether there is transfer of ownership. Now after 5 days, hindi
binalik, hindi rin binayaran, so ano yan. Ang sabi dito, if the item
is not returned within that period, there is automatic sale,
because sale is effective upon delivery, dili kailangan bayaran,
so wala na giuli, imo na na, bayari ko, so there is NO ESTAFA.
As a general rule, ESTAFA, NO TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP,
example, the money and the book. If you do not return the book,
estafa, the money, may transfer of ownership kaya di yan estafa.
One thing that you have to remember here is the DEFENSE of
NOVATION.
Naalala nyo anong novation? A change in the terms of payment
of the contract. So suppose in the case of an agent and
principal. The agent is unable to return the proceeds and he is
also unable to return the goods. So sabi nya sa principal, I
promise to pay, I will execute a promissory note, I will pay for the
value of the things in a months time. After one month wala
kabayad, so ano ngayon estafa? Or an action for a sum of
money. In the first place, meron silang contract of agency. If at
that point, the principal chose to file a case, estafa talaga yun.
But what happened here, the contract was novated into one of a
simple loan, kay nag execute ng promissory note, in other
words, kanya nay un and if he does not pay, that is a simple
collection of money. Therefore, it is NOT ESTAFA. That is
NOVATION.
There is another similar crime or felony. Kanina we distinguish
estafa from malversation. Another is THEFT AND ESTAFA.
The usual distinction there is, kining estafa, if you look at the law,
the things are received in trust or on commission. In other words,
the offender received, gidawat niya unya wala niya giuli. Ang
theft if you remember, is taking of personal propery with intent to
gain. Estafa, gidawat. Theft, gikuha. But sometimes that is not a
good indicator because, for example in the case of a househelp.
Ang househelp gihatagan nimo ug kwarta, palit sa palengke
unya wala na nibalik. Gihatag man nimo ang kwarta, the money
is received, so is that estafa? Househelp nga eh so qualified
theft yan.
Or another example. Yung sasakyan. You have to distinguish
between
PHYSICAL
POSSESSION
AND
JURIDICAL
POSSESSION. When you say JURIDICAL POSSESSION, that
is POSSESSION that you can exercise even against the owner,
you are not the owner but you can exercise that even against the
owner. An example there is yung apartment, sabihin ng may-ari,
alis ka na dyan. Merong contract of lease so hindi ka pwede
basta nalang mapaalis. Your possession of your apartment unit
is JURIDICAL.
So when somebody rents a car, may rent a car company ka, give
him the possession of the car, you give him the keys, kung dili na
iuli, unsa man na ron? That is JURIDICAL POSSESSION so that
amounts to ESTAFA. Kung transfer na PHYSICAL, THEFT yan
sya. PHYSICAL POSSESSION ONLY.
But also, remember yung sa taxi, there is this ruling of the SC.
Kung taxi, diba boundary man na, basta kay taga-I kog isa ka
libo, imoha na ang sobra. Unya karon wala gi-uli ang taxi, wala
daw niya giuli kay wala sya kaabot boundary. So is that theft or
estafa? SC said, the relationship of the owner and the driver is
that of EE-ER and therefore the crime is THEFT. Although
because its motor vehicle, qualified.
43
Another illustration is, ipatuloy ko yung with respect to

JURIDICAL AND PHYSICAL POSSESSION only. Kasi yung sa
rental, that is juridical, you can insist your possession even
against the owner. But suppose you have a car and a personal
driver, gisugo nimo, if you change your mind, can the driver
insist? So that is possession that is not juridical, that is merely
physical possession.
Now, conversion also, in relation to this particular paragraph,
par.1(b), relate this to P.D. 115, the TRUST RECEIPT. Trust
receipt transaction. Anyway, trust receipt transaction, P.D. 115
What constitutes Sec. 4 of trust receipts? What constitutes a
trust receipt transaction? Under Sec. 4 of a trust receipt.
P.D. 115
Section 4. What constitutes a trust receipt transaction. A trust receipt tran
is any transaction by and between a person referred to in this Decree as th
in this Decree as entrustee, whereby the entruster, who owns or holds abs
specified goods, documents or instruments, releases the same to the po
execution and delivery to the entruster of a signed document called a "
himself to hold the designated goods, documents or instruments in trust
dispose of the goods, documents or instruments with the obligation to turn
to the extent of the amount owing to the entruster or as appears in the
instruments themselves if they are unsold or not otherwise disposed of, in
specified in the trust receipt, or for other purposes substantially equivalent
1. In the case of goods or documents, (a) to sell the goods or p

process the goods with the purpose of ultimate sale: Provided, T
trust receipt for the purpose of manufacturing or processing befor
its title over the goods whether in its original or processed form un
obligation under the trust receipt; or (c) to load, unload, ship or
manner preliminary or necessary to their sale; or
2. In the case of instruments,
a) to sell or procure their sale or exchange; or
b) to deliver them to a principal; or
c) to effect the consummation of some transactions invol

d) to effect their presentation, collection or renewal
The sale of goods, documents or instruments by a person in the

instruments for profit who, at the outset of the transaction, has, a
in such goods, documents or instruments, or who sells the sam
other interest as security for the payment of the purchase p
transaction and is outside the purview and coverage of this Decre
So merong entruster, merong entrusteee. The entruster is

usually a bank, and ang nangutang entrustee. Whereby the
entruster holds absolute title or security interest over certain
specified rules, documents and instruments, releases the same
to the possession of the entrustee, releases items to the
entrustee, upon the latters (entrustee) execution or delivery to
the entruster of a signed document or a trust receipt. So ito ang
nag execute, ang entrustee, dili man ni magpautang pud ang
banko (entruster) so what happens is that, kasi ito, this was
meant to help merchants and importers. Kung mag import ka,
kelangan mo ng pera, you need financing, you go to a bank unya
kay maro man ning bangko, dili man pud na muhatag nalang. To
ensure that they get back what they let you borrow, execute ka
ng trust receipt. But the merchandise that he will buy will be in
the name of the bank. The title is in the name of the bank, its not
his. It is in the name of the bank but the possession of these
items is given to him by the bank, subject of course to, kung
mabaligya niya, magbayad sya sa bangko, that in a nutshell is a
TRUST RECEIPT TRANSACTION, whereby the entrustee binds
himself to hold the designated goods, documents or instruments
in trust for the entruster and to sell or otherwise dispose of the
goods, documents or instruments with the obligation to turnover
to the entruster the proceeds thereof to the extent of the amount
owing to the entruster or as appears in the trust receipt of the
goods themselves if they are not sold or not otherwise disposed
of. So parang estafa talaga sya.
Simply stated, trust receipt transaction, is one where the
entrustee has the obligation to deliver to the entruster the price
of the sale or if the merchandise is not sold, to return the
merchandise to the entruster. The proceeds or the merchandise
themselves. Proceeds syempre kay kung gibaligya na nimo,
mag kita sya doon, magpatong na sya, basta meron lang sya
obligations from the proceeds.
There are therefore 2 obligations in a trust receipt transaction:
1.
Money Received under the obligation or the duty to turn

it over to the owner of the merchandise sold, to the
entruster
2.
Merchandise Received under the obligation or the duty

to return the proceeds or the merchandise and this is
one of the important phrases.
44
WHEREAS, the utilization of trust receipts, as a convenient business devic

their financing problems, had gained popular acceptance in interna
particularly in commercial banking transactions;
WHEREAS, there is no specific law in the Philippines that governs trust re

obligations of the parties involved therein and the enforcement of the said
terms of the trust receipt agreement;
WHEREAS, the recommendations contained in the report on the financia

certain modifications by the monetary authorities included, among others,
receipt transactions;
There were a lot of cases before, na ang sabi ng court before,

mag apply to sa importing lang, importation. But in one of the
cases, sabi ng SC, wala man nakalagay sa P.D. 115 na for
A violation of any of these undertakings, constitute ESTAFA
purposes of importation lang ito. So this will also apply even if
defined under Article 315 (1)(b) of the RPC and this is provided
the merchant does not import. Basta nag execute ng trust receipt
in the law itself, the trust receipts law, Section 13, which is the
tapos dito binili, domestic, mag apply gihapon na sya. So dito
penalty clause.
klaro, to assist merchants and importers solve their financing
obviously
the goods,
state, indocuments
enacting the law, sought to
Section 13. Penalty clause. The failure of an entrustee to turn over theproblems.
proceeds So
of the
sale of the
find atoway
assistingorimporters
andinmerchants
or instruments covered by a trust receipt to the extent of the amount owing
thetoentruster
as appears
the trust in their financing
in
order
to
encourage
commerce
in
the
Philippines.
receipt or to return said goods, documents or instruments if they were not sold or disposed of in accordance with
the
terms of the trust receipt shall constitute the crime of estafa, punishable under the provisions of Article Three hundred
Trust Receipts
Law
createdotherwise
to "to aid in financing importers and
and fifteen, paragraph one (b) of Act Numbered Three thousand eightThe
hundred
and fifteen,
aswas
amended,
funds
or
resources
to
finance
the
importation
or purchase of merchandise,
known as the Revised Penal Code. If the violation or offense is committed by a corporation, partnership, association
except
utilization,
asdirectors,
collateral,officers,
of the merchandise imported or pur
or other juridical entities, the penalty provided for in this Decree shall
bethrough
imposed
upon the
Regardless
of whether
the to
transaction
is foreign or domestic, it is importan
employees or other officials or persons therein responsible for the offense,
without
prejudice
the civil liabilities
relation to trust receipts mainly involved sales.
arising from the criminal offense.
So in a nutshell, that sums it up. Violation ng trust receipt, file ka

ng ESTAFA.
Now, this was challenged. The constitutionality was challenged.
Because ang estafa, naa man nay imprisonment. Isnt this
unconstitutional, you will be imprisoned for contracting a debt. Di
ba sabi ng constitution, dili jud ka mapreso kung utang lang ang
istoryahan and we know that this refers to contractual
obligations. Isnt this a contractual obligation.
Sabin g SC in one case, itong trust receipt, dalawa ang feature
nito. One feature is the LOAN FEATURE, utang, bayaran mo, so
kung ganyan, you do not go to jail for the utang, that is in the
constitution. But the other feature of the trust receipt is the
SECURITY FEATURE, that is why you are being charged. You
are not being charged for the simple loan. You are being
imprisoned because you violated the SECURITY FEATURE, the
trust receipt itself, kasi yan, yan ang security for the bank.
A trust receipt does not involve a simple loan transaction,
between a debtor and a creditor.
But in this case of, Hur Tin Yang vs. People August 14, 2013,
andito na lahat all about trust receipts in relation to estafa. In this
case, SC said, nonetheless, when both parties enter into an
agreement, knowing fully well that the return of the goods,
subject of the trust receipt is not possible, even without any
fault on the part of the trustee, it is NOT A TRUST RECEIPT
TRANSACTION penalized under P.D. 115 in relation to 315 and
the only obligation agreed upon by the parties would be a return
of the proceeds of the same transaction. This transaction
becomes a mere loan, where the borrower is obligated to pay
the bank the amount spent for the purchase of the goods.
Because according to the court, parang contract of adhesion,
nisugot nalang ka.
The true nature of a trust receipt transaction, can be found in the
WHEREAS CLAUSE of P.D. 115
Considering that the goods in this case were never intended for sal
communication towers, the trial court erred in ruling that the agreement is a
Since Asiatrust knew that petitioner was neither an importer nor retail d
agreement could not possibly apply to petitioner.
When both parties enter into an agreement knowing that the return of th
possible even without any fault on the part of the trustee, it is not a trust rec
We pointed out that the borrowers were not importers acquiring goods f
often within the custody or control of the trustee until they are purchas
manufacture of finished products, these finished products if not the raw
remain in the possession of the trustee until they are sold. But the goo
construction project are often placed under the control and custody of the
only be compelled to return the materials if they fail to pay the contract
proceedings.
The practice of banks of making borrowers sign trust receipts to facilitate

the threats of criminal prosecution should they be unable to pay it may be u
Such agreements are contracts of adhesion which borrowers have n
disapproved. The resort to this scheme leaves poor and hapless borrowe
misinterpretation.
Unfortunately, what happened in Colinares is exactly the situation in th
practice described in Colinares should be stopped and discouraged. For
provision of non-imprisonment for nonpayment of debts,22 it is imperative
Estafa under Art. 315, par. 1 (b) ofthe RPC, in relation to PD 115. (HUR TIN
Note: these are exerpts of the case that sir read to the class.
Because it has really been a practice, simple loan lang, nagpapa

execute ng trust receipt, kahit hindi kailangan even when youre
not going to buy merchandise for sale, execute ka pa rin ng Trust
Receipt. That is according to the SC is reprehensible.
Ang sunod nito is, by taking undue advantage of the signature of
the offended party, you have a paper and you write a document
above the signature. Obviously may mga taong ganon noh,
magiwan lang din ng signature, to the prejudice of the offended
party. That is estafa.
CRIM 2 OCT23, 2014 FIRST HOUR
2. By means of any of the following false pretenses or
fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneously with the
commission
of
the
fraud:
(a) By using fictitious name, or falsely pretending to
possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit,
45
agency, business or imaginary transactions, or by means of

other similar deceits.
because you issued a check. Obligation contracted at the time of

the issuance of the check. That is the order.
When you use a fictitious name, one example given there is you
redeemed a ticket sa pawnshop and you used a fictitious name
and pretend to be somebody, that would under this kind of
estafa.
Another element is, at the time of the issuance the offender

had no funds or the funds deposited are not sufficient to
cover the value of the check.
or falsely pretending to possess power, influence, qualifications,

