Você está na página 1de 18

Art. 246. Parricide.

Any person who shall kill


his father, mother, or child, whether legitimate
or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or
descendants, or his spouse, shall be guilty of
parricide and shall be punished by the penalty
of reclusion perpetua to death.
Elements:
1. That a person is killed;
2. That the deceased is killed by the accused; and
3. That the deceased is the father, mother, or child,
whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate
ascendant or other descendant, or the legitimate
spouse, of the accused.

* The child should not be less than 3 days old;


otherwise the crime is infanticide (Art. 255).

2. In consideration
promise.

of

price,

reward,

or

3. By means of inundation, fire, poison,


explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel,
derailment or assault upon a street car or
locomotive, fall of an airship, by means of motor
vehicles, or with the use of any other means
involving great waste and ruin.
4. On occasion of any of the calamities
enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of
an
earthquake,
eruption
of
a
volcano,
destructive cyclone, epidemic or other public
calamity.
5. With evident premeditation.
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly
augmenting the suffering of the victim, or
outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse.

Outraging (physical act)


Art. 248. Murder. Any person who, not falling
within the provisions of Article 246 shall kill
another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be
punished by reclusion temporal in its maximum
period to death, if committed with any of the
following attendant circumstances:
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 persons to insure or afford impunity.

It means to commit an extremely vicious or deeply


insulting act.
Scoffing (verbal act)
It means to jeer, and implies a showing of irreverence.
Dismemberment of a dead body is one manner of
outraging or scoffing at the corpse of the victim and
qualifies the killing to murder (People v. Guillermo, G.R.
No. 147786, January 20, 2004).
Elements:

1. That a person was killed;


2. That the accused killed him;
3. That the killing was attended by any of the
qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art. 248; and
4. That the killing is not parricide or infanticide.

Rules for the application of the circumstances


which qualify the killing to murder:
1. That murder will exist with only one of the
circumstances described in Art. 248;
Note: Where there are more than one qualifying
circumstance present, only one will qualify the
killing, with the rest to be considered as generic
aggravating circumstances (People v. Dueo, G.R.
No. L-31102, May 5, 1979).
2. That when the other circumstances are absorbed or
included in one qualifying circumstance, they cannot
be considered as generic aggravating (People v.
Sespee et al., G.R. No. L-9346, October 30, 1957);
and
3. That any of the qualifying circumstances
enumerated in Art. 248 must be alleged in the
information (U.S. v. Campo, G.R. No. 7321, November
5, 1912). Treachery and evident premeditation are
inherent in murder by means of poison but the use of
poison is not inherent in murder. It only becomes
inherent if there is intent to kill and the poison is used
as a means to kill. The use of a loose firearm, when

inherent in the commission of a crime punishable


under the Revised Penal Code or other special laws,
shall be considered as an aggravating circumstance
(R.A. 10591, Sec. 29).
Loose Firearm
It refers to an unregistered firearm, an obliterated or
altered firearm, firearm which has been lost or stolen,
illegally manufactured firearms, registered firearms in
the possession of an individual other than the licensee
and those with revoked licenses in accordance with the
rules and regulations (R.A. 10591, Sec. 1 [v]). Under
Section 3 of the Human Security Act of 2007, a person
who commits an act punishable as murder under Art.
248 thereby sowing and creating a condition of
widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among
the populace, in order to coerce the government to
give in to an unlawful demand shall be guilty of
Terrorism.

Art. 249. Homicide. Any person who, not


falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall
kill another without the attendance of any of the
circumstances
enumerated
in
the
next
preceding article, shall be deemed guilty of
homicide and be punished by reclusion
temporal.

