ARTICLE 223 - CONNIVING WITH OR CONSENTING TO EVASION

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he had in his custody or charge, a prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment;
3. That such prisoner escaped from his custody; and
4. That he was in connivance with the prisoner in the latters escape.

*Connivance with the prisoner (agreement between the prisoner and the public officer) in his escape is an indispensable element of
the offense.

Classes of prisoners involved:

1. If the fugitive has been sentenced by final judgment to any penalty.
2. If the fugitive is held only as detention prisoner for any crime or violation of law or municipal ordinance.

*A detention prisoner is a person in legal custody, arrested for, and charged with, some crime or public offense.
*Leniency, laxity and release of detention prisoner who could not be delivered to the judicial authority within the time fixed by law,
are not considered infidelity in the custody of prisoners.
*There is real and actual evasion of service of sentence when the custodian permits the prisoner to obtain a relaxation of his
imprisonment and to escape the punishment of being deprived of his liberty, thus making the penalty ineffectual, although the
convict may not have fled.

ARTICLE 224 - EVASION THROUGH NEGLIGENCE

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he is charged with the conveyance or custody of a prisoner, either detention prisoner or prisoner by final judgment; and
3. That such prisoner escapes through his negligence.

*Not every negligence or distraction of a guard is penalized. It is only that positive carelessness that is short of deliberate non-
performance of his duties as guard that is the gravamen of the crime of infidelity under Art. 224.
*The fact that the public officer recaptured the prisoner who had escaped from his custody does not afford complete exculpation. A
policeman who, assigned to guard a prisoner, falls asleep, with the result that the prisoner escapes, is guilty of negligence in the
custody of a prisoner.

Liability of escaping prisoner:

1. If the fugitive is serving sentence by reason of final judgment, he is liable for evasion of the service of sentence under Art.
157.
2. If the fugitive is only a detention prisoner, he does not incur criminal liability.

*Any public officer who has direct custody of a detained person under the provisions of this Act and who, by deliberate act,
misconduct or inexcusable negligence causes or allows the escape of such detained person shall be guilty of an offense (Human
Security Act of 2007, R.A. 9372, Section 44).
ARTICLE 225 - ESCAPE OF PRISONER UNDER THE CUSTODY OF A PERSON NOT A PUBLIC OFFICER
Elements:
1. That the offender is a private person;
2. That the conveyance or custody of a prisoner or person under arrest is confided to him;
3. That the prisoner or person under arrest escapes; and
4. That the offender consents to the escape of the prisoner or person under arrest, or that the escape takes place through his
negligence.

*Art. 225 is NOT applicable if a private person was the one who made the arrest and he consented to the escape of the person he
arrested.

ARTICLE 226 - REMOVAL, CONCEALMENT, OR DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

Elements:
1. That the offender be a public officer;
*Only public officers who have been officially entrusted with the documents or papers can be held liable under Article 226. If the
offender is a private individual, estafa is committed if there is damage caused. If there is no damage, the crime is malicious
mischief.

2. That he removes, conceals or destroys documents or papers; The removal must be for illicit purpose when the intention of the
offender is
a. to tamper with it, or
b. to profit by it, or
c. to commit an act constituting a breach of trust in the official care thereof.
*Papers include checks, promissory notes, and paper money.

3. That the said documents or papers should have been entrusted to such public officer by reason of his office; and
4. That damage, whether serious or not, to a third party or to the public interest should have been caused.

*The document must be complete and one by which a right can be established or an obligation could be extinguished.
*The removal must be for an illicit purpose.
*The crime of removal of public document in breach of official trust is consummated upon its removal or secreting away from its
usual place in the office and after the offender had gone out and locked the door, it being immaterial whether he has or has not
actually accomplished the illicit purpose for which he removed said document.
*Damage in this article may consist in mere alarm to the public or in the alienation of its confidence in any branch of the
government service.
ARTICLE 227 - OFFICER BREAKING SEAL
Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he is charged with the custody of papers or property;
3. That these papers or property are sealed by proper authority; and
4. That he breaks the seals or permits them to be broken.
5. Damage or intent to damage is not necessary.

ARTICLE 228 - OPENING OF CLOSED DOCUMENTS

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That any closed papers, documents, or objects are entrusted to his custody;
3. That he opens or permits to be opened said closed papers, documents, or objects; and
4. That he does not have the proper authority.

*The closed document must be entrusted to the custody of the accused by reason of his office.
*If in opening closed papers or objects, the public officer broke the seal, the offense would be breaking seal under Art. 227 and not
the crime of opening a closed document, because the offender must be a public officer not included in the preceding article.
*Damage or intent to cause damage is NOT an element of this offense.
ARTICLE 229 - REVELATION OF SECRETS BY AN OFFICER
Acts punished:
1. By revealing any secret known to the offending public officer by reason of his official capacity.
Elements of No. 1:
a. That the offender is a public officer; That he knows of a secret by reason of his official capacity;
b. That he reveals such secret without authority or justifiable reasons; and
c. That damage, great or small, be caused to public interest.

*Sec 3 (k) of RA 3019 is violated if there is no damage caused in revealing the secret.
*This article punishes minor official betrayals, infidelities of little consequence, affecting usually the administration of justice,
executive or official duties, or the general interest of the public order.
*Secrets must affect public interest, if not, the revelation would constitute no crime at all.