property, credit, agency, business or imaginary transactions, or
by means of other similar deceits.Bastakay nay deceit.
For those of you who have read xxx ( cant clearly hear sirs
voice..butang thought saiyagiingon, clerk of court makes a
decision instead of the judge, is that pretending to possess
power, influence? Hindi. )
In one case Ilaganvs CA 239 S 575, he was an agent and he
was strictly prohibited by his principal from collecting money.
However, he falsely pretended to the clients that he was
authorized to collect money. There are actually 2 kinds of estafa
there: 1. Estafa with abuse of confidence with respect to the
principal and 2. Estafa by means of deceit with respect to the 7
individuals from whom he collected money. And for each one of
them, theres a different count of estafa.
Just remember when you speak of estafa, the element of
damage, actual damage is not really necessary as long as it is
capable of pecuniary estimation. Example, when you are
deprived of property rights, there is damage.
(b) By altering the quality, fineness or weight of anything
pertaining to his art or business.
(c) By pretending to have bribed any Government employee,
without prejudice to the action for calumny which the
offended party may deem proper to bring against the
offender. In this case, the offender shall be punished by the
maximum period of the penalty.
Pretending nabigyannangperaang judge.
(d) [By post-dating a check, or issuing a check in payment
of an obligation when the offender therein were not
sufficient to cover the amount of the check. The failure of
the drawer of the check to deposit the amount necessary to
cover his check within three (3) days from receipt of notice
from the bank and/or the payee or holder that said check
has been dishonored for lack of insufficiency of funds shall
be prima facie evidence of deceit constituting false pretense
or fraudulent act. (As amended by R.A. 4885, approved June
17, 1967.)]
This is the most important paragraph here. In this paragpraph,
there are 2 acts: 1. Youpost-date a check or 2. You issue a check
nawalaypondo, or insufficient funds.
When you talk about checks, be sure you know that bouncing
checks is a different crime. When you talk about bouncing
checks, there is a bouncing check law BP22.
Here, when you talk about about violation under Art 315, you talk
about estafa. It is not about estafa by bouncing checks. But
when you talk about bouncing checks, it is BP22. Here, you talk
about estafa, although parangganon din anglabas, the check will
bounce. In other words, it will not be honoured because of the
insufficiency of funds or no funds at all.
So there are 2 laws for the bouncing checks. We have to know
this because they can go together, meaning, the issuance of a
bouncing check may be criminally chargeable under both BP22
as well as Art 315 (2) (d). Sometimes it will fall under BP22 only,
or sometimes in art 315 (2) (d) only. But there are instances
where you can be charged under both BP22 and Art 315 (2) (d).
In estafa, the offender post-dated or issued a check in
payment of an obligation contracted at the time of the postdating or of the issuance. In other words, you are issuing this
check as payment for something at that time. At the time of the
issue, you got something in return. You want to buy TV, you dont
have cash, you issued a check. The TV was given to you
The last element there would be that the payee was defrauded.
Like I said, the payment of the check was a simultaneous
obligation.
Under the xxx doctrine, if the check was issued to a payment of
a pre-existing obligation, there is no estafa. What do you mean
by a pre-existing obligation? Naankadaanobligation, and you
issued a check in payment of the obligation. If the checked
bounces, that is not estafa. Why? Because the payee was not
defrauded at that time. For example, you borrowed money from
X. You said, you will pay next week. Next week comes,
singilnasiyasayo, walakapambayad. So you issued a check. Pag
present sa bank, the check is dishonored. Is there estafa? There
is no estafa. Why? Because your obligation is not a pre-existing
one. In other words, hindisya simultaneous, hindisiyakaliwaan.
Nalibabasyapag issue nimogcheke? Wala man.Nalibasya, even
before kaynituosyanimo. It is not estafa under a case like that for
a pre-existing obligation. It will be a violation of BP22.
Suppose that the check is dishonoured because of stop
payment. Is there a violation? Kasidiba, isyuhannimougcheke,
unyatawagannimoangbanko, you order stop payment. Is that
estafa under art 315?As long as the transaction covered is
simultaneous, that is estafa. We are talking here of estafa by
means of deceit. Kung nalibaka, na deceive ka, na-defraud
angtao because of your deceit, it will fall under Art 315. It is also
true with respect to the endorsement. Dibaangcheke is a
negotiable instrument, so you can endorse it. If you are the
endorsee
hindiikawang
nag
draw
ng
check.
Ikawlangangnagpasa, ang nag negotiate. Are you liable? Of
course, you are. Because again you are saying that the check is
good when in fact, it is not. That is still deceit.
PpvsLukbang 196 S 341.In this case, the check was not issued
for payment. It was issued as a guaranty or something like that,
a guaranty for investment or a guaranty for payment. If the check
is presented to the bank and it was dishonoured, will it amount to
estafa? Also gi-filanng falsification under untruthful statements in
a narration of facts.Kasisabimo may pondo, may amount
naganyan, when in fact that is a false statement in a narration of
facts. Walakanamanperapala.Anongsabing SC? That is not
falsification. Why? Because a check is not a document. There is
no narration there. Its not a narration of facts. A check is an
order by the drawer telling the bank to pay the holder of the
check. With respect to the check issued as a security for the
investment, the court said that there is no crime because the
check was not issued in payment of an obligation. If you look at
Art315 (2) (D), it says there in payment of an obligation. So if the
check was merely for purposes of guaranty or as an evidence of
indebtedness, not for payment of an obligation, then it cannot be
estafa.
The same thing if you look at cross-checks. What is the nature of
a cross-check? A cross-check is not supposed to be encash. It is
supposed to be deposit. Kung ganyan, it is not a payment of
something, so its not to be estafa.
People
vsDizon.Sinabihannyaangtaonaitokulangangpondo.
Now, the tao tried to encash it. Can there be estafa? No, walang
deceit. You go back to the basic principle estafa by means of
deceit. If there is no deceit, you cannot filer under this
paragraph.
You have to take note of that because the rule is different when
we talk about BP22. In BP22, the crime is really basically the
issuance of a check which is unfunded, a check which is
insufficiently funded. That is the crime in BP22. This bouncing
check law was passed to protect the integrity of checks.
Section 1. Checks without sufficient funds. - Any person who
makes or draws and issues any check to apply on account or for
value, knowing at the time of issue that he does not have
sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank for the payment
of such check in full upon its presentment, which check is
subsequently dishonored by the drawee bank for insufficiency of
funds or credit or would have been dishonored for the same
reason had not the drawer, without any valid reason, ordered the
bank to stop payment, shall be punished by imprisonment of not
less than thirty days but not more than one (1) year or by a fine
of not less than but not more than double the amount of the
check which fine shall in no case exceed Two Hundred
Thousand Pesos, or both such fine and imprisonment at the
discretion of the court.
The same penalty shall be imposed upon any person who,
having sufficient funds in or credit with the drawee bank when he
makes or draws and issues a check, shall fail to keep sufficient
funds or to maintain a credit to cover the full amount of the check
if presented within a period of ninety (90) days from the date
appearing thereon, for which reason it is dishonored by the
drawee bank.
Where the check is drawn by a corporation, company or entity,
the person or persons who actually signed the check in behalf of
such drawer shall be liable under this Act.
There are 2 acts punish in BP22.
1. You make, draw, issue any check to apply on
account or for value.
The phrase on account or for value makes a lot of
difference. Like I said, sometime you can invoke both
BP22 and Art 315 when the check is issued for a
simultaneous obligation. That is what is meant by for
value. The check is issued for value, saato pa kaliwaan.
I give you this check, you give me the items.
Itongon account, what does that mean? That means a
pre-existing obligation which is not punish if you charge
under Art 315. But here, if you make, draw, issue a
check intended for payment to apply on account.
Ibigsabihin you are issuing a check for a pre-existing
obligation, and therefore it constitutes a violation of the
BP22.
So that is one distinction between BP22 and Art 315.
BP22 applies even if there is a pre-existing obligation.
In Art 315, it does not apply. It can only be estafa if it is
made to pay for a simultaneous obligation.
Is an endorser liable in BP22? Dibasabinatinsa Art 315,
you are liable. If you look in the language of BP22, the
act punish is the making, drawing, issuing the check.
Yong endorser, di syanaga draw, di syanaga issue,
therefore di syakasamasa BP22.
Another is, memorandum checks checks issued only
as a guaranty or issued as evidence of indebtedness,
or cross-checks. Are you liable under BP22? This time
the answer is yes. Compared to Art 315, hindi. Kasinga,
here sa BP22, the essence is the issuance a of bad
check. Mere issuance. So your guaranty should be
other way, not by issuing a check.
In BP22, sec 4 says
Section 4. Credit construed. - The word "credit" as used herein
shall be construed to mean an arrangement or understanding
with the bank for the payment of such check.
May lusotkasisa BP22, when you present the check for payment,
tapos you have insufficient funds pala. You are given the
opportunity to make good the check. Sometimes, may
nagabigayng credit. Meaning, even if your check is insufficiently
funded. They will take it. Bayarannila yon. So you have a credit
with bank. So if you make arrangement with the bank, ok na yon
kumbaga.
Also, when you present the check to the bank, sec 2 says..
Section 2. Evidence of knowledge of insufficient funds. - The
making, drawing and issuance of a check payment of which is
refused by the drawee because of insufficient funds in or credit
with such bank, when presented within ninety (90) days from the
date of the check, shall be prima facie evidence of knowledge of
such insufficiency of funds or credit unless such maker or drawer
pays the holder thereof the amount due thereon, or makes
46
arrangements for payment in full by the drawee of such check

within (5) banking days after receiving notice that such check
has not been paid by the drawee.
Here, even if it is a crime of malumprohibitum, you need
evidence that the drawer knows nawalasyang funds. Kailangan
may knowledge. If within 90 days, di gi-honorngbank, that is now
evidence that you acquired knowledge that your check is
unfunded or there is insufficient funds. That will be now evidence
as knowledge.
unless such maker or drawer pays the holder thereof the amount
due thereon, or makes arrangements for payment in full by the
drawee of such check within (5) banking days after receiving
notice that such check has not been paid by the drawee.
In other words, you are given opportunity under BP22, if you do
not pay or make arrangement with the bank, then liable
kana.meronka pang leeway, within 5 banking days,
ayusinmonayan, otherwise, igo n aka sa BP22. This 90 days is
for purposes of knowledge. Pag present sa bank
taposdishonored, evidence na yon. So you have 5 banking days
parabayaran yon or you make arrangement with the bank.
If you present your check after 90 days, walana yang
presumption nayan. The 90 days is only for purposes of
presumption. Bakitkanamanpupuntasabanko after 90 days from
the making or drawing? Mao ngginatawagna stale check.
Walang criminal liability.
Another thing is stop payment. Is the stop payment a violation of
BP22? Again, basics. BP22 is making a bad check. Eh kung may
pondoyanpero gusto molang i-stop payment, is that a bad
check? Its not a bad check! It is not a violation of BP22. It would
be a violation of Art 315. Nangatikka, sabimobayad,
taposimogitawaganangbankoparadiliibayad.
If the check is dishonored, ilagayang reason for the dishonor,
insufficient of funds, stop payment or kung insufficient tapos stop
payment pa jud, ibutangnadidto.
which check is subsequently dishonored by the drawee bank for
insufficiency of funds or credit or would have been dishonored
for the same reason had not the drawer, without any valid
reason, ordered the bank to stop payment
kana, violation of BP22 and Art 315.
Lim vs CA vs 274 S 572.He was the authorized signatories of
check, gisignanniyaang check, as to payee and amount ibang
division angnaga fill up. Ang issue dito is knowledge. According
to the court, he cannot be held liable. If such knowledge of
insufficiency of funds is proven to be actually absent or nonexistent, accused should not be held liable. The prosecution
must prove and defense must be given a chance to rebut.
Although malumprohibitum, the prosecution is not excused from
the responsibility of proving beyond reasonable doubt all the
elements of the offense and that includes knowledge.
The notice of dishonour was sent to the corporation, not to the
person who was authorized. There was no notice. That is not
knowledge. Kasi corporation ang nag issue eh.
Llamadovs CA 270 S 43.This time the signatory of the check
denies knowledge. The check was signed in blank. But he was
held liable. Knowledge as a state of mind is difficult to prove. The
statute itself creates a prima facie presumption that drawer has
knowledge. He failed to rebut the presumption by paying the
amount of the check within 5 days from notice of dishonour.
When you sign a check in blank, you made yourself prone to the
charge of violation of BP22. It was incumbent upon him to prove
his defense of lack of involvement in the negotiation or in the
transaction.
The directive I told you earlier with respect to banks to indicate
the order of stop payment is in section 3
Section 3.Duty of drawee; rules of evidence. - It shall be the
duty of the drawee of any check, when refusing to pay the same
to the holder thereof upon presentment, to cause to be written,
printed, or stamped in plain language thereon, or attached
thereto, the reason for drawee'sdishonor or refusal to pay the
same: Provided, That where there are no sufficient funds in or
credit with such drawee bank, such fact shall always be explicitly
stated in the notice of dishonor or refusal. In all prosecutions
under this Act, the introduction in evidence of any unpaid and
dishonored check, having the drawee's refusal to pay stamped
or written thereon or attached thereto, with the reason therefor
as aforesaid, shall be prima facie evidence of the making or
issuance of said check, and the due presentment to the drawee
for payment and the dishonor thereof, and that the same was
properly dishonored for the reason written, stamped or attached
by the drawee on such dishonored check.
Not with standing receipt of an order to stop payment, the
drawee shall state in the notice that there were no sufficient
funds in or credit with such bank for the payment in full of such
check, if such be the fact.
Both must appear, the stop payment and drawn against
insufficient funds (DAIF). If they both exist, ilagaydoon. Take
note, the practice refer to drawer and other euphemisms is no
longer allowed. Nakalagaydapat stop payment or insufficient
funds.Klarohana.
The other act punish in BP22 is
2. The failure to keep sufficient funds or to maintain a credit
within a period of ninety (90) days from the date appearing
thereon.
Kaya ngadibamerontayo within 90 days you present, that is your
obligation to maintain sufficient funds within 90 days. Kaya
ngakung after 90 days kana nag present, walang liability ang
nag issue under the BP22.
So how do you distinguish the first act from the second act.
1. Yong sa first, the check is worthless at the time of the
issuance, whereas the 2nd type, its good when issued.
2. The 1st type, the drawer has knowledge of the insufficiency of
funds or lack of funds, whereas in the 2 nd type, knowledge is not
a requisite.
3. The 1st type, the law compels the drawer to either deposit or
arrange credit with the drawee upon 5 days from presentment,
the 2nd type, the law expects or compels the drawer maintain
sufficient funds or enough credit within 90 days from drawing or
issuing.
Lozano vs Martinez 196 S 343.Where the constitutionality of
the imprisonment was questioned. According to the court, this is
not a violation of the right against imprisonment for non-payment
of debt. The purpose of the law is to protect the integrity of the
check as a form of payment in commercial transactions. The
practice proscribed is the act of making or issuing worthless
checks which is considered as a public nuisance.
ano pa ang usapan niyo kahit pa it only serves as your security