Homicide - The unlawful killing of any person,


which is not parricide, murder or infanticide.
Elements:
1. That a person was killed;
2. That the accused killed
justifying circumstance;

him

without

Corpus Delicti
It means that a crime was actually perpetrated and
does not refer to the body of the murdered person
(People v. Taruc, et. al., G.R. No. L-18308, April 30,
1966).

any

3. That the accused had the intention to kill,


which is presumed; and
4. That the killing was not attended by any of the
qualifying circumstances of murder, or by that of
parricide or infanticide.
Intent to kill is conclusively presumed when death
results; evidence of intent to kill is important only in
attempted or frustrated homicide (Yapyuco v.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 120744-46, June 25, 2012).
In an attempted or frustrated homicide, the offender
must have the intent to kill the victim. If there is no
intent to kill on the part of the offender, he is liable for
physical injuries. Intent to kill is usually shown by the
kind of weapon used and the location and nature of
the wound (People v. Balderas, G.R. No. 106582).

In all crimes against persons in which the death of


the victim is an element of an offense, there must
be satisfactory evidence of (1) the fact of death
and (2) the identity of the victim (REYES, Book
Two, supra at 507).

When there is no way of determining how the


attack was committed, treachery cannot be
considered and the accused is guilty of homicide
only (People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 152176, October 1,
2003).

There can be no crime of attempted or frustrated


homicide through imprudence. The element of intent
to kill in attempted or frustrated homicide is
incompatible with negligence or imprudence (People v.
Castillo, GR. No. 227, February 1, 1946).

Accidental Homicide
It is the death of a person brought about by a lawful
act performed with proper care and skill and without
homicidal intent, e.g. death in boxing bout. There is no
felony committed in this case (Id.).

Art. 251. Death caused in a tumultuous affray.


When, while several persons, not composing
groups organized for the common purpose of

assaulting and attacking each other reciprocally,


quarrel and assault each other in a confused and
tumultuous manner, and in the course of the
affray someone is killed, and it cannot be
ascertained who actually killed the deceased,
but the person or persons who inflicted serious
physical injuries can be identified, such person
or persons shall be punished by prision mayor.
If it cannot be determined who inflicted the
serious physical injuries on the deceased, the
penalty of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods shall be imposed upon all
those who shall have used violence upon the
person of the victim.

Elements:
1. That there be several persons;
2. That they did not compose groups organized
for the common purpose of assaulting and
attacking each other reciprocally, otherwise, they
may be held liable as co-conspirators;
3. That these several persons quarreled and
assaulted one another in a confused and
tumultuous manner;
4. That someone was killed in the course of the
affray;
5. That it cannot be ascertained who actually
killed the deceased; and

6. That the person or persons who inflicted


serious physical injuries or who used violence
can be identified.

Persons Liable:
1. The person or persons who inflicted the serious
physical injuries are liable; and
2. If it is not known who inflicted the serious physical
injuries on the deceased ALL the persons who used
violence upon the person of the victim are liable, but
with lesser liability.
Tumultuous Affray
A melee or free-for-all, where several persons not
comprising definite or identifiable groups attack one
another in a confused and disorganized manner
resulting in the death or injury of one or some of them.
Tumultuous affray exists when at least four
persons took part. When the quarrel is between a
distinct group of individuals, one of whom was
sufficiently identified as the principal author of
the killing, as against a common, particular victim, it
is not a "tumultuous affray" within the meaning of Art.
251 of the RPC (People v. Unlagada, G.R. No. 141080,
September 17, 2002). In such a case, the crime
committed is homicide under Art. 249.
The victim may be
participant thereof.

participant

or

non-

Art. 252. Physical injuries inflicted in a


tumultuous affray. When in a tumultuous
affray as referred to in the preceding article,
only serious physical injuries are inflicted upon
the participants thereof and the person
responsible thereof cannot be identified, all
those who appear to have used violence upon
the person of the offended party shall suffer the
penalty next lower in degree than that provided
for the physical injuries so inflicted.
When the physical injuries inflicted are of a less
serious nature and the person responsible
therefor cannot be identified, all those who
appear to have used any violence upon the
person of the offended party shall be punished
by arresto mayor from five to fifteen days.

Elements:
1. That there is a tumultuous affray as referred to in
Art. 251;
2. That a participant or some participants thereof
suffer serious physical injuries or physical
injuries of a less serious nature only;
3. That the person responsible therefor cannot be
identified; and
4. That all those who appear to have used
violence upon the person of the offended party
are known.