blanket, gunit-gunitan lang nimo, pareho lang yan. Although in
BARCA? v. CA 298scra656, ito yung sinasabi nila na gidecriminalize nila ang BP 22, THAT IS NOT ACCURATE
because in this case the court only imposed a penalty of fine
kasi ang penalty under BP 22 is imprisonment OR a fine. In this
case, SC imposed fine only kaya doon na nagstart ang tsismis
na gi-decriminalize nila ang BP 22 pero NOT ACCURATE kasi
nandon pa sa law yung imprisonment pero meron lang
instruction ngayon or guide ang SC na diri lang ka sa fine
kumbaga may preference sa imposition of penalty. Imprisonment
not less than 30 days and not more than 1 year or a fine or
double the amount of check but not more than OR kasi yan,
the same philosophy underlying in ISL gaya ng preventive
unnecessary deprivation of liberty and economi usefulness and
due reguard of socil. So pareho ang philosophy ng ISL at BP 22.
So in this case, SC deleted the imprisonment imposed by the
lower court and instead imposed the fine only. They considered
the fact that the accused were first time offenders and they were
Filipinowho presumably contributes to the national economy.
They made this statement that they brought this appeal believing
in good faith that they did not violate BP 22. In a similar case,
ROSA LIM V. PEOPLE, same thing happened citing again yung
preventive unnecessary deprivation of liberty, that this would
best serve the criminal justice. Like i said base ito don sa circular
kasi yun ang binigay nila sa mga judges. BP 22 ALSO STATES
THAT THIS IS W/O PREJUDICE TO THE LIABILITY UNDER
THE RPC. That is why i said earlier na PWEDE KA MAFILE-AN
NG SABAY UNDER BP 22 AND 315. There is NO DOUBLE
JEOPARDY BECAUSE THESE ARE TWO OFFENSES w/
different elements. NIERRAS V. DACUYCUY, 315 and BP 22
were distinguished. 315 deceit and damage, BP 22 mere
issuance and knowledge of insufficiency is presumed. The
penalty in 315 is contained in 38818 you dont follow that in 315,
the penalty is PM to RT depending on the amount. The violation
of 315 is mala in se, BP 22 is mala prohibita.
SORRY di ko talaga maintindihan (but this is under ART 316)
OTHER FORMS OF SWINDLING mortagages...that is what is
punished here, the law does not prohibit to encumber properties
but if you falsely say that this property is not encumbered, that is
deceit and that is other form of swindling. In the case of ANTAZO
V. PP, there was a mortgaged property and it was sold as clean
kuno but the mortgage was registered in ROD, that is
constructive notice diba, so dapat alam niya. Is this estafa pa rin
under other forms of swindling? SC SAID, CONSTRUCTIVE
NOTICE DOES NOT APPLY, the essence of this is the reliance
on the sellers title, yes--registration is notice to the whole world
but there is no law which requires that the buyer checks, the
buyer has the right to rely on the words of the seller. Nangatik
ka, ingon nimo limpyo pero dili diay, naay deceit. THAT
REGISTRATION IS NOTICE TO THE WHOLE DOES NOT
APPLY BECAUSE THERE IS SWINDLING.
nd
SEPT 23 2 part
MILLER V. CA: dishonour due to closure of account, this is the
same as failure to maintain necessary deposits. BP 22 applies
even if the check is issued only as a guarantee, nag issue ka ng
check as accommodation party not meant as payment for an
obligation. But because you issued a bad check, apil yan sa BP
22 although not punished by Art 315, that is QUE V. PEOPLE
what is prohibited is the mere issuance of an unfunded check.
Other way of putting it is evidence of indebtedness, investment,
guarantee, accommodation party or security. Is this applicable if
check is drawn against a redundant account? In the case of
REVILLA V. CA, SC said YES if it is drawn or issued in the
Philippines even if the ---is abroad. In PEOPLE V. NITAFAN, the
court elaborated on the memorandum check, MC is not meant
for payment, it is only for guarantee of payment. It is an evidence
of debt, valid in the hands of the holder, still covered by BP 22
because a CHECK IS ALWAYS INTENDED FOR PAYMENT;
YOU CANNOT CHANGE ITS NATURE. The law does not
distinguish. THE PRIVATE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
PARTIES CANNOT PREVAIL OVER THE LAW. Why? Because
if ganyan, you will have to look into the private agreement of the
parties, nawala na ang essence ng BP 22- ang issuance ng bad
check, that is why all these checks eh covered ng BP 22 kahit
47
The owner of the property takes it from the lawful

possessor, suppose you pledge your celfon to
somebody unya imong gikawat.
Any person who, to the prejudice of another, shall
execute any fictitious contract. Usually sa mga
creditors, you execute a fictitious contract like sale and
you defraud creditors. That is OTHER FORMS OF
SWINDLING. Yung fraudulent insolvency, absconds
with his property for the prejudice of his creditors, ano
ang difference nito? In 314 you really have defrauded
your creditor, here atik-atik lang, really you still have
your properties. In here you simulated contracts to
defraud your creditors, may deceit. Yung sa 314 you
abscond and yung property were really sold.
Swindling of minors is also punishable. (story about
sabatanapandesal vendor robbed)
OTHER DECEITS
Example of this is yung bus conductor daw,
nangutanasiya as aka, gensantapostagaankaug ticket
buslutanperohanggangdigoslangpalaangnilagay
so
iyanggi-pocket
ang
difference,
kung
di
momabutangsaestafa or swindling dirisa other deceits.
CHATTEL MORTGAGE- REMOVAL OR SALE OF
PROPERTY MORTGAGE
This talks about personal property that you mortgage,

you are supposed to register it with the ROD, usually
yungmgasakyanan, you execute chattel mortgage
kungdili cash. Among others, the usual conditions there
is you cannot remove that property from where you are,
kung ditto, dirilangka, di mopwedengdalhinsacebu o sa
manila. Bakitganon? Kasikapagnatransport mon a yan,
the real owner will have difficulty of getting it back, that
is the whole point of chattel mortgage, so there is
prohibition to transfer the chattel but you can still sell
that, pwede man yung property already mortgage as
long as you have the written consent of the mortgagor.
The counterpart of Art. 316(2), this speaks of real
property.
PRESENTATION OF POWERPOINT: RA 7877 ANTISEXUAL HARASSMENT (KUNYARI NAGDISCUSS NA
DAW NG ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS)
Seduction and acts of lasciviousness, ganon din ang
element
may
lewd
design.
DitosaSEXUAL
HARASSMENT, kahityawyawlang you can be held
liable na for harassing. This is the meat of SEXUAL
HARASSMENT, TAKE NOTE OF THE ENVIRONMENT:
WORK, EDUCATION OR TRAININGOUTSIDE OF
THESE ENVIRONMENTS, 7877 WILL NOT APPLY.
HARASSMENT
MUST
WITHIN
WORKING
ENVIRONMENT,
WITHIN
EDUCATION
ENVIRONMENTOR
WITHIN
TRAININGENVIRONMENT. Specified yan ng law,
outside of these environment there can be NO
PROSECUTION UNDER 7877 and it is committed by
EMPLOYER, EMPLOYEE, SUPERVISOR, AGENT OR
ETC. What does the offender do? DEMANDS OR
REQUESTS OR OTHERWISE REQUIRES ANY
SEXUAL FAVOR FROM THE PERSON, REGARLESS
OF WHETHER THE DEMAND OR REQUEST IS
ACCEPTED
although
if
accepted,
walanamansigurongkasokasinagkasinabotnamansila.
Di namansinabina sexual intercourse, basta sexual
favor. Work related or employment where sexual favor
is a condition in hiring or employment to be employed
or for continued employment. Maramingganitodiba,
even in government, angimongsweldokaltasan, gaya ng
mag GRO kamunabagokamaging teacher, that is a
condition for hiring or continued in employment, gusto
modilinakitairenew, i-blowjob momunaakokasi kung
hindi di kitairenew. Even in terms and conditions of
promotions, privileges and usually travel abroad like
tatlolangtos contender kaangmanyaknaamohiritpudug
sexual favor. Request lang man yan but that is
considered a sexual favor. Or the sexual favor results in
limiting, segregating or classifying employee which
would discriminate, deprive or diminish or etc. what is
common is itong #3 if these acts will result into an
intimidating,
hostile
or
offensive
environment
kasimaraming
acts
eh
DEMANDING
OR
REQUESTING. IF ANY OF THESE WILL RESULT
INTO an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment
FOR THE EMPLOYEE, PASOK DITO. Any person
threats or induces another to commit any act of sexual
harassment shall also be liable, similar to those
persons criminally liable- Inducement or indispensable
cooperation. But here, what we have is induces
another, so principal by inducement and principal by
indispensable cooperation.
DUTY OF THE HEAD OF THE INSTITUTION should
prevent or deter the harassment. It can issue,
promulgate..committee on decorum and investigation
which must be in placed in offices. The law mandates
the creation of that committee.
48
The acts that will result into an intimidating, hostile or

offensive environment for an employee (referring
sappt). Administrative sanctions shall not require to
prosecution proper, it has something to do with admin
law. Example you are charged and found guilty for
sexual harassment administratively, that will not bar
your prosecution under 7877. Take note of the
liability: THE EMPLOYER OR HEAD OF OFFICE IS
SOLIDARILY LIABLE FOR DAMAGES ARISING FROM
THE ACTS OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT IF HE IS
INFORMED OF THE ACT AND NO IMMEDIATE
ACTION WAS TAKEN UN ANG QUALIFIER NIYA.
Sec 6 talks of independent action. So this is a penal
statute so may criminal at civil ka pa na independent
action for damages and if the offender is a public officer
yunyungsinasabikona THREE-FOLD RULE LIABILITY,
he will also be administratively liable.
Any action arising from the violation of this ACT SHALL
PRESCRIBE IN 3 YEARS. YOU SHOULD BRING AN
ACTION W/IN 3 YEARS FROM THE TIME OF THE
COMMISSION OF THE ACT COMPLAINED OF.
DISCIPLINARY RULES IS SIMILAR TO 1577? But this
is more detailed because it is not only sexual favor, it
can be also verbal or physical behavior of a sexual
nature. Work relatedterms and conditions of
promotions, conferences, symposiums (PLEASE
READ DISCIPLINARY RULES UNDER THIS
ACT)bawalmagbutangugcalendaryonanaayhubo-hubo,
tanduay and the like kasi it is creating an offensive,
hostile, intimidating environment and etc.
CLASSIFICATION: may grave, less grave, unwanted
touching meaning walang consent, pinching- that is less
grave offense. Then may light offense yung
surreptitiously looking in persons private parts or worn
undergarments aka upskirtingsigekagpanilip. Even
telling sexy jokes gaya ng ang cute2x mo, joke lang
man un hanggang maglala. Maraming grounds such us
unwanted phone calls and other analogous cases.
Jurisprudence, the accused here was a high ranking
official, chairman of the NLRC.
gumaganda ka ata, sa ibang mga pagkakataon na
nahawan at sabay pisil habang ako ay nagtatype, sa
mga pagkakataong ito kinakabahan ako nab aka
mangyari sa akin ang napapabalitang insidente na
ngyari tungkol sa mga sekretarya niyang nagbitiw gawa
ng mga mapanghahalay na panghihipo so there is a
pattern already na ang chairman mahilig manghipo, the
other instances eh sige pangutana kung may boyfriend
ka nab a tapos binigyan pa siya ng pera pang enrol kasi
nag law skul daw, tinaggap niya kasi takot na sya pero
later sinoli din niya. may kalive-in ka na ba? Sir,
Malabo. Bakit malaki ang balakang mo? Sir, kayo ha!
Masama sa amin ang may kalive-in. Another instance,
during meeting ang kanyang mga titig ay umuusad
mula ulo hanggang dibdib. May applicant, sabihin mo
magpapsmear muna siya. (THIS IS BASED SA
RECORD NG CASE) another instance, habang
naglalakad, nilagay ang kanang kamay sa aking balikat
at pinisil-pisil ito at pinagapang ito sa kanang bahagi ng
aking leeg, sa tenga at tsaka kiniliti. Hindi na
nakayanan ng employee, she filed for leave of absence
and asked for transfer then filed a complaint for sexual
harassment. TAKE NOTE: this is admin, ang DEFENSE
niya: these acts alone w/o corresponding demand,
request or reqt do not constitute sexual harassment;
Sec 4a of 7877 did not delegate to the employer the
power to promulgate rules that would provide additional
forms of sexual harassment or to come up with its own
definition of sexual harassment. SC said, Sec 3 of 7877
defined the criminal aspect of the unlawful act, same
section authorizes the institution of independent civil
action for damages, administrative sanction will not be
a bar. The CA correctly ruled that the liability is not to be
determined solely based on 7877 because admin ang
charge not the criminal infraction of sexual harassment.
CA found sufficient evidence on the admin charge but
even if the acts are to be tested strictly by the standards
set in 7877, he will still be liable. In other words, its true
that this provision calls for a demand, request or reqt
but it is not necessary that the demand, request or reqt
be articulated in a categorical oral or written statement.
It may be discerned with equal servitude of the acts of
the offender, defeaning clarity of unspoken sexual...also
not required that the demand, request or reqt is made a
condition for future employment, IT IS ENOUGH THAT
THE ACT OF REPSONDENT CREATES AN
INTIMIDATING,
HOSTILE
OR
OFFENSIVE
ENVIRONMENT FOR THE EMPLOYEE. THE
REQUEST, DEMAND OR REQT NEED NOT BE
WRITTEN OR SPOKEN.
Criminal Law 2; October 27, 2014 (Complete Two Hours)
Chapter Eight
ARSON AND OTHER CRIMES INVOLVING DESTRUCTIONS
Article 320 Destructive Arson. The penalty of
reclusion temporal in its maximum period to death
shall be imposed upon any person who shall burn:
1. One (1) or more buildings or edifices,
consequent to one single act of burning, or
as result of simultaneous burnings, or
committed on several or different occasions;
2. Any building of public or private
ownership, devoted to the use of the public
in general, or where people usually gather or
congregated for a definite purpose such as
but not limited to official governmental
function or business, private transaction,
commerce, trade, worship, meetings and
conferences, or merely incidental to a
definite purpose such as but not limited to
hotels, motels, transient dwellings, public
conveyance or stops or terminals, regardless
of whether the offender had knowledge that
there are persons in said building or edifice
at the time it is set on fire, and regardless
also of whether the building is actually
inhabited or not.
3. Any train or locomotive, ship or vessel,
airship or airplane, devoted to transportation
or convenience, or public use, entertainment
or leisure.
4. Any building, factory, warehouse
installation and any appurtenances thereto,
which are devoted to the service of public
utilities.
5. Any building, the burning of which is for
the purpose of concealing or destroying
evidence of another violation of law, or for
the purpose of concealing bankruptcy or
defrauding creditors or to collect from
insurance.
Irrespective of the application of the above
enumerated qualifying circumstances, the penalty of
death shall likewise be imposed when the arson is
perpetrated or committed by two (2) or more persons
or by a group of persons, regardless of whether their
purpose is merely to burn or destroy the building or
the edifice, or the burning merely constitutes an overt
act in the commission or another violation of law.
49
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its maximum

period to death shall also be imposed upon any
person who shall burn:
(a) Any arsenal, shipyard, storehouse or
military powder or fireworks factory,
ordinance storehouse, archives or general
museum of the government.
(b) In an inhabited place, any storehouse or
factory of inflammable or explosive
materials.
If as a consequence of the commission of any of the
acts penalized under this Article, death or injury
results, or any valuable documents, equipment,
machineries, apparatus, or other valuable properties
were burned or destroyed, the mandatory penalty of
death shall be imposed."
This is destruction of property of another by means of fire. There

are two articles on Arson in the Revised Penal Code which,
however, have been repealed or amended by the Arson Law.
P.D. 1613 is now the main law on Arson. Actually, now, we have
two laws on Arson. We have Article 320 and yun nga, P.D. 1613.
In the case of People v. Murcia, (2010) yan ang sinabi ng SC.
There are actually two categories of Arson- Destructive Arson
under Article 320 of the RPC and Simple Arson under P.D. 1613.
The said classification is based on the kind, character and
location of the property burned, regardless of the value of the
damage caused. Article 320 contemplates the malicious burning
of structures, both public and private, hotels, buildings, edifices,
trains, vessels, aircraft, factories, and other military, government
or commercial establishments by any person or group of
persons. On the other hand, Presidential Decree No. 1316
covers houses, dwellings, government buildings, farms, mills,
plantations, railways, bus stations, airports, wharves and other
industrial establishments.
In any case, the same pa rin siya. It is still malicious destruction
of property of another by means of fire.
Given that definition, can we say that it is still Arson if the
property burned is your own property? If you look at the law,
under P.D. 1613, it says there, any person who burns or sets fire
to the property of another...the same penalty shall be imposed
when a person sets fire to his own property under circumstances
which expose danger to the life or property of another. So, it
appears that the burning of your property under certain
circumstances will fall under the crime of Arson. K? So, please
take note of that. So, when the definition says, the malicious
destruction of property of another by means of fire, it can also
be Arson if you set fire to your own property and endangers the
life or property of others.
Now, we know that, by means of fire is an aggravating or a
qualifying circumstance, so that if by means of fire is included
in the definition or is an element of the crime, then you no longer
consider that, for purposes of increasing or qualifying a crime.
For example, by means of fire is a qualifying circumstance in
killing of a person, qualifying the killing to murder. So wala na
ang aggravating circumstance doon. You do not consider that
anymore because it is already included in the definition or
already an element of the crime.
Stages
Also, they say that it is difficult to identify the stages of Arson. For
example, if you burn the D building kay lagot na kaayo ka sa
lawschool unya ang nasunog kay ground floor lang or ang library
lang sa fifth floor. Ang nasunog one floor lang. Is that frustrated
kay na-frustrate ka? Or 1/3 lang nasunog (parang rape lang noh,
yung matter of inches lang). Anyway, in the crime of Arson, it
50
does not matter how many percent was burned. Jurisprudence

tells us that as long any part of the building is burned, the crime
is already consummated. Even if the whole building is not
burned, that is already consummated Arson.
4. If during the lifetime of the corresponding fire insurance policy

more than two fires have occurred in the same or other premises
owned or under the control of the offender and/or insured.
What then is frustrated? Some authors are saying na walang

frustrated. I think Boado is saying that. And I think Reyes is
saying na meron. Ang kanyang example is, someone set fire
already on rags but no part of the building got burned. Ang iniisip
ko naman, ano yang rag, naga float yan siya diyan? For me, if it
is there on the ground, it is part of the building being burned.
May apoy, andiyan sa floor, that is part of the building being
burned. Although yun ang sabi ni Reyes.
5. If shortly before the fire, a substantial portion of the effects

insured and stored in a building or property had been withdrawn
from the premises except in the ordinary course of business.
Ang attempted level is clearer, diba? Nothing is burning yet and

you are still performing overt acts of setting fire. So wala pa. So
yan ang stages.
Anyway, if you read these, you can deduce that something is

fishy here. This section gives us a disputable presumption. If you
have these, you can now file for Arson. Bago nasunog,
gipangkuha lahat ng mga improtantent bagay doon. Ang natira
nalang na nasunog ay yung building, which is insured. Of
course, as I said, this is just a presumption. Anyway, just take
note of these.
Death as a consequence of Arson

Also, take note that both P.D. 1613 and Article 320 mention
death, death results as a consequence. Under Article 320, it is
mandatory death (penalty) if as a consequence of Arson, death
results. Also in PD 1613, if by reason of or on occasion of Arson
death results, the penalty of Recusion Perpetua to death shall be
imposed. So, if you set fire to a building and death results, it is
still Arson. You do not complex that. It is simply Arson if
somebody dies as a result of the commission of Arson.
But, if you kill somebody and you burn the house or building,
then you are now killing somebody by means of fire and the
means of fire can now be used to qualify the killing to murder.
Another result with respect to killing would be, when you kill
somebody and then you use fire to burn the property, building or
whatever, in order to conceal the fact of the crime. Kung
masunog ang tanan, pati ang evidence mawala. Pati yung
pinatay mo, sunog din yan. Now what is the crime?
Well actually, its not what is the crime but what the crimes are
because the act of killing is different with the Arson. You
remember our lesson in Complex Crimes, diba? When an act is
committed to conceal the commission of another crime, then
they are separate crimes. Take note, ha? There is no such thing
as a complex crime of Arson with Homicide. So it really depends
on the circumstances.
Also, take note of, meron nakalagay jan na, you burn the
property in order for you to collect the insurance. That is
qualified (???)...any building, the burning of which is for the
purpose of concealing or destroying evidence of another
violation of law, or for the purpose of concealing bankruptcy or
defrauding creditors or to collect from insurance that has been
established from the past that people insure their property and
then arrange for it to be burned on the ground, then afterwards,
they collect the insurance proceeds. That is still Arson.
Pima facie evidence of Arson
And then this one, Section 6. This constitutes prima facie
evidence of Arson. If the law gives the prosecutors presumptions
in their favour, kasi nga, mahirap ma-prove ang Arson. So these
circumstances constitute prima facie evidence of Arson:
1. If the fire started simultaneously in more than one part of the
building or establishment.
2. If substantial amount of flammable substances or materials
are stored within the building note necessary in the business of
the offender nor for household us.
3. If gasoline, kerosene, petroleum or other flammable or
combustible substances or materials soaked therewith or
containers thereof, or any mechanical, electrical, chemical, or
electronic contrivance designed to start a fire, or ashes or traces
of any of the foregoing are found in the ruins or premises of the
burned building or property.
4. If the building or property is insured for substantially more
than its actual value at the time of the issuance of the policy.
6. If a demand for money or other valuable consideration was

made before the fire in exchange for the desistance of the
offender or for the safety of the person or property of the victim.
Another thing to remember here is that, this is an exemption to

the general rule on conspiracy being not punishable because in
Arson, conspiracy to commit Arson is punished by prision mayor.
Chapter Nine
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
Article 327. Who are liable for malicious mischief. Any person who shall deliberately cause the property
of another any damage not falling within the terms of
the next preceding chapter shall be guilty of malicious
mischief.
What is malicious mischief under Article 327? Malicious mischief,

again, refers to destruction of property but minus by means of
fire. If the destruction is by means of fire, then go to Arson. If the
destruction is by way of other means, you go to Malicious
Mischief.
Now, the concept of malicious mischief is destruction for the
sake of destruction. You must have the intent to cause damage
to property of another by means other than fire. Of course, if you
cause damage to anothers property, that would be in conflict
with the concept of malice in malicious mischief. Ang reckless
imprudence, lahi man na diba? Culpa. So if there is neglect and
there is damage to another, do not go to malicious mischief.
Malicious mischief should be deliberate. If the act is neglectful
but still voluntary, then, you go to quasi-offenses, right? The
crime is the imprudent act. The damage to property, death or
injury are results and not the crime.
Going back to malicious mischief, I also gave you an example of
killing a goat. Kanang goat sigeg kaon ug sagbot, mga kamatis
and laing gulay, naglagot ka, eh di imong gipatay. That is what?
That is malicious mischief. Now as I told you, yung lumabas sa
bar exam, after killing the whatever animal, kinain nila ngayon.
That is no longer mischief! That would be theft. Actually, the
phrase there is make use.
Article 328. Special cases of malicious mischief. Any person who shall cause damage to obstruct the
performance of public functions, or using any
poisonous or corrosive substance; or spreading any
infection or contagion among cattle; or who cause
damage to the property of the National Museum or
National Library, or to any archive or registry,
waterworks, road, promenade, or any other thing
used in common by the public, shall be punished:
1. By prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods, if the value of the damage
caused exceeds 1,000 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor, if such value does not
exceed the abovementioned amount but it is
over 200 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor, in such value does not
exceed 200 pesos.
51
No criminal, but only civil liability, shall result from the

commission of the crime of theft, swindling or
malicious mischief committed or caused mutually by
the following persons:
1. Spouses, ascendants and descendants,
or relatives by affinity in the same line.
Now, special cases of malicious mischief, you just read that. This
is also one of the articles that must be amended kay masyadong
mababa ang penalties.
2. The widowed spouse with respect to the

property which belonged to the deceased
spouse before the same shall have passed
into the possession of another; and
Article 329. Other mischiefs. - The mischiefs not

included in the next preceding article shall be
punished:
1. By arresto mayor in its medium and
maximum periods, if the value of the damage
caused exceeds 1,000 pesos;
2. By arresto mayor in its minimum and
medium periods, if such value is over 200
pesos but does not exceed 1,000 pesos; and
3. By arresto menor or fine of not less than
the value of the damage caused and not
more than 200 pesos, if the amount involved
does not exceed 200 pesos or cannot be
estimated.
Then we have other forms of mischief. The penalty would

depend on the value of the damage, and again, mababa na
naman masyado. This should be amended na. And if the value of
the damage cannot be estimated, one of the more unforgettable
cases in criminal law is the case of People v. Dumlao. Ano yun?
Kumuha siya ng buok-buok (sorry not clear), gi-scatter niya doon
sa bahay, sa doorknob, sa railing sa stairs, ganyan. Gikalat niya
doon. So, unsa may value sa damage ana? So this is an
example where the value of the damage cannot be estimated.
Article 330. Damage and obstruction to means of
communication. - The penalty of prision correccional
in its medium and maximum periods shall be imposed
upon any person who shall damage any railway,
telegraph or telephone lines.
If the damage shall result in any derailment of cars,
collision or other accident, the penalty of prision
mayor shall be imposed, without prejudice to the
criminal liability of the offender for the other
consequences of his criminal act.
For the purpose of the provisions of the article, the
electric wires, traction cables, signal system and other
things pertaining to railways, shall be deemed to
constitute an integral part of a railway system.
So with respect to railroad, kung naay mga nangamatay dira,

walay labot ang nag-drive. So, without prejudice to the the
criminal liability of the offender for the other consequences of his
criminal act because here, the criminal act is damaging another,
specific, by damaging railway, telegraph or telephone lines. So
kung imong gi-hiwi ang tracks didto, that is Article 330.
Now chapter 10 is the more important provision here.
Chapter Ten
EXEMPTION FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY IN CRIMES
AGAINST PROPERTY
Article 332. Persons exempt from criminal liability. -
3. Brothers and sisters and brothers-in-law

and sisters-in-law, if living together.
The exemption established by this article shall not be
applicable to strangers participating in the
commission of the crime.
Now, we know that relationship can affect the criminal liability of
a person. Usually, in crimes against property, relationship is a
mitigating circumstance. Here in Article 332, it is telling us that
relationship can be an exempting circumstance as far as
specified crimes are concerned. What are these crimes? These
are the crimes of:
1.
Swindling (estafa)
2.
Theft
3.
Malicious Mischief
So, that is as long as they are committed by the persons

indicated. So, spouses cannot commit theft against each other or
they cannot commit swindling against each other. Or they
cannot, what, commit malicious mischief against each other.
That is as far as criminal liability goes. There is no criminal
liability but there is civil liability. That is the first phrase of Article
332, No criminal, but only civil liability, shall result from the
commission of the crime of theft, swindling or malicious
mischief... So, as far as these persons are concerned, walang
criminal liability ito sila. So, ang mga magtiayon, sigeg pangawat
ang asawa sa pitaka sa bana or vice versa, dili na pwede ma
file-an ug theft. Pero, if you rob your wife or your husband, or
your father or your lolo, there is criminal liability simply because
hindi yan siya kasama sa specified crimes under Article 332.
Also included are ascendants, descendants, mutually committed
by them. Now, take note that descendants here includes those
step relationships (step mother, step father, step sister, step
brother). Yan. Or, yung mga adopted. Yung mga adopted child,
kasama yan diyan. Even common-law spouses. Here, spouses
relate to common-law. Why is that? Are we not sanctioning
common law relationships, because here, you are saying that
there is no criminal liability between them? Well, the reason for
this is that under the Civil Code, what governs their property
relationship? What governs them is what, co-ownership. The
premise here is that there is co-ownership between these
people. That is why, even if you steal, you swindle, pareho lang
kayo eh, you are both co-owners. Walang criminal liability
although there is civil liability. Take note, iba yung rule natin sa
accessories.
Anyway, the last paragraph there says, The exemption
established by this article shall not be applicable to strangers
participating in the commission of the crime because the
strangers do not have relationship with these people, pretty
much the same as the rule in parricide. So if the killing is done
against the wife, eh di parricide yan. But if the husband induces
another to kill his wife, then the is not guilty of parricide kasi
walang relationship yan. Same thing here. If somebody is asked
to steal from the husband, meron silang conspiracy, they are
liable, yes, but the crime of one is not the crime of all. In fact, the
other does not commit a crime. But, the person not included
because there is no relationship is liable for theft, swindling or
malicious mischief. Okay? Yan.
Lets go to title eleven.
Title Eleven
CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY
Adultery and Concubinage is Chapter One. This is one aspect of
the law that Gabriela is up in arms. Lugi daw. Unsang klase na!
Ang Adultery, ani unya ang Concubinage lahi! Nganong dili man
na mapareho? Bakit, ano pala ang Adultery?
Article 333. Who are guilty of adultery. - Adultery is
committed by any married woman who shall have
sexual intercourse with a man not her husband and
by the man who has carnal knowledge of her knowing
her to be married, even if the marriage be
subsequently declared void.
Adultery shall be punished by prision correccional in
its medium and maximum periods.
If the person guilty of adultery committed this offense
while being abandoned without justification by the
offended spouse, the penalty next lower in degree
than that provided in the next preceding paragraph
shall be imposed.
Adultery is committed by any married woman who shall have
sexual intercourse with a man not her husband. So that is
Adultery. So when you are married woman, you are supposed to
have sex or make love only with one person that is your
husband. Other than that, definitely, that is adultery.
So if you do not have a relationship, anong tawag diyan fuck
buddies, no strings attached, magkita mo, mag-ana mo, kung
dili eh di wala, ana lang. Unya, minyo na babae. Muana siya na,
wala man miy relationship! Is that a crime? Yes, that is a crime
because kasi nga, you are supposed to have sexual relationship
only with your husband. Other than that, Adultery yan.
Ngayon, how many counts? Kasi in a months time, mga 30 days
so 30 din. Everyday kayo kasi bago pa kayo. So, how many
counts of Adultery do you have? You will have 30 counts,
because the crime here is the sexual act! For every sexual
intercourse, there is a crime of Adultery because relationship is
not the crime. The crime is the act of sexual intercourse. Yan
ang matindi sa Adultery.
52
Now, one misconception of laymen is that Adultery can only be