Injured/victim must be a participant in the


affray.

Only those who used violence are punished,


because if the one who caused the physical
injuries is known, he will be liable for the
physical injuries actually committed, and not
under this article (RPC, Art. 252, par. 1).

Art. 253. Giving assistance to suicide. Any


person who shall assist another to commit
suicide shall suffer the penalty of prision mayor;
if such person leads his assistance to another to
the extent of doing the killing himself, he shall
suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal.
However, if the suicide is not consummated, the
penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and
maximum periods, shall be imposed.
Punishable Acts:
1. By assisting another to commit suicide, whether
the suicide is consummated or not; and
2. By lending his assistance to another to commit
suicide to the extent of doing the killing himself.

A person who attempts to commit suicide is not


criminally liable even if an innocent third person
is hurt or killed or property or is damaged
(REGALADO, supra at 570-571).

The penalty for giving assistance to suicide if the


offender is the father, mother, child or spouse of the
one committing suicide is the same since the law
does not distinguish (REYES, Book Two, supra at
515).

It is not applicable to police officers in the


performance of their duties.

The purpose of the offender is only to intimidate


or frighten the offended party (Id. at 517).

Euthanasia or Mercy-Killing It is a practice of


painlessly putting to death a person suffering from
some incurable disease.

If in the discharge of firearm, the offended party


is hit and wounded, there is a complex crime
of discharge of firearm with serious or less
serious physical injuries (People v. Arquiza,
G.R. Nos. 42128, 42129, December 19, 1935);
but if only slight physical injuries were
inflicted, there is no complex crime (but two
separate crimes) since such physical
injuries constitutes a light felony.

A doctor who resorted to euthanasia may be


held liable for murder under Art. 248 since
euthanasia is not giving assistance to suicide
but doing the killing himself.
In euthanasia, the person killed does not want to die.

Art. 254. Discharge of firearms. Any person


who shall shoot at another with any firearm
shall suffer the penalty of prision correccional in
its minimum and medium periods, unless the
facts of the case are such that the act can be
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.
Elements:
1. That the offender discharges a firearm against or at
another person; and
2. That the offender has no intention to kill that
person.

The crime is discharge of firearm even if the gun


was not pointed at the offended party when it was
fired, as long as it was initially aimed by the
accused at or against the offended party (People v.
Oscar Ramirez, C.A. 46 O.G. 6119).
If the firearm was not aimed against or at another
person, the crime committed is alarms and
scandals (RPC, Art. 155).
No offense for illegal discharge of firearms through
imprudence.

Art. 260. Responsibility of participants in a duel.


The penalty of reclusion temporal shall be
imposed upon any person who shall kill his
adversary in a duel.

If he shall inflict upon the latter physical injuries only,


he shall suffer the penalty provided therefor, according
to their nature.
In any other case, the combatants shall suffer the
penalty of arresto mayor, although no physical
injuries have been inflicted.
The seconds shall in all events be punished as
accomplices.

Punishable Acts:
1. By killing ones adversary in a duel;
2. By inflicting upon such adversary physical
injuries; and
3. By making a combat although no physical
injuries have been inflicted.

selection of arms and fix all other conditions of the


fight.
Seconds
The persons who make the selection of the arms
and fix the other conditions of the fight.
Self defense cannot be invoked if there was a
preconcerted agreement to fight, but if the attack
was made by the accused against his opponent before
the appointed place and time, there is an unlawful
aggression, hence self-defense can be claimed (Justo v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-8611, June 28, 1956).
If death results, penalty is the same as that for
homicide.

1. The person who killed or inflicted physical injuries


upon his adversary or both combatants in any other
case, as principals;

Art. 261. Challenging to a duel. The penalty of


prision correccional in its minimum period shall
be imposed upon any person who shall
challenge another, or incite another to give or
accept a challenge to a duel, or shall scoff at or
decry another publicly for having refused to
accept a challenge to fight a duel.