committed by a woman and that Concubinage can only be
committed by a man. That is not so because read read read, ano
man ang nakalagay diyan? and by the man who has carnal
knowledge of her knowing her to be married, even if the
marriage be subsequently declared void. So you see? Adultery
can also be committed by a man. Therefore, in Adultery, you
should file against both. You cannot file against one party only.
Therefore, both parties can be held liable for Adultery. So, it is
wrong to say na babae lang ang may kasalanan niyan, sa
Concubinage lalaki lang. Dili na mao. Although ang defense ng
lalaki diyan, I do not know shes married! So that is his defense
to be exculpated from criminal liability. But just the same, both of
them are supposed to be charged! It is now for the court to
acquit the guy if he does not know of the marriage, ganoon yon.
As far as filing is concerned, dalawa yan.
Also, the fact thatthe marriage be subsequently declared void is
not a defense at all. In annulment diba, we are saying that there
is no marriage at all that took place. Now, that cannot be a
defense in Adultery. You should wait muna for the marriage to be
annulled before you engage in sexual intercourse. Kung walang
declaration, you will be criminally liable, even if later on, your
marriage will be subsequently declared void or annulled.
Ang last paragraph diyan is sort of a privileged mitigating
circumstance kasi the penalty is lower in degree. So sa ato pa,
gimingaw siya. Wala siyang kasama. That is the reason why the
penalty is one degree lower.
Also, in Adultery, there are no accomplices kasi the law seems to
punish only the guilty parties. So the accomplices, the BFFs,
didto ka naga vent, sige kag yawyaw, unsa man ning akong
bana unya naa siyay gipa-ila-ila sa imo, pogi kaayo, buotan pa
jud. Unya didto mo sa ilahang balay, didto mo. So apparently, he
is an accomplice because he concurred with the criminal offense
by a previous or simultaneous act. But here, in Adultery, wala
yan. He will not be an accomplice.
Now, Concubinage. Sino ang may codal? Galing pa akong
airport.
Article 334. Concubinage. - Any husband who shall
keep a mistress in the conjugal dwelling, or shall have
sexual intercourse, under scandalous circumstances,
with a woman who is not his wife, or shall cohabit with
her in any other place, shall be punished by prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.
The concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro.
Tatlo kasi dito sa Concubinage. So tanong ka, bakit nagayawyaw ang Gabriela dito na tatlo man pala ang ways na macommit and Concubinage tapos sa Adultery isa lang? Pero kung
imong basahon ang Article 334, muragmag-yawyaw jud ka kay
lisod kaayo i-prove nimo ni.
1.
By keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling
2.
By having sexual intercourse, under scandalous

circumstances, with a woman who is not his wife
3.
By cohabiting with her in any other place
Sige daw be, huna-hunaa daw na. Kinsa man ang tigas na tao
nga grabe ug talent na iyahang mistress, didto jud puyo sa
ilahang balay? I believe na talaga ako diyan, I believe! Anong
meron ka na nasugot silang tanan? Happily ever after tanan.
Meron ba kayong kilala? Pinoy? Dili sila Dolphy? Kasi sila
daghan ug anak diba? Pero kani, lahi man ni. Ang imong other
woman lives in your conjugal dwelling. Presumably, andiyan ang
anak mo, andiyan ang asawa mo, maglipat-lipat ka nalang ng
kwarto niyan. Ang saya mo naman. Anyaway, meron ka bang ma
file-an na kaso na ganyan? Parang wala. Or, the probability is
nil. Anyway,that is one mode of committing Adultery. You keep
you mistress in your conjugal dwelling. So X na yan siya. Di man
jud na mahitabo, or very rare.
So the second mode, is having sexual intercourse under
scandalous circumstances. Unsa man pud ni nga. Bakit ka
naman din na mag-sexual intercourse under scandalous
circumstances? Kahit nga kayo na mag-asawa kayo, i-tago niyo
nga eh under normal circumstances. Dapat discrete. Unya
karon, for it to be Concubinage, dapat under scandalous
circumstances. Scandalous nga. Diba, ibig sabihin niyan, may
publicity, alam ng mga tao yan, Kahit hindi siguro public pero
abre ang bintana. Hala sige. Again, the probability lagi of
conviction or a charge under the second mode is close to nil.
Parang Malabo yan.
Now, ano yung third? By cohabiting with her in any other place.
So, parang swak na diba? Cohabitation with her in any other
place. This is popular among government officials, their number
2 in another house, number 3,4, 5 in a condo, etc. Is that
Concubinage? Under the law and under our jurisprudence, that
is not Concubinage! Kasi when you say cohabit, you must live
together as husband and wife. You must live in a character of a
husband and wife Didto ka naga-uli. Otherwise, that will not fall
under Concubinage. Dapat mag-live-in kayo. Diba?
Anyway, that is the object of the protest of Gabriela. Gipasundan
mo ang husband mo, tapos gi-picturan na naga acrobatic sila.
Nag-bali-bali na sila ug tiil. Unya, kinsa man ang na skandalo
ana? Ikaw! Kay ikaw man nagsugo na mag picture2x. That is not
under scandalous circumstances. Ikaw lang nahago ug sunod2x.
That is not Concubinage pa rin.
Then, the concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro.
Chapter two. Wala ng rape diyan kasi rape has been classified
as a crime against persons. We go to acts of lasciviousness.
Article 336. Acts of lasciviousness. - Any person who
shall commit any act of lasciviousness upon other
persons of either sex, under any of the circumstances
mentioned in the preceding article, shall be punished
by prision correccional.
It is simply rape minus the sexual intercourse. Rape less sexual
intercourse. Yan. All the other elements are the same except that
there is no sexual intercourse.
October 27, 2014
2nd half
53
have an intent to have sexual intercourse you cannot have an

attempted rape, although what we are talking about is the same
act. Kissing for example or grabbing the the private parts, the
same, if there is an intention to have sexual intercourse
attempted rape yan, no intention AOL. AOL is rape without the
sexual intercourse.
One other thing, same also with rape, itong AOL if you look at Art
336 any person who shall commit any act of lasciviousness
upon other persons of either sex so ang AOL pwede lalaki ang
offended party or babae.
Ano ang Lascivious conducts? Ano yan yung bastos ba, kasi you
have to get the nature of the crime, ito lewd intent but no intent
to have sexual intercourse. Because if you do not have lewd
intent, the same act can fall in another crime, pwede yan unjust
vexation, if the intent is just really to annoy you. Like naglagot
sya sa imuha you hold her breast pero wla sya intent kay dili
man sya ganahan nimo nglagot lang jud sya nimo. That cannot
be considered as AOL kasi wala man syang lewd intent. Ang
iyahang purpose is really to embarrass or annoy you or vex so
unjust vexation only. So you really have to look at the intent
because it can fall under different crimes depending on the
intent.
In one case, naa sa church, so paano maging lewd conduct yan
na daghan tao, although ofcourse kung grabe jud kamanyakis ni
na dli jud makapugong sa iyang kaugalingon, well that is the
matter of intent. The point is kung ang intent lascivious dito ka sa
AOL, if the intent is another pwede ka sa unjust vexation.
Also relate this to RA 7610 child abuse.
Chapter Three
SEDUCTION, CORRUPTION OF MINORS AND WHITE SLAVE
TRADE
Article 337. Qualified seduction. - The seduction of a virgin

over twelve years and under eighteen years of age,
committed by any person in public authority, priest, homeservant, domestic, guardian, teacher, or any person who, in
any capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or
custody of the woman seduced, shall be punished by prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.
The penalty next higher in degree shall be imposed upon
any person who shall seduce his sister or descendant,
whether or not she be a virgin or over eighteen years of age.
Under the provisions of this Chapter, seduction is committed
when the offender has carnal knowledge of any of the
persons and under the circumstances described herein.
Article 338. Simple seduction. - The seduction of a woman
who is single or a widow of good reputation, over twelve but
under eighteen years of age, committed by means of deceit,
shall be punished by arresto mayor.
Seduction is sexual intercourse with consent. Why is it a crime

na nisugot man? Crime kay tanawa ang edad sa imu gisexual
intercourse, ang edad is over 12 but under 18, sa ato pa minor.
Yung rape sexual intercourse without consent, yung rape sexual
Article 336. Acts of lasciviousness. - Any person who shall commit any
act of lasciviousness
intercourse
with consent.upon other persons of
either sex, under any of the circumstances mentioned in the preceding article, shall be punished by prision
correccional.
It is a crime because of four things:
1. Abuse of authority
2. Abuse of relationship
3. Abuse of confidence
Well actually acts of lasciviousness (AOL) it is simply rape minus
4. Deceit
the sexual intercourse or rape less sexual intercourse. All other
elements are the same, parehas talaga sila ng rape minus the
sexual intercourse lang, that is all that you have to remember.
Mao ni sila ang ngtake sa place ng without consent. May
consent nga eh but there is abuse of authority, relationship,
One difficulty here is that when do you determine if it is
confidence, that is seduction, qualified actually.
attempted rape or AOL because you see where you attempt to
rape somebody you are committing AOL, like you will hold or
What about the deceit? It will fall under simple seduction.
grab the private parts, etc, what is that? That is also AOL. What
makes it different from attempted rape? The same act. The
In qualified seduction tatlo yan, abuse of authority,
difference here would be on the intent. If there is intent to have
relationship or confidence, so qualified yan. The other is
sexual intercourse that would be attempted rape. If you do not
deceit, sa simple seduction yan.
So here sexual intercourse with consent, provided under Art 337
ang nkalagay is virgin, the seduction of a virgin over twelve
years and under eighteen years of age
So unsa man mgpacheck up pa ta ni sa doctor? ))
When you say virgin, that is not in the physical sense. Virgin is
simply means a woman of good reputation. And if there us abuse
of authority like the mayor will commit it, kasi yung abuse of
authority ang mg-take ng place ng without consent. Here the
victim is a minor and incapable of giving a perfect consent, the
law presumes that.
Kumbaga this guy with abuse of authority had sexual intercourse
with the victim, there is a presumption that there is abuse of
authority even if there is consent, kaya nga crime sya because
that abuse of authority. Priest, house servant like having sexual
intercourse with the anak sa amo that is abuse of confidence.
What is the difference between a house servant and a domestic?
Kasi diba pare-pareho lang, ang alam natin domestic helper or
house servant, dba pareho? Actually dito hindi yan pareho,
domestic ang sinabi diyan. Domestic is somebody who lives with
you in the house, it could be a border yung ganun. Well that guy
has sexual intercourse with the daughter then that is qualified
seduction.
Ofcourse, ang didto ha should always over 12 under 18, yan
yung basic kasi. The only time where age is not a requirement
when the seduction is by means of abuse of relationship. Pag
may abuse of relationship The penalty next higher in degree
shall be imposed upon any person who shall seduce his sister or
descendant, whether or not she be a virgin or over eighteen
years of age.
So in cases of incest it does not matter, if the sister or
descendant is over 18 years of age, pwede na tigulang na basta
kay sister or descendant it does not matter. Virginity also does
not matter. Because ayaw ng law ng incest kaya the penalty is
one degree higher.
Yung ibang offender guardian, teacher, or any person who, in
any capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or custody of
the woman seduced you suppose to educate pero lahing klase
na education imuha gibuhat, sexual education.
So again, pag-abuse of authority, relationship and confidence,
tatlo yan qualified seduction. The other means is deceit that
would be simple seduction.
The deceit usually is the breach of a promise to marry. Kasi
usual ito nuon, that in order to have sexual intercourse with the
girl you make a promise na minyoan nimo in all the churches in
Mindanao or Philippines, unya dili nimo tumanon deceit na.
Kumbaga pumayag ng sexual intercourse, there is consent,
because you deceive the girl. Again over 12 under 18 yan who is
single or a widow of good reputation, widow of good reputation
scratch that because you cannot be a widow of good reputation
now because kay kung magminyo ka karn 18 man ka so wla nay
widow na below 18.
Suppose that, the man promise to give ipad or cell phone in
order to have sexual intercourse with the woman, but after the
sexual intercourse, he will just say na joke lang to uie, is that
seduction by means of deceit? Our authors said that is not the
deceit that we are talking about, kasi pag-ganyan prostitute ang
labas nimo ana, ngpabayad ka unya wla ka gibayri reklamo.
Article 339. Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the

offended party. - The penalty of arresto mayor shall be
imposed to punish any other acts of lasciviousness
committed by the same persons and the same circumstances
as those provided in Articles 337 and 338.
Now Art 339, acts of lasciviousness with the consent. Yung

kanina acts of lasciviousness is the same as rape without the
sexual intercourse, into namang acts of lasciviousness with the
consent, ibig sabihin nito is acts lang sya kutob pero may
consent. Parang seduction lang sya, ang seduction may consent
but with sexual intercourse, here walang sexual intercourse yan
54
pero with consent kutob lang sya sa acts. So parang seduction

pero walang sexual intercourse, kasi ang seduction may sexual
intercourse with consent.
Article 340. Corruption of minors. - Any person who shall

promote or facilitate the prostitution or corruption of persons
underage to satisfy the lust of another, shall be punished by
prision mayor, and if the culprit is a pubic officer or employee,
including those in government-owned or controlled
corporations, he shall also suffer the penalty of temporary
absolute disqualification. (As amended by Batas Pambansa
Blg. 92).
Article 341. White slave trade. - The penalty of prision mayor
in its medium and maximum period shall be imposed upon
any person who, in any manner, or under any pretext, shall
engage in the business or shall profit by prostitution or shall
enlist the services of any other for the purpose of prostitution
(As amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 186.)
Will skip that pag usapan natin sa trafficking, kung ang purpose
mo is exploitative didto ka sa trafficking of persons, includig 341,
white slave trades, although of course pwede ka din dito pero
mas mataas ang penalty under the trafficking of persons. If the
trafficking is for the purpose white slaves trade doon ka.
Chapter Four
ABDUCTION
Article 342. Forcible abduction. - The abduction of any

woman against her will and with lewd designs shall be
punished by reclusion temporal.
The same penalty shall be imposed in every case, if the
female abducted be under twelve years of age.
Article 343. Consented abduction. - The abduction of a virgin
over twelve years and under eighteen years of age, carried
out with her consent and with lewd designs, shall be punished
by the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and
medium periods.
Abduction is just kidnapping, serious illegal detention. Forcible

abduction ang serious illegal detention are the same basically
except that in forcible abduction there is an additional element
and that is the element of lewd intent. Kumbaga you detain
somebody, you restrict her freedom, the same but if the intent is
lewd that will fall under forcible abduction. Yan lang basic
difference from serious illegal detention.
Now there are two kinds of abduction:
1. Forcible, and
2. Consented
What is lewd? Obscene, lustful, indecent, lascivious. It signifies
that kind or form of immorality which has relation to moral
impurity, or that which is carried on in a wanton manner.
Now, usually kasi nga may lewd intent so there is other purpose,
this crime can be complex with rape. If you have abducted and
brought somewhere then rape her, that is a complex crime of
forcible abduction with rape.
In the case of People vs. Angeles, here there is robbery, ngayon
yung isang accused dinala ang isang babae sa hotel, so there
was separate crime of forcible abduction with rape complex yan,
separate then yung robbery, with respect to that particular
accused.
Now suppose that, giabduct na tapos gi-rape, then the next day
gi-rape na pud, kumbaga ginawang sex slave, pagka ugma rape
napud, is that maraming counts ng forcible abduction with rape?
The ruling here isa lang yung forcible abduction with rape, the
other rapes are considered independent crimes yan, separate
crimes. There is only one complex crime of forcible abduction
with rape, yun lang pagkuha tapos gi-rape, yung succeeding
rapes independent crimes na yan.
What is consented? Take note ha abduction may lewd intent,
unya karn naay consent, kumbaga the one who is abducted
kabalo sya na naay lewd intent unya nisugot sya. Unsa man na?
Well, in tha past maraming cases na ganito, the best example for
this is yung ng elope or ng-taban or ng-tanan, nihawa sa balay
ni-uban sa uyab. Alam nya na mgkaroon sila ng sexual
intercourse, nisugot sya , that is consented abduction.
Consent Abduction - The abduction of a virgin over twelve years
and under eighteen years of age, carried out with her consent
and with lewd designs
When you say abduction lewd design jud yan, ngayon kung
without the consent, dito ka sa forcible, kya nga forcible kasi
gipugos, pero naa sab abduction na gipugos, that is consented
abduction.
Lets go back to forcible abduction the 2nd paragraph say,the

same penalty shall be imposed in every case, if the female
abducted be under twelve years of age. Now take note of that
kasi kung under 12 it does not matter kung may consent or wala,
parang rape lang yan, ang rape pag under 12 rape statutory yan.
So parang abduction with lewd intent, kasi may consent pero

under 12 ang dinala mo that cannot be a defense because
forcible abduction pa rin yan. Sabihin mo na pumayag man ang
bata, under 12 pumayag? The law presumed that under 12
cannot give consent therefore the crime is not consented
abduction it should be forcible abduction.
What crimes against where the age of the victim is an element?

In the following, the age of the girl is material:
1.
Qualified seduction with abuse authority, confidence

and deceit;
2.
Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the offended

party under the same condition;
3.
Consented abduction.
55
concubinage, seduction, abduction, rape and acts of

lasciviousness. - The crimes of adultery and concubinage
shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the
offended spouse.
The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution
without including both the guilty parties, if they are both
alive, nor, in any case, if he shall have consented or
pardoned the offenders.
The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of
lasciviousness, shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents, or guardian, nor, in any case, if the offender
has been expressly pardoned by the above named persons,
as the case may be.
In cases of seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness and
rape, the marriage of the offender with the offended party
shall extinguish the criminal action or remit the penalty
already imposed upon him. The provisions of this paragraph
shall also be applicable to the co-principals, accomplices
and accessories after the fact of the above-mentioned
crimes.
How do you prosecute these crimes? These are the crimes that
sometimes called private crimes, it is also crimes which cannot
be prosecuted de officio. Meaning, you cannot file a complaint
without the affidavit of the private offended party. You have to
have the complaint of the private offended party otherwise you
cannot prosecute this.
The rationale there is that the offended party may choose to

suffer in isolation and not go through the spectacle of a public
trial, the law respect that. Kasi nga yan ang mahirap sa rape
cases kasi nga ang victim pagtrial ma-cross-examine sya, and
the victim is made to undergo same ordeal again, kasi himayhimayon man jud ng testimony, so from the start so maala-ala
mo lahat yung mga nangyari, so when the victim does not want
tofile a case the law respects that and nobody can file a case for
her. Kung dili gani gusto d dili, so this cannot be prosecuted the
officio because it is a private crime it needs the complaint of the
offended party.
What crimes where the age of the victim is immaterial?
1.
Rape;
2.
Acts of lasciviousness;
3.
Qualified seduction with abuse of relationship (dito yung

incest);
4.
Forcible abduction (so sabi nga ni Dean Inigo na kahit

lola nana 72 years old imu giabduct with lewd intent
forcible abduction pa din yan, so age does not matter)
Chapter Five
PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO THE PRECEDING CHAPTERS
OF TITLE ELEVEN
Article
344. Prosecution
of
the
crimes
of
adultery,
The 1st and 2nd paragraphs the crimes of adultery and

concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint
filed by the offended spouse. The offended party cannot
institute criminal prosecution without including both the guilty
parties, if they are both alive, nor, in any case, if he shall have
consented or pardoned the offenders. So dalawa ang filelan mo,
suppose nangabit ang bana pero love man jud sya sa wife ang
filelan lang sa wife ang kabit, dli namahimo.
You cannot also chage if there is consent or pardon. If you

remember Art 89, pardon is not a mode of extinction of criminal
liability, so are we talking about? It is merely a bar to prosecution
of a criminal case, in other words kung mayroong pardon you
are barred from filing a case because it is a bar to a criminal
action. Like in adultery, pghuman sa yaw2x nghinilakay na sila,
ngsorry na giforgive na, that is pardon hindi kana pwede mgfile
unless of course may adultery na naman na ginawa. Like karn
na forgive na so that is a bar to criminal action unya pagkanext
month ngcommit na sab, so lahi na sab to na adultery.
Ano namn itong with consent? Like for example muana ang
asawa hala sige pangita ka-sex didto, okey lang sa akin no hurt
feelings. Basically that is consent. Marami dyan ng-hiwalay
tapos ngayon they want to have there own partner, to have their
own life, to move on, so ngsabot cla na they can have their own
partner and move on with their lives. So they draft an agreement
that we are free to go our own way, we are moving on
separately, consented that we can have own partners, so
ganyan2x. Ngayon, in your civil law, is that a valid agreement?
That is void for being against public policy. But for purposesof
defense in a criminal case of adultery and concubinage that is an
evidence of consent, when there is consent there is a bar to
criminal case, you cannot prosecute if you have consented to the
act of adultery.
Ofcourse the consent should be given after the criminal act. For
pardon to be effective you must extend the pardon before the
case is filed in court. Kumbaga, nasuko na asawa unya file daun
sa korte unya ng-uli sila and now the complainant wishes to
withdraw the complaint. Unya kay naa namn sa korte? What was
before a private crime has now become a public crime because
its under the control of the prosecutor, who is acting for and in
the interest of the state, hindi na yan private wala na kay labot
ana except as witness. So kung ayaw mo huwag kang mgfile
pero kung na file na yan wala ka ng magawa dyan because nga
it has passed on to the public prosecutor, although ofcoursein
reality mahirapan na ang prosecutor na iprove yan wla na syang
witness but purposes of our discussion wala na yan you cannot
just withdraw your complaint kasi this is kumbaga this thing is
bigger than you, we are after yung society, family is the basic
social institution etc etc, this is beyond you. Before the filing sayo
yun, if you withdraw that is with you, but now that you have file
the case in court wala na, the control passes to the state.
Naalala nyo yung case na Pilapil vs. Ibay-Somera? Diba ang

husband foreigner tapos gidivorce iya Filipina wife sa abroad
unya nibalik dri, ngfile sya ug adultery case sa wife. Sabi ng wife
na dli na pwede dli na tika husband, sabi naman ng foreigner na
when you committed adultery I am still your husband. The SC
said that the husband must be the husband at the time of the
filing of the complaint so walang adultery because the foreigner
husband gets a divorce the Filipina spouse can remarry.
3rd paragraph The offenses of seduction, abduction, rape or

acts of lasciviousness, So it is not just adultery and concubinage,
it include also seduction, abduction, rape or acts of
lasciviousness. Shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended party or her parents,
grandparents, or guardian, nor, in any case, if the offender has
been expressly pardoned by the above named persons, as the
case may be. So in that order ha. Like I said pardon here is not
a mode of extinction it is only a bar to criminal action.
4th paragraph in cases of seduction, abduction, acts of

lasciviousness and rape, the marriage of the offender with the
offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or remit the
penalty already imposed upon him meaning the case is already
in court and the parties get married, ngminyo ang offended and
offender, so wala na, so the criminal action will be extinguished.
Now suppose the offender has already been convicted and
already serving his sentence in jail, yan yung ibig sabihin dyan
na the penalty can be remitted. So it is a mode of extinction of
criminal liability.
56
The provisions of this paragraph shall also be applicable to the

co-principals, accomplices and accessories after the fact of the
above-mentioned crimes. But with respect to rape diba when
there is marriage between the offender and the offended
extinction yan sa rape. Now, this rule could not be applicable in
cases of multiple rape because with respect to the other
offenders wala ka co-principal ka jpon.
In one example, A, husband, B, the wife, B has an affair with C,

so mayroong adultery si B with C. Now gi-filelan ng kaso unya
namatay si A. Unya ngminyo si B ug si C. Is there criminal
liability extinguish? Remember that B and C they are not
offended and offender parties, they are both offenders this will
not apply.
Article 345. Civil liability of persons guilty of crimes against

chastity. - Person guilty of rape, seduction or abduction, shall
also be sentenced:
1. To indemnify the offended woman.
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law
should prevent him from so doing.
3. In every case to support the offspring.
The adulterer and the concubine in the case provided for in
Articles 333 and 334 may also be sentenced, in the same
proceeding or in a separate civil proceeding, to indemnify for
damages caused to the offended spouse.
To indemnify the offended woman.
To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law should prevent him

from so doing.
Kunwari minyo na, the victim is married and has kids tapos
ngayon nabuntis dahil sa crime na yan, or there are multiple
offenders, sino ngayon ang ipaacknowledge mo diyan. Those
were the instances where acknowledgement is not an option.
Isipin mo manuktok did2 ang offender or iyang representative
mghatag ug support like tuition sa iyang anak, so yan
magkakaproblema.
Article 346. Liability of ascendants, guardians, teachers, or

other persons entrusted with the custody of the offended
party. - The ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers and
any person who, by abuse of authority or confidential
relationships, shall cooperate as accomplices in the
perpetration of the crimes embraced in chapters, second,
third and fourth, of this title, shall be punished as principals.
Teachers or other persons in any other capacity entrusted
with the education and guidance of youth, shall also suffer
the penalty of temporary special disqualification in its
maximum period to perpetual special disqualification.
Any person falling within the terms of this article, and any
other person guilty of corruption of minors for the benefit of
another, shall be punished by special disqualification from
filling the office of guardian.
Take note they are considered as principals, although their

actions are not really or they are only helping act, but in these
cases, seduction, abduction, ect, itong mga ascendant,
guardians, teachers and any person who, by abuse of authority
or confidential relationships, shall cooperate as accomplices in
the perpetration of the crimes, shall be punish as principals,
although their participation is that of accomplice according to this
article they will be punished as principals. Parang ano lang yan
slight illegal detention na the one who furnishes the place is
punish as a principal even if really his action is only that of an
accomplice, so similar sila.
Crim II TSN, October 28, 2014, Part 1 (34 minutes)

We come to CONSENTED ABDUCTION. We have this case
People v. _______, this is an old case where the girl submitted
because of the promise of marriage, sabi natin, ano thats
supposed to be Simple because of deceit. But here, the Court
said this is Consented Abduction. Simple Abduction is dissolved
because of the consent. But if the victim is raped, then thats
another story because it will be the complex crime of Consented
Abduction with Rape. The abduction was used as a necessary
means of committing rape. Also I forgot to tell you, well, diba sabi
nila there is consent? So ano ang crime when there is absolute
consent? Well, the law seeks to protect not just the victim but
also the family of the victim kasi, ang ating example diyan, is
tanan or taban. So the essence of the crime is not the wrong
done to the woman but the outrage committed against the family
and the alarm caused to them. Also, sa adultery, yung doctrine
of in pari delicto, if youre both in the wrong, wala, para lang
offsetting. But in criminal law there is no such thing, if your
spouse commits adultery, it cannot be a defense that the other is
also doing it with somebody. That cannot be used, even if true.
The husband who filed was also cohabiting with another, but he
is not precluded from filing provided of course there was no
consent or pardon.
Okay, lets not go to SIMULATION or CRIMES AGAINST THE
CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS. Again, ang consent ang tingnan
niyo dito. The crime is against the civil status of persons. If you
read 347, the simulation of births, substitution of a child for
another and concealment or abandonment, all of these affect the
civil status of persons. Youre familiar with this kay naay mga
telenovela nga ingon ani. Mara Clara. Parang nagswitch yun sila
diba? Substitution of a child for another. Its a crime! Simulation
of birth, hindi ka buntis unya nagbuntis-buntisan ka lang pero
after 9 mos, meron kang baby to show to the whole world. Why
is that a crime? What defense is given? Maayo man ang bata, in
fact, we are able to give a better life to the child kesa doon sa
original na pamilya. But that is not a defense kasi nga, yun, the
civil status will be affected. Kanino ba yang anak? Nasisira mo
yung filiation. Yan actually ang crime diyan kaya even if your
intention is noble, that is, to give a much better life to the child,
that is not a defense pa din. Because it creates a false status to
the detriment of the family, dun sa mga legitimate talaga,
kunwari, simulated or substituted, you are going to introduce
another person to the family na hindi naman siya related, to the
prejudice of the others. But of course we know that this is a
common practice especially in the provinces. Even until now. Na
anak ng relative ihatag nalang didto sa iyang relative gihapon.
So the child grows up with the auntie and the uncle but calls
them papa and mama. And then nobody knows it. Diba yun ang
problema? Anyway, the object here of substitution, simulation or
concealment is the creation of false civil status, you are causing
the loss of any trace as to the filiation of the child. Also, to be
able to relate this to other crimes involving babies, when the
woman gives birth and abandons the baby, thats what we call
abandonment, under Article 276. The intention was made to
cause the child to lose its civil status. Or if you leave the child in
a forest or in a dangerous situation, if the child dies, that may be
parricide or homicide. Anyway, here,

pinapakialaman mo ang status ng bata.
the
concept
57
is
USURPATION OF CIVIL STATUS, example here, you present