2. The seconds, as accomplices.

Punishable Acts:

Persons Liable:

1. By challenging another to a duel;


Duel
A formal or regular combat previously concerted
between two parties in the presence of two or more
seconds of lawful age on each side, who make the

2. By inciting another to give or accept a challenge


to a duel; and
3. By scoffing or decrying another publicly for
having refused to accept a challenge to fight a
duel.

Persons liable:
1. Challenger; and
2. Instigators.
A challenge to fight, without contemplating a
duel, is not challenging to a duel. The person
making the challenge must have in mind a formal
combat to be concerted between him and the one
challenged in the presence of two or more
seconds (REYES, Book Two, supra at 532)

Art. 255. Infanticide. The penalty provided for


parricide in Article 246 and for murder in Article 248
shall be imposed upon any person who shall kill any
child less than three days of age.
If the crime penalized in this article be committed by
the mother of the child for the purpose of concealing
her dishonor, she shall suffer the penalty of prision
correccional in its medium and maximum periods, and
if said crime be committed for the same purpose by
the maternal grandparents or either of them, the
penalty shall be prision mayor.

Infanticide - It is the killing of any child less than


three (3) days of age, whether the killer is the parent
or grandparent, any other relative of the child, or a
stranger.
Elements:
1.That a child was killed;

2.That the deceased child was less than three days (72
hours) of age; and
3. That the accused killed the said child.

Father or mother or other legitimate ascendant


who kills a child less than three days old shall
suffer the penalty for parricide (RPC, Art. 255, par.
1).
Only the mother and the maternal grandparents
of the child are entitled to the mitigating
circumstance of concealing the dishonor (RPC, Art.
255, par. 2).
The delinquent mother who claims concealing
dishonor must be of good reputation and good
morals (REYES, Book Two, supra at 520).
Other person who kills or who cooperates with
the mother or maternal grandparent in killing a
child less than three days old will suffer the
penalty for murder (U.S. v. Aquino, G.R. No. 11653,
August 19, 1916).
No crime of infanticide is committed if the child
has been dead or if, although born alive, it could
not sustain an independent life when it was
killed (U.S. v. Vedra, G.R. No. 4779, November 20,
1908).
Treachery is inherent in infanticide (U.S. v. Oro, G.R.
Nos. 42128-29, December 19, 1935).

Art. 256. Intentional abortion. Any person who


shall intentionally cause an abortion shall suffer:
1. The penalty of reclusion temporal, if he shall use
any 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.

Intentional Abortion - It is the willful killing of the


fetus in the uterus or the violent expulsion of the fetus
from the maternal womb which results in the death of
the fetus.

2.That violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages


administered, or that the accused otherwise acts upon
such pregnant woman;
3.That as a result of the use of violence or drugs or
beverages upon her, or any other act of the accused,
the fetus dies, either in the womb or after having been
expelled therefrom; and
4.That the abortion is intended.

Person liable in Intentional Abortion:


1. The person who intentionally caused the
abortion under Art. 256.
2. The pregnant woman if she consented under
Art. 258.

Ways of Committing Intentional Abortion:


1. By using any violence upon the person of the
pregnant woman;
2. By acting, without using violence and without the
consent of the woman by administering drugs or
beverages upon such pregnant woman without her
consent; and
3. By acting, with the consent of the pregnant
woman, by administering drugs or beverages.
Elements:
1. That there is a pregnant woman;

As long as the fetus dies as a result of the


violence used or the drugs administered, the
crime of abortion exists, even if the fetus is over
or less than six (6) months, or is full term.

If the fetus could sustain an independent life


(the fetus must have had an intrauterine life of
not less than 7 months) after its separation from
the maternal womb, and it is killed, the crime is
infanticide, not abortion (People v. Detablan, C.A.,
40. O.G., Supp. 5, 30).
Fetus must die in consummated abortion. If it is
intentional abortion and the fetus does not die,
it is frustrated intentional abortion when all the

acts of execution have been performed by the


offender (REYES, Book Two, supra at 522).
If the abortion is not intended and the fetus does not
die, in spite of the violence intentionally exerted, the
crime may only be physical injuries. There is no
crime of frustrated unintentional abortion, in
view of the lack of intention to cause an
abortion (Id.).
If grave threats were made to cause abortion, a
complex crime of grave threats and intentional
abortion is committed. If light threats were made, two
separate crimes of light threats and intentional
abortion are committed. If there is no intention to
cause abortion and no violence, there is no abortion of
any kind.
Art. 257. Unintentional abortion. The penalty of
prision correccional in its minimum and medium period
shall be imposed upon any person who shall cause an
abortion by violence, but unintentionally.
Elements:
1. That there is a pregnant woman;
2. That violence is used upon such pregnant
woman without intending an abortion;
3. That the violence is intentionally exerted; and
4. That as a result of the violence, the fetus dies,
either in the womb or after having been expelled
therefrom.

Violence refers to actual physical force.

CONFLICTING VIEWS: The offender must have known


of the womans pregnancy (People v. Carnaso, C.A., 61
OG 3623) However, in US v. Jeffrey (G.R. No. 5597,
March 5, 1910), it was ruled that knowledge of such
pregnancy was not necessary.

In the case of People v. Salufrania (G.R. No. L- 50884,


March 30, 1988), the Supreme Court ruled that despite
knowledge of the accused of his wifes pregnancy, the
intent to cause the abortion has not been sufficiently
established, thus, the accused is only liable for the
complex crime of parricide (for the death of wife) with
unintentional abortion (for the death of the fetus in the
mothers womb). There is a complex crime of homicide
with unintentional abortion (People v. Genoves, 33 O.G.
2201).

There is complex crime of parricide with


abortion (People v. Villanueva, G.R. No. 95851 March
1, 1995)

Art. 258. Abortion practiced by the woman


herself of by her parents. The penalty of prision
correccional in its medium 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.

Any woman who shall commit this offense to conceal


her dishonor, shall suffer the penalty of prision
correccional in its minimum and medium periods.

If the purpose is other than to conceal the


womans dishonor, abortion by any of her
parents falls under Art. 256.

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.

Liability of the pregnant woman is mitigated if


her (not including the maternal grandparents)
purpose is to conceal her dishonor (RPC, Art.
258, par. 2).

There is no mitigation for parents of the


pregnant woman even if the purpose is to
conceal dishonor in abortion, unlike in
infanticide (RPC, Art. 258, pars. 1 and 3).

Elements:
1. That there is a pregnant woman who has
suffered an abortion;
2. That the abortion is intended; and
3. That the abortion is caused by:

a. The pregnant woman herself;


b. Any other person, with her consent; or

Art. 259. Abortion practiced by a physician or


midwife and dispensing of abortives. The
penalties provided in Article 256 shall be imposed in its
maximum period, respectively, upon any physician or
midwife who, taking advantage of their scientific
knowledge or skill, shall cause an abortion or
assist in causing the same.

c. Any of her parents, with her consent, for the


purpose of concealing her dishonor.

Any pharmacist who, without the proper


prescription from a physician, shall dispense any
abortive shall suffer arresto mayor and a fine not
exceeding 1,000 pesos.

Under a and c above, the woman is liable under Art.


258; while the third person under b is liable under Art.
256.

Elements:
1. That there is a pregnant woman who has
suffered an abortion;

2. That the abortion is intended;


3. That the offender, who must be a physician or
midwife, causes, or assists in causing the
abortion; and
4. That said physician or midwife takes advantage
of his or her scientific knowledge or skill. The
penalties provided for intentional abortion shall be
imposed in the maximum period upon the physician or
midwife (RPC, Art. 259, par. 1). They are severely
punished because they incur a heavier guilt in making
use of their knowledge for the destruction of human
life, where it should be used only for its preservation
(Albert). If abortion was not intended or was a result of
a mistake, no crime is committed.
As to PHARMACISTS, the elements are:
1. That the offender is a pharmacist;
2. That there is no proper prescription from a
physician; and
3. That the offender dispenses any abortive.
This crime is consummated by dispensing an abortive
without proper prescription from a physician. It is not
necessary that the abortive was actually used (REYES,
Book Two, supra at 529).
It is immaterial
abortive would
shall be liable
abortion should
(Id.).