yourself to be another person and you assume the filiation or
parental rights of such other person. You are not just usurping
the civil status of that person, you are actually usurping the
public status or profession of another. So if Im actually the heir
of this rich guy, piata mo pala. Also, we distinguish this from
Estafa, kasi if the impersonation or usurpation is to defraud,
papasok nanaman ang element of deceit. Ito dito, you assume
the filiation of another. So there is also actually a different
penalty if the purpose is to defraud, its called Qualified.
Now, BIGAMY. Merong nagtanong, what is the opposite of Mini
Me in Criminal Law? The answer is this one, Bigamy (HAHA).
Okay, now, ano tong Bigamy, Chapter 2. Take note, when you
say Bigamy, kasi ang common concept diyan is dalawa.
Dalawang marriages.Paano man yan if nakatatlo ka na o
nakaapat? Trigamy? Fourgamy? According to the RPC, the
second and subsequent marriages are considered Bigamy pa
din. Ah. Wag mo na gawingTrigamy. Basta Bigamy na tanan.
Why is this a crime? Because you contracted a marriage even
before your previous marriage is being legally dissolved. Thats
349. So when can you get married again? First, kung namatay
imong bana or asawa. Ikaduha, kung legally dissolved ang
marriage. Ikatulo, if the spouse has been declared presumptively
dead. Outside of these 3 requirements, you will be subject or
vulnerable to Bigamy. Now, as far as the declaration of nullity or
the dissolution of marriage is concerned, ayaw pagbuot2. Wait
until it is legally declared void. You cannot use as an excuse na
pwede na ka magminyo ug usab kay nagfile na ka ug action to
have the first marriage declared void and then later on, it is really
granted. In the case of Beltran v. People (334 SCRA 126),
according to the Court, the parties are not permitted to judge for
themselves the nullity of the marriage, they should wait for the
Court to decide. So long as there is no such declaration, the
presumption is that the marriage exists. Therefore he who
contracts a second marriage before the judicial declaration of
nullity of the first, assumes the risk of being prosecuted for
Bigamy. Now, also one important thing here is this: the bigamous
marriage is for all intents and purposes, valid, except only that it
is a second marriage. In other words, all requisites for the validity
of a marriage is here, except lang na pangalawa siya and there
is still that subsisting, that existing marriage. Because if the
second marriage lacks any of the essential requisites of a valid
marriage, example consent, then that cannot be bigamous. It
can only be bigamous if valid siya, if nacomply lahat ng formal
and essential requisites of a valid marriage. Ang problema lang
talaga is that meron pang subsisting marriage. That is the only
flaw.
If the marriage is contracted abroad, if its not recognized here,
wala na yan. Suppose A (married to B) contracted marriage with
C in Thailand, bumalik sila ditto sa PIlipinas and lived as
husband and wife. Is there Bigamy? Wala man! General
characteristic of Criminal Law diba is territoriality? Saan ba yun
kinasal, outside the country! So anong pakialam ng Criminal Law
diyan? Walang Bigamy. Although they lived together as husband
and wife here, that can be susceptible to the charge of
concubinage or adultery as the case may be. But as far as
Bigamy is concerned, there is the principle of territoriality. Take
note too that Bigamy is not a private crime, therefore it can be
prosecuted by kahit sino not just the offended party.
If you contract a bigamous marriage, now, is your partner also
liable for bigamy? Remember the elements of the crime. Parang
malabo yan na ang partner maging liable din, but can he be
considered an accomplice? Ang problem diyan is that the crime
would not have been accomplished without the cooperation of
the partner. Were it not for the cooperation of the partner, walang
marriage na mahitabo. So the partner, by indispensable
cooperation, is also a principal! Mahitabo ba diay ng marriage
kung muingon siya ug dili ko. Although yung mga ninang,
bridesmaid, of course, go back again to intent and knowledge.
Alam mo na minyo na ni siya, nagninong2 pa ka diha, kana
pwede ka mahimong accomplice. Or bridesmaid ka, best man,
alam mo na married na ang barkada mo. Accomplice ka!
Now, can a person be convicted of Bigamy and also for
Concubinage? Pwede ba? Go back to basics, pareho ba sila ng
elements? Hindi man. So if swak siya doon, swak siya dito,
pwede man. They are distinct offenses having their own
elements.
MARRIAGE CONTRACTED AGAINST PROVISION OF THE
LAW. First of all, it should not fall under Bigamy. Contracting
marriage knowing that the requirements of the law are not
complied with or the marriage is in disregard of a legal
impediment. Alam mo palang may problema yang marriage na
yan, humirit ka pa. Knowingly again ha, knowingly. But the
impediment diyan should not refer to the existence of a previous
marriage, otherwise, automatic yan na Bigamy. Itong
PREMATURE MARRIAGE, sa ato pa, hindi ka pa dapat
nagmarry, una2 ka. Why is it a crime? Anyway, widow na nga
siya, kasuhan pa. Namatyan na ka, prisuhon pa ka because you
are not supposed to get married agad. Well, this is to avoid
confusion as to filiation if nanganak ka. Youre not supposed to
marry within a certain number of days. Kung you get married
before 180 days after the subsequent marriage the rule is the
baby is conceived in the former marriage provided born within
300 days after the termination of the first. The concept is para
lang to avoid confusion.
352. PERFORMANCE OF ILLEGAL MARRIAGE CEREMONY.
The offender here are those authorized to solemnize marriage
and then they perform an illegal marriage. Crimes against Honor,
first is 353. Definition of defamation yan kasi it includes both
libel and slander. What is defamation, yan. Malicious imputation
of a vice or defect, real or imaginary.
58
(2) Food deprivation or forcible feeding with spoiled food, animal

or human excreta and other stuff or substances not normally
eaten;
(3) Electric shock;
(4) Cigarette burning; burning by electrically heated rods, hot oil,
acid; by the rubbing of pepper or other chemical substances on
mucous membranes, or acids or spices directly on the wound(s);
(5) The submersion of the head in water or water polluted with
excrement, urine, vomit and/or blood until the brink of
suffocation;
(6) Being tied or forced to assume fixed and stressful bodily
position;
(7) Rape and sexual abuse, including the insertion of foreign
objects into the sex organ or rectum, or electrical torture of the
genitals;
(8) Mutilation or amputation of the essential parts of the body

such as the genitalia, ear, tongue, etc.;
(9) Dental torture or the forced extraction of the teeth;
(10) Pulling out of fingernails;
(11) Harmful exposure to the elements such as sunlight and

extreme cold;
(12) The use of plastic bag and other materials placed over the
head to the point of asphyxiation;
Crim 2 TSN, October 28, 2014, Part 2, 1st 30 minutes.

Lets go to some special laws. R.A. 9745. this is the Anti-Torture
Act of 2009. Take note of the definition of torture:
"Torture" refers to an act by which severe pain or suffering,
whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a
person for such purposes as obtaining from him/her or a third
person information or a confession; punishing him/her for an act
he/she or a third person has committed or is suspected of having
committed; or intimidating or coercing him/her or a third person;
or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when
such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with
the consent or acquiescence of a person in authority or agent of
a person in authority. It does not include pain or Buffering arising
only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions.
The acts of torture is defined in Section 4. Just read it.
(13) The use of psychoactive drugs to change the perception,

memory. alertness or will of a person, such as:
(i) The administration or drugs to induce confession and/or

reduce mental competency; or
(ii) The use of drugs to induce extreme pain or certain symptoms

of a disease; and
(14) Other analogous acts of physical torture; and
Section 4. Acts of Torture. - For purposes of this Act, torture

shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
(a) Physical torture is a form of treatment or punishment inflicted
by a person in authority or agent of a person in authority upon
another in his/her custody that causes severe pain, exhaustion,
disability or dysfunction of one or more parts of the body, such
as:
(1) Systematic beating, headbanging, punching, kicking, striking
with truncheon or rifle butt or other similar objects, and jumping
on the stomach;
(b) "Mental/Psychological Torture" refers to acts committed by a

person in authority or agent of a person in authority which are
calculated to affect or confuse the mind and/or undermine a
person's dignity and morale, such as:
(1) Blindfolding;
(2) Threatening a person(s) or his/fher relative(s) with bodily

harm, execution or other wrongful acts;
(3) Confinement in solitary cells or secret detention places;

(4) Prolonged interrogation;
(5) Preparing a prisoner for a "show trial", public display or public

humiliation of a detainee or prisoner;
(6) Causing unscheduled transfer of a person deprived of liberty

from one place to another, creating the belief that he/she shall be
summarily executed;
(7) Maltreating a member/s of a person's family;
(8) Causing the torture sessions to be witnessed by the person's

family, relatives or any third party;
(9) Denial of sleep/rest;
(10) Shame infliction such as stripping the person naked,

parading him/her in public places, shaving the victim's head or
putting marks on his/her body against his/her will;
(11) Deliberately prohibiting the victim to communicate with any

member of his/her family; and
(12) Other analogous acts of mental/psychological torture.
59
punishment as criminal acts shall apply to all circumstances. A

state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability, or any
other public emergency, or a document or any determination
comprising an "order of battle" shall not and can never be
invoked as a justification for torture and other cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment.
Section 7. Prohibited Detention. - Secret detention places,

solitary confinement, incommunicado or other similar forms of
detention, where torture may be carried out with impunity. Are
hereby prohibited.
In which case, the Philippine National Police (PNP), the Armed

Forces of the Philippines (AFP) and other law enforcement.
agencies concerned shall make an updated list of all detention
centers and facilities under their respective jurisdictions with the
corresponding data on the prisoners or detainees incarcerated or
detained therein such as, among others, names, date of arrest
and incarceration, and the crime or offense committed. This list
shall be made available to the public at all times, with a copy of
the complete list available at the respective national
headquarters of the PNP and AFP. A copy of the complete list
shall likewise be submitted by the PNP, AFP and all other law
enforcement agencies to the Commission on Human Rights
(CHR), such list to be periodically updated, by the same
agencies, within the first five (5) days of every month at the
minimum. Every regional office of the PNP, AFP and other law
enforcement agencies shall also maintain a similar list far all
detainees and detention facilities within their respective areas,
and shall make the same available to the public at all times at
their respective regional headquarters, and submit a copy.
updated in the same manner provided above, to the respective
regional offices of the CHR.
Section 8. Applicability of the Exclusionary Rule; Exception. Any confession, admission or statement obtained as a result of
torture shall be inadmissible in evidence in any proceedings,
except if the same is used as evidence against a person or
persons accused of committing torture.
Take note of Section 10. The of Writs of Habeas Corpus, Amparo
and Habeas Data Proceedings shall be given priority.
Section 10. Disposition of Writs of Habeas Corpus, Amparo and
Habeas Data Proceedings and Compliance with a Judicial 0rder.
- A writ of habeas corpus or writ of amparo or writ of habeas data
proceeding, if any, filed on behalf of the victim of torture or other
cruel, degrading and inhuman treatment or punishment shall be
disposed of expeditiously and any order of release by virtue
thereof, or other appropriate order of a court relative thereto,
shall be executed or complied with immediately.
Take note of Section 15. Torture shall not absorb or shall not be
absorbed by any other crime or felony committed.
Section 5. Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or

Punishment. - Other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment refers to a deliberate and aggravated treatment or
punishment not enumerated under Section 4 of this Act, inflicted
by a person in authority or agent of a person in authority against
another person in custody, which attains a level of severity
sufficient to cause suffering, gross humiliation or debasement to
the latter. The assessment of the level of severity shall depend
on all the circumstances of the case, including the duration of the
treatment or punishment, its physical and mental effects and, in
some cases, the sex, religion, age and state of health of the
victim.
Section 6. Freedom from Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and

Degrading Treatment or Punishment, An Absolute Bight. Torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or
Section 15. Torture as a Separate and Independent Crime. Torture as a crime shall not absorb or shall not be absorbed
by any other crime or felony committed as a consequence, or
as a means in the conduct or commission thereof. In which case,
torture shall be treated as a separate and independent criminal
act whose penalties shall be imposable without prejudice to any
other criminal liability provided for by domestic and international
laws.
Take note also of Section 16. which excludes those who
committed torture from availing of special amnesty laws.
Section 16. Exclusion from the Coverage of Special Amnesty
Law. - In order not to depreciate the crime of torture, persons
who have committed any act of torture shall not benefit from
any special amnesty law or similar measures that will have
the effect of exempting them from any criminal proceedings and
sanctions.
60
Relate Section 18 on our discussion regarding the Board of

Claims.
Section 18. Compensation to Victims of Torture. - Any person
who has suffered torture shall have the right to claim for
compensation as provided for under Republic Act No. 7309:
Provided, That in no case shall compensation be any lower than
Ten thousand pesos (P10,000.00). Victims of torture shall also
have the right to claim for compensation from such other
financial relief programs that may be made available to him/her
under existing law and rules and regulations.
The compensation in R.A. 7309 and R.A. 9745 are not the same.
In R.A. 7309, the maximum is P10,000.00. However, in R.A.
9745, the compensation shall not be lower than P10,000.00.
Take note also that the RPC is applied suppletorily.
Section 22. Applicability of the Revised Penal Code. - The
provisions of the Revised Penal Code insofar as they are
applicable shall be suppletory to this Act. Moreover, if the
commission of any crime punishable under Title Eight (Crimes
Against Persons) and Title Nine (Crimes Against Personal
Liberty and Security) of the Revised Penal Code is attended by
any of the acts constituting torture and other cruel, inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment as defined herein, the
penalty to be imposed shall be in its maximum period.
In this instance, torture is still a different offense and will be
prosecuted independently and separately. However, if a crime
punishable under Title 8 and Title 9 is committed along with
torture, the penalty for the crime will be imposed in its maximum
period. (It seems like torture is a special aggravating
circumstance).
This special law is discussed for Bar Exam purposes. It will not
be included in the exams.
Another special law, R.A. 9775, deals with child pornography.
Section 3. Definition of Terms
(a) Child" refers to a person below eighteen (18) years of age
or over, but is unable to fully take care of himself/herself from
abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of
a physical or mental disability or condition. For the purpose of
this Act, a child shall also refer to:
(1) a person regardless of age who is presented, depicted or
portrayed as a child as defined herein; and
(2) computer-generated, digitally or manually crafted images or

graphics of a person who is represented or who is made to
appear to be a child as defined herein.
(b) "Child pornography" refers to any representation, whether

visual, audio, or written combination thereof, by electronic,
mechanical, digital, optical, magnetic or any other means, of
child engaged or involved in real or simulated explicit sexual
activities.
(2) bestiality;
(3) masturbation;
(4) sadistic or masochistic abuse;
(5) lascivious exhibition of the genitals, buttocks,

breasts, pubic area and/or anus; or
(6) use of any object or instrument for lascivious acts
"Grooming" refers to the act of preparing a child or someone

who the offender believes to be a child for sexual activity or
sexual relationship by communicating any form of child
pornography. It includes online enticement or enticement through
any other means.
"Luring" refers to the act of communicating, by means of a

computer system, with a child or someone who the offender
believes to be a child for the purpose of facilitating the
commission of sexual activity or production of any form of child
pornography.(2) Bestiality;
Take note of this because this is related to the cybercrime law,

which we will take on later.
"Pandering" refers to the act of offering, advertising, promoting,

representing or distributing through any means any material or
purported material that is intended to cause another to believe
that the material or purported material contains any form of child
pornography, regardless of the actual content of the material or
purported material.
Unlawful or Prohibited Acts. - It shall be unlawful for any person:

(a) To hire, employ, use, persuade, induce or coerce a
child to perform in the creation or production of any
form of child pornography;
(b) To produce, direct, manufacture or create any form
of child pornography;
(c) "Explicit Sexual Activity" includes actual or simulated
(1) As to form:
(i) sexual intercourse or lascivious act including, but not
limited to, contact involving genital to genital, oral to
genital, anal to genital, or oral to anal, whether between
persons of the same or opposite sex;
(c) To publish offer, transmit, sell, distribute,

broadcast, advertise, promote, export or import any
form of child pornography;
(d) To possess any form of child pornography with the
intent to sell, distribute, publish, or broadcast: Provided.
That possession of three (3) or more articles of child
pornography of the same form shall be prima facie
evidence of the intent to sell, distribute, publish or
broadcast;
61
(e) To knowingly, willfully and intentionally provide a

venue for the commission of prohibited acts as, but not
limited to, dens, private rooms, cubicles, cinemas,
houses or in establishments purporting to be a
legitimate business;
(b) Within seven (7) days, report the presence of any

form of child pornography, as well as the particulars of
the person maintaining, hosting, distributing or in any
manner contributing to such internet address, to the
proper authorities; and
(f) For film distributors, theaters and telecommunication

companies, by themselves or in cooperation with other
entities, to distribute any form of child pornography;
(c) Preserve such evidence for purposes of

investigation and prosecution by relevant authorities.
(g) For a parent, legal guardian or person having

custody or control of a child to knowingly permit the
child to engage, participate or assist in any form of child
pornography;
(h) To engage in the luring or grooming of a child;
(i) To engage in pandering of any form of child
pornography;
(j) To willfully access any form of child pornography;
(k) To conspire to commit any of the prohibited acts
stated in this section. Conspiracy to commit any form of
child pornography shall be committed when two (2) or
more persons come to an agreement concerning the
commission of any of the said prohibited acts and
decide to commit it; and
(l) To possess any form of child pornography.
Take note the child pornography involves distribution of
any form of child pornography. Even possession of any
form of child pornography is an unlawful act.
Syndicated Child Pornography - The crime of child
pornography is deemed committed by a syndicate if
carried out by a group of three (3) or more persons
conspiring or confederating with one another and shall
be punished under Section 15(a) of this Act.
Section 8. Jurisdiction. - Jurisdiction over cases for the violation
of this Act shall be vested in the Family Court which has
territorial jurisdiction over the place where the offense or any of
its essential elements was committed pursuant to Republic Act
No. 8369, otherwise known as "Family Courts Act of 1997".
Section 10. Responsibility of Mall Owners/Operators and
Owners or Lessors of Other Business Establishments. - All mall
owners/operators and owners or lessors of other business
establishments shall notify the PNP or the NBI within seven
(7) days from obtaining facts and circumstances that child
pornography is being committed in their premises. Provided,
That public display of any form of child pornography within their
premises is a conclusive presumption of the knowledge of the
mall owners/operators and owners or lessors of other business
establishments of the violation of this Act: Provided, further, That
a
disputable
presumption
of
knowledge
by
mall
owners/operators and owners or lessors of other business
establishments should know or reasonably know that a violation
of this Act is being committed in their premises.
Photo developers, information technology professionals, credit
card companies and banks and any person who has direct
knowledge of any form of child pornography activities shall
have the duty to report any suspected child pornography
materials or transactions to the proper authorities within seven
(7) days from discovery thereof.
Any willful and intentional violation of this provision shall be
subject to the penalty provided under Section 15(l) of this Act.
Section 11. Duties of an Internet Content Host. - An internet
content host shall:
(a) Not host any form of child pornography on its
internet address;
An internet content host shall, upon the request of proper

authorities, furnish the particulars of users who gained or
attempted to gain access to an internet address that contains
any form of child pornography.
An internet content host who shall knowingly, willfully and
intentionally violate this provision shall be subject to the penalty
provided under Section 15(j) of this Act: Provided, That the
failure of the internet content host to remove any form of child
pornography within forty-eight (48) hours from receiving the
notice that any form of child pornography is hitting its server shall
be conclusive evidence of willful and intentional violation thereof.
Section 12. Authority to Regulate Internet Caf or Kiosk. - The
local government unit (LGU) of the city or municipality where an
internet caf or kiosk is located shall have the authority to
monitor and regulate the establishment and operation of the
same or similar establishments in order to prevent violation of
the provisions of this Act.
Section 13. Confidentiality. - The right to privacy of the child
shall be ensured at any stage of the investigation,
prosecution and trial of an offense under this Act. Towards
this end, the following rules shall be observed:
(a) The judge, prosecutor or any officer of the law to
whom the complaint has been referred to may,
whenever necessary to ensure a fair and impartial
proceeding and after considering all circumstances for
the best interest of the child conduct a closed-door
investigation, prosecution or trial;
(b) The name and personal circumstances of the child,
including the child's immediate family, or any other
information tending to establish his/her identity shall not
be disclosed to the public;
(c) Any record regarding a child shall be confidential
and kept under seal. Except upon written request and
order of the court, a record shall be released only to the
following:
(1) Members of
administrative use;
the
court
staff
for
(2) The prosecuting attorney;

(3) Defense counsel;
(4) The guardian ad litem;
(5) Agents of investigating law enforcement
agencies and
(6) Other persons as determined by the court.
(d) Any form of child pornography that is part of the
court records shall be subject to a protective order that
provides as follows:
(1) Any form of child pornography may be
viewed only by the parties, their counsel, their
expert witness and guardian ad litem;
(2) Neither form of child pornography nor any
portion thereof shall be divulged to any other
person, except as necessary for investigation,
prosecution or trial; and
(3) No person shall be granted access to any
form of child pornography or any part thereof
unless he/she signs a written affirmation that
he/she has received and read a copy of the
protection order; that he/she submits to the
jurisdiction of the court with respect to the
protective order; and that, in case of violation
thereof, he/she will be subject to the contempt
power of the court; and
(e) In cases when prosecution or trial is conducted
behind closed doors, it shall be unlawful for any editor,
publisher and reporter or columnist in case of printed
materials, announcer or producer in case of television
and radio, producer and director of a film in case of the
movie industry, or any person utilizing the tri-media
facilities or information technology to publish or
broadcast the names of the victims of any case of child
pornography.
Any violation of this provision shall be subject to the penalty
provided for under Section 15(m) of this Act.
Section 14. Care, Custody and Treatment of a Child Victim. The DSWD shall ensure that the child who is a victim of any form
of child pornography is provided appropriate care, custody and
support for their recovery and reintegration in accordance with
existing laws.
The child and his family shall be entitled to protection as well as
to the rights and benefits of witnesses under Republic Act No.
6981, otherwise known as "The Witness Protection, Security and
Benefit Act".
The child shall also be considered as a victim of a violent crime
defined under Section 3(d) of Republic Act No. 7309, otherwise
known as "An Act Creating a Board of Claims under the
Department of Justice for Victims of Unjust Imprisonment or
Detention and Victims of Violent Crimes and for Other
Purposes", so that the child may claim compensation therein.
A child victim is considered a victim of a violent crime so he/she
is entitled to compensation in the Board of Claims.
Section 17. Confiscation and Forfeiture of the Proceeds, Tools
and Instruments Used in Child Pornography. - In addition to the
penalty imposed for the violation of this Act, the court shall order
the confiscation and forfeiture in favor of the government of all
the proceeds, tools and instruments used in the commission of
the crime, unless they are the property of a third person not
liable for the unlawful act; Provided, however, That all awards for
damages shall be taken from the personal and separate
properties of the offender; Provided, further, That if such
properties are insufficient, the deficiency shall be taken from the
confiscated and forfeited proceeds, tools and instruments.
62
(a) "Broadcast" means to make public, by any means,

a visual image with the intent that it be viewed by a
person or persons.
(b) "Capture" with respect to an image, means to
videotape, photograph, film, record by any means, or
broadcast.
(c) "Female breast" means any portion of the female
breast.
(d) "Photo or video voyeurism" means the act of
taking photo or video coverage of a person or group
of persons performing sexual act or any similar activity
or of capturing an image of the private area of a person
or persons without the latter's consent, under
circumstances in which such person/s has/have a
reasonable expectation of privacy, or the act of selling,
copying, reproducing, broadcasting, sharing,
showing or exhibiting the photo or video coverage
or recordings of such sexual act or similar activity
through VCD/DVD, internet, cellular phones and similar
means or device without the written consent of the
person/s involved, notwithstanding that consent to
record or take photo or video coverage of same was
given by such person's.
In this provision, even if consent was given by the
person allowing himself/herself to be photographed or
filmed, if the photo or video was sold, copied,
reproduced, broadcasted, shared, shown or exhibited
without such persons WRITTEN CONSENT by
anybody, then the latter is still liable under this Act. So,
if you are a professional nude photographer or a
professional pornographer, you must first get the
written consent of the person subject of your nude
photo or video before you can engage in the act of
selling,
copying,
reproducing,
broadcasting,
sharing, showing or exhibiting the photo or video
coverage or recordings of such photos or videos.
(e) "Private area of a person" means the naked or
undergarment clad genitals, public area, buttocks or
female breast of an individual.
(f) "Under circumstances in which a person has a
reasonable expectation of privacy" means believe that
he/she could disrobe in privacy, without being
concerned that an image or a private area of the person
was being captured; or circumstances in which a
reasonable person would believe that a private area of
the person would not be visible to the public, regardless
of whether that person is in a public or private place.
Section 4. Prohibited Acts. - It is hereby prohibited and declared
unlawful for any person:
Take note that child pornography is a transnational crime.

Section 22. Child Pornography as a Transnational Crime. Pursuant to the Convention on transnational Organized Crime,
the DOJ may execute the request of a foreign state for
assistance in the investigation or prosecution of any form of child
pornography by: (1) conducting a preliminary investigation
against the offender and, if appropriate, to file the necessary
charges in court; (2) giving information needed by the foreign
state; and (3) to apply for an order of forfeiture of any proceeds
or monetary instrument or properly located in the Philippines
used in connection with child pornography in the court; Provided,
That if the DOJ refuses to act on the request of for delaying the
execution thereof: Provided, further, That the principles of
mutuality and reciprocity shall, for this purpose, be at all times
recognized.
Another special of interest is R.A. 9995, the "Anti-Photo and
Video Voyeurism Act of 2009". It is under this law that Chito
Miranda and Paulo Bediones are liable.
Section 3. Definition of Terms. - For purposes of this Act, the
term:
(a) To take photo or video coverage of a person or

group of persons performing sexual act or any similar
activity or to capture an image of the private area of a
person/s such as the naked or undergarment clad
genitals, public area, buttocks or female breast without
the consent of the person/s involved and under
circumstances in which the person/s has/have a
reasonable expectation of privacy;
If you take a photo in a nudist beach, you do not have a
reasonable expectation of privacy.
(b) To copy or reproduce, or to cause to be copied or
reproduced, such photo or video or recording of sexual
act or any similar activity with or without consideration;
(c) To sell or distribute, or cause to be sold or
distributed, such photo or video or recording of sexual
act, whether it be the original copy or reproduction
thereof; or
(d) To publish or broadcast, or cause to be published or
broadcast, whether in print or broadcast media, or show
or exhibit the photo or video coverage or recordings of
such sexual act or any similar activity through
VCD/DVD, internet, cellular phones and other similar
means or device.
The prohibition under paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) shall apply
notwithstanding that consent to record or take photo or video
coverage of the same was given by such person/s. Any person
who violates this provision shall be liable for photo or video
voyeurism as defined herein.
Section 6. Exemption. - Nothing contained in this Act, however,
shall render it unlawful or punishable for any peace officer, who
is authorized by a written order of the court, to use the record or
any copy thereof as evidence in any civil, criminal investigation
or trial of the crime of photo or video voyeurism: Provided, That
such written order shall only be issued or granted upon written
application and the examination under oath or affirmation of the
applicant and the witnesses he/she may produce, and upon
showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that photo
or video voyeurism has been committed or is about to be
63
committed, and that the evidence to be obtained is essential to

the conviction of any person for, or to the solution or prevention
of such, crime.
This provision is akin to an application of a warrant of arrest or a
search warrant.
Section 7. Inadmissibility of Evidence. - Any record, photo
video, or copy thereof, obtained or secured by any person
violation of the preceding sections shall not be admissible
evidence in any judicial, quasi-judicial, legislative
administrative hearing or investigation.
or
in
in
or

Crim Law 2 Compilation

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 2 Compilation

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

CRIMINAL LAW II REVIEW TRANSCRIPTION FROM CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS TO THE END OF BOOK 2

will fall under parricide.

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS

his ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse, shall be

there are several crimes that involve killing. Example A killed B.

guilty of parricide and shall be punished by the penalty of

reclusion perpetua to death.

to determine several facts first.

always in the direct line tapos by blood. So even if utol mo

talk about yung baby pa, yung infanticide.

Article 255. Infanticide. - The penalty provided for parricide

line! So therefore, it will not fall under parricide. Ang parricide

in Article 246 and for murder in Article 248 shall be imposed

note, when you talk about father, mother, or child, the

relationship may be legitimate or illegitimate.

If the crime penalized in this article be committed by the

BUT, when you talk about ascendant, descendants, and

mother of the child for the purpose of concealing her

including the spouse, the relationship must now be legitimate.

dishonor, she shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional

Otherwise, they will not be parricide. For example, common law

in its medium and maximum periods, and if said crime be

parricide because the relationship is not legitimate.

grandparents or either of them, the penalty shall be prision

Now, Supposing a husband asks someone to kill his spouse.

Killing of a person who is 3 days old. That is infanticide. Please

article says the offender can be any person. So if the offender is

OF ONE IS NOT THE CRIME OF THE OTHER. Because the

the parent or a stranger it does not matter as long as the victim

relationship factor is not there to the one who was assigned to

kill the spouse.

that there are babies born na hindi full term.

As to the husband, siya ang principal for

Kato iyang kasabot na killer, ibang crime yung sa

kanya kasi wala naman cya relationship dun sa pinatay.

Now, next would be murder. Kasi nga process of elimination

had an intrauterine life of less than 7 months and was killed

parricide. So sa murder na tayo.

within 24 hours from the moment of birth. Pointing to an article

provisions of Article 246 shall kill another, shall be guilty of

hours he will be considered a person. Will that argument be

murder and shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its

maximum period to death, if committed with any of the

FOR CIVIL PURPOSES. In other words that article will only

following attendant circumstances:

apply to civil cases.

Hindi rin father, mother, child, so hindi na rin

Para sa criminal cases, as far as the

revised penal code is concerned, bahala na kung unsa ang

1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior

strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing

means to weaken the defense or of means or

2. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise.

3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion,

the penalty will be the same and that is Reclusion perpetua to

shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or

assault upon a street car or locomotive, fall of an

Now, if the baby is more than 3 days old, he is still considered an

of any other means involving great waste and ruin.

4. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated

So next topic would be the basic killing. Homicide. So if hindi

in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake,

mahulog sa infanticide, parricide, murder, then homicide na yan.

epidemic or other public calamity.