that the pharmacist knows that the


be used for abortion. Otherwise, he
as an accomplice in the crime of
abortion result from the use thereof

If abortives were taken, when in fact the woman


is not really pregnant, an impossible crime is
committed (REGALADO, supra at 578).
Art. 262. Mutilation. The penalty of reclusion
temporal to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon
any person who shall intentionally mutilate another by
depriving him, either totally or partially, or some
essential organ of reproduction.
Any other intentional mutilation shall be punished by
prision mayor in its medium and maximum periods.

Two Kinds:
1. By intentionally mutilating another by depriving
him, either totally or partially, of some essential organ
for reproduction (castration).
Elements:
a. That there be castration, that is, mutilation of
organs necessary for generation, such as penis
or ovarium; and
b. That the mutilation is caused purposely and
deliberately, that is, to deprive the offended
party of some essential organ for reproduction.
Note: Intentionally depriving the victim of the
reproductive organ does not necessarily involve the
cutting off of the organ or any part thereof. It suffices
that it is rendered useless.
2. By intentionally making other mutilation, that is, by
lopping or clipping off any part of the body of the

offended party, other than the essential organ for


reproduction, to deprive him of that part of the body
(mayhem).
The law looks not only to the result but also to the
intention or purpose of the act. Mutilation is always
intentional.
The intention of the offender to deprive the victim of
the body part whether by castration or mayhem is
essential and must thus exist in either case.

Physical
Injuries

Mutilation

NO special
There is a special
intention
intention to clip
to clip off some off some part of Cruelty, as
understood
part of the
the body so as to
in
Art 14 (21),
body so as to
deprive him of
is
inherent in
deprive the
such part.
offended party
mutilation
of such part.
and, in fact,
that is the only felony where the said circumstance is
an integral part and is absorbed therein. If the victim
dies, the crime is murder qualified by cruelty, but the
offender may still claim and prove that he had no
intention to commit so grave a wrong (REGALADO,
supra at 583).

Art. 263. Serious physical injuries. Any person


who shall wound, beat, or assault another, shall be

guilty of the crime of serious physical injuries and shall


suffer:
1. The penalty of prision mayor, if in consequence of
the physical injuries inflicted, the injured person shall
become insane, imbecile, impotent, or blind;
2. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium
and maximum periods, if in consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted, the person injured shall have
lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell,
or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a
leg or shall have lost the use of any such member, or
shall have become incapacitated for the work in which
he was therefor habitually engaged;
3. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum
and medium periods, if in consequence of the physical
injuries inflicted, the person injured shall have become
deformed, or shall have lost any other part of his body,
or shall have lost the use thereof, or shall have been ill
or incapacitated for the performance of the work in
which he as habitually engaged for a period of more
than ninety days;
4. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period
to prision correccional in its minimum period, if the
physical injuries inflicted shall have caused the illness
or incapacity for labor of the injured person for more
than thirty days.chanrobles virtual law library
If the offense shall have been committed against any
of the persons enumerated in Article 246, or with
attendance of any of the circumstances mentioned in
Article 248, the case covered by subdivision number 1
of this Article shall be punished by reclusion temporal

in its medium and maximum periods; the case covered


by subdivision number 2 by prision correccional in its
maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum
period; the case covered by subdivision number 3 by
prision correccional in its medium and maximum
periods; and the case covered by subdivision number 4
by prision correccional in its minimum and medium
periods.
The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall not be
applicable to a parent who shall inflict physical injuries
upon his child by excessive chastisement.

Ways of Committing:
1. By wounding;
2. By beating;
3. By assaulting; or
4. By administering injurious substance.
Serious Physical Injuries
1. When the injured person becomes insane, imbecile,
impotent or blind in consequence of the physical
injuries inflicted;
Insanity - It means loss of reason or will; failure to
determine right from wrong; failure to perceive things
as they are.
Impotence - It means inability to copulate. Blindness
must be complete; it must be of both eyes.
2. When the injured person

a. Loses the use of speech or the power to hear or to


smell, or loses an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg;
b. Loses the use of any such member; or
c. Becomes incapacitated for the work in which he was
theretofore habitually engaged, in consequence of the
physical injuries inflicted; Loss of power to hear must
be of both ears; if one ear only, such injury falls under
par. 3 (People v. Hernandez, G.R. No. L-4213,
November 28, 1953).
Loss of use of hand or incapacity for usual work must
be permanent (People v. Reli, C.A., 53 O.G. 5695).
3. When the person injured
a. Becomes deformed;
Requisites of deformity:
i. Physical ugliness;
ii. Permanent and definite abnormality; and
iii.Conspicuous and visible.
The injury to cause deformity is one that cannot be
replaced by nature (People v. Balubar, G.R. No. 40940,
October 9, 1934).
A scar produced by an injury constitutes deformity
within the meaning of par. 3 of this article.
b. Loses any other member of his body;
c. Loses the use thereof; or

d. Becomes ill or incapacitated for the performance of


the work in which he was habitually engaged for more
than 90 days, in consequence of the physical injuries
inflicted; In paragraphs 2 and 3, the offended party
must have a vocation or work at the time of the injury.
4.When the injured person becomes ill or incapacitated
for labor for more than 30 days (but must not be more
than 90 days), as a result of the physical injuries
inflicted (30 days < X 90 days).
Note: It speaks of incapacity for any kind of labor.

Work - It includes studies or preparation for a


profession.
Lessening of efficiency due to injury is not
incapacity.
Hospitalization for more than 30 days may mean
either illness or incapacity for labor for more
than 30 days.
This crime is considered a formal crime since it is
punished based on the gravity of the injuries inflicted.
What is penalized in the crime of injuries is the result.
Thus, it is always consummated and cannot be
committed in the attempted or frustrated stage
(BOADO, supra at 693).
If a robbery is committed and the injured person
suffers that enumerated under numbers 3 and 4, the
crime/s committed is/are:

1. Special complex crime of robbery with serious


physical injuries if the injured person is not
responsible for the robbery.
2. Separate crimes of robbery and serious physical
injuries if the injured person is a robber.

There must be no intent to kill; otherwise, the crime


would be attempted or frustrated homicide, parricide
or murder, as the case maybe.
Serious physical injuries may be committed by reckless
imprudence or by simple imprudence or negligence
under Art. 365 in relation to Art. 263.
Where the category of the offense of serious physical
injuries depends on the period of illness or incapacity
for labor, there must be evidence of that length of that
period; otherwise, the offense shall only be slight
physical injuries (People v. Penesa, G.R. No.CA-263,
August 19, 1948).

.
Physical Injuries
The
offender
inflicts
physical
injuries.

Attempted or
Frustrated
Homicide
Attempted
homicide
may
be
committed, even
if
no
physical
injuries
are

inflicted.

Elements:
1.That the offender inflicted upon another any serious
physical injury;

Offender has no
intent to kill the
offended party.

The offender has


an
intent to kill the
offended party

2.That it was done by knowingly administering to him


any injurious substances or beverages or by taking
advantage of his weakness of mind or credulity; and
3.That he had no intent to kill.

Qualifying Circumstances:
1. Offense committed against persons enumerated in
the crime of parricide; or

It is frustrated murder if there was intent to kill, the


injurious substance to be considered as poison.

2. With the attendance of circumstance which qualifies


the crime to murder.

Administering Injurious Substance introducing into the body the substance.

However, the qualified penalties are not


applicable to parents who inflict serious physical
injuries upon their children by excessive
chastisement.

Art. 264. Administering injurious substances or


beverages. The penalties established by the next
preceding article shall be applicable in the respective
case to any person who, without intent to kill, shall
inflict upon another any serious, physical injury, by
knowingly administering to him any injurious
substance or beverages or by taking advantage of his
weakness of mind or credulity.

It

means

If the accused did not know of the injurious nature of


the substances he administered, he shall not be liable
under this Article.
Art. 264 does not apply when the physical injuries
resulted to less serious or light, as they will be treated
under Art. 265 or 266, as the case may be

Art. 265. Less serious physical injuries. Any


person who shall inflict upon another physical injuries
not described in the preceding articles, but which shall
incapacitate the offended party for labor for ten days
or more, or shall require medical assistance for the

same period, shall be guilty of less serious physical


injuries and shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor.

a. There is manifest intent to insult or offend the


injured person; or

Whenever less serious physical injuries shall have


been inflicted with the manifest intent to kill or offend
the injured person, or under circumstances adding
ignominy to the offense in addition to the penalty of
arresto mayor, a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall be
imposed.

b. There are circumstances adding ignominy to the


offense; and

Any less serious physical injuries inflicted upon the


offender's parents, ascendants, guardians, curators,
teachers, or persons of rank, or persons in authority,
shall be punished by prision correccional in its
minimum and medium periods, provided that, in the
case of persons in authority, the deed does not
constitute the crime of assault upon such person.

a. The offenders parent, ascendant, guardian, curator


or teacher; or

Elements:
1. The offended party is incapacitated for labor for 10
days or more but not more than 30 days, or needs
medical attendance for the same period (10 days X
30 days); and
2. The physical injuries must not be those described in
the preceding articles.

Qualified Less Serious Physical Injuries:


1. A fine not exceeding P500, in addition to arresto
mayor, shall be imposed for less serious physical
injuries when:

2. A higher penalty is imposed when the victim is


either:

b. Persons of rank or persons in authority provided the


crime is not direct assault.

The law includes two (2) subdivisions, to wit:


1. The inability for work; and
2. The necessity for medical attendance

Therefore, although the wound required medical


attendance for only two (2) days, yet, if the injured
party was prevented from attending to his ordinary
labor for a period of 29 days, the physical injuries
sustained are denominated as less serious.
There must be proof as to the period of the required
medical attendance. In the absence of proof, the
offense committed is only slight physical injuries
(People v. Penesa, G.R. No.CA-263, August 19, 1948).

Art.
266.
Slight
physical
injuries
and
maltreatment. The crime of slight physical injuries
shall be punished:
1. By arresto menor when the offender has inflicted
physical injuries which shall incapacitate the offended
party for labor from one to nine days, or shall require
medical attendance during the same period.
2. By arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 20 pesos
and censure when the offender has caused physical
injuries which do not prevent the offended party from
engaging in his habitual work nor require medical
assistance.
3. By arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not
exceeding 50 pesos when the offender shall ill-treat
another by deed without causing any injury.

Kinds:
1. Physical injuries which incapacitated the offended
party for labor from one (1) to nine (9) days, or
required medical attendance during the same period;
2. Physical injuries which did not prevent the offended
party from engaging in his habitual work or which did
not require medical attendance; and

3. Ill-treatment of another by deed without causing any


injury.
Example: Any physical violence which does not
produce injury, such as slapping the face of the
offended party, without causing a dishonor.
When there is no evidence of actual injury, it is only
slight physical injuries (People v. Amarao, et. al., 182
C.A. 36 O.G. 3462).
Supervening event converting the crime into serious
physical injuries after the filing of the information for
slight physical injuries can still be the subject of
amendment or of a new charge (People v. Manolong,
G.R. No. L-2288, March 30, 1950).
If physical injuries were inflicted with an intent to insult
or humiliate the injured person, the intent to insult or
humiliate shall be considered:
1. An aggravating circumstance of ignominy in case of
serious physical injuries;
2. In increasing the penalty and qualifying the crime in
case of less serious physical injuries; or
3. Separate crime of slander by deed in case of slight
physical injuries