2. By delivering wrongfully papers or copies of papers of which he may have charge and which should not be published.
Elements of No. 2:
a. That the offender is a public officer;
b. That he has charge of papers;
c. That those papers should not be published;
d. That he delivers those papers or copies thereof to a third person;
e. That the delivery is wrongful; and
f. That damage be caused to public interest

*Charge Means control or custody. If the public officer is merely entrusted with the papers but not with the custody, he is not liable
under this provision.
*Damage is an element of the offenses defined in Art. 229. A higher penalty is provided if serious damage is caused otherwise a
lower penalty is imposed. This indicates that the lesser penalty refers to causing damage which is not serious.

Revelation of Secrets by an Officer

The papers contain secrets and therefore should not be published, and the public officer having charge thereof removes and
delivers them wrongfully to a third person.
Infidelity in the Custody of Document/Papers by Removing the Same
The papers do not contain secrets but their removal is for an illicit purpose.
ARTICLE 230 - PUBLIC OFFICER REVEALING SECRETS OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUAL
Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he knows of the secrets of a private individual by reason of his office; and
3. That he reveals such secrets without authority or justifiable reason.

* If the offender is a lawyer, the crime under Art. 209 is committed.

*If the offender is a private individual, the crime under Art. 290 or 291 is committed.
*Revelation to one person is necessary and sufficient, for public revelation is not required.
*It is NOT necessary that damage is suffered by the private individual. The reason for this provision is to uphold faith and trust in
public service.

ARTICLE 231 - OPEN DISOBEDIENCE

Elements:
1. That the offender is a judicial or executive officer;
2. That there is a judgment, decision or order of a superior authority;
3. That such judgment, decision or order was made within the scope of the jurisdiction of the superior authority and issued with
all legal formalities; and
4. That the offender without any legal justification openly refuses to execute said judgment, decision or order, which he is duty
bound to obey.

ARTICLE 232 - DISOBEDIENCE TO ORDER OF SUPERIOR OFFICER WHEN SAID ORDER WAS SUSPENDED BY INFERIOR OFFICER
Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That an order is issued by his superior for execution;
3. That he has for any reason suspended the execution of such order;
4. That his superior disapproves the suspension of the execution of the order; and
5. That the offender disobeys his superior despite the disapproval of the suspension.

*This article does NOT apply if the order of the superior is illegal.

ARTICLE 233 - REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That a competent authority demands from the offender that he lend his cooperation towards the administration of justice or
other public service; and
3. That the offender fails to do so maliciously.

*There must be damage to the public interest or to a third party.

* If the offender is a private individual, he may be held liable for contempt.
ARTICLE 234 - REFUSAL TO DISCHARGE ELECTIVE OFFICE
Elements:
1. That the offender is elected by popular election to a public office;
2. That he refuses to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of said office; and
3. That there is no legal motive for such refusal to be sworn in or to discharge the duties of said office.

ARTICLE 235 - MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer or employee;
2. That he has under his charge a prisoner convicted by final judgment or a detention prisoner;
3. That he maltreats such prisoner in either of the following manners:
a. By overdoing himself in the correction or handling of a prisoner or detention prisoner under his charge either:
i. by the imposition of punishments not authorized by the regulations; or
ii. by inflicting such punishments (those authorized) in a cruel and humiliating manner; or
b. By maltreating such prisoner to extort a confession or to obtain some information from the prisoner.

*The public officer or employee must have actual charge of the prisoner.
*To be a detention prisoner, the person arrested must be placed in jail even for a short while.
*Offender may also be held liable for physical injuries or damage caused. There is no complex crime of maltreatment of prisoners
with serious or less serious physical injuries, as defined in Art. 48.

ARTICLE 236 - ANTICIPATION OF DUTIES OF A PUBLIC OFFICE

Elements:
1. That the offender is entitled to hold a public office or employment, either by election or appointment;
2. That the law requires that he should first be sworn in and/or should first give a bond;
3. That he assumes the performance of the duties and powers of such office; and
4. That he has not taken his oath of office and/or given the bond required by law.

ARTICLE 237 - PROLONGING PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES AND POWERS

Elements:
1. That the offender is holding a public office;
2. That the period provided by law, regulations or special provisions for holding such office, has already expired; and
3. That he continues to exercise the duties and powers of such office.

Officers contemplated
A public officer who has been suspended, separated, declared overage, or dismissed cannot continue to perform the duties of his
office.
ARTICLE 238 - ABANDONMENT OF OFFICE
Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he formally resigns from his position; There must be written or formal resignation
3. That his resignation has not yet been accepted; and
4. That he abandons his office to the detriment of the public service.

Qualifying circumstance
When the abandonment of the office has for its purpose to evade the discharge of the duties of preventing, prosecuting or
punishing any of the crimes falling within Title 1 and Chapter 1 Title 3 of Book 2 of the RPC.

Abandonment of Office (Art. 238)

Committed by any public officer. The public officer abandons his office to evade the discharge of his duty.
Negligence and Tolerance in Prosecution of Offenses (Art. 208)
Committed only by public officers who have the duty to institute prosecution for the punishment of violations of the law. The
public officer does not abandon his office but he fails to prosecute an offense by dereliction of duty or by malicious tolerance of the
commission of offenses.

ARTICLE 239 - USURPATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS

Elements:
1. That the offender is an executive or judicial officer;
2. That he:
a. Makes general rules or regulations beyond the scope of his authority; or
b. Attempts to repeal a law; or
c. Suspends the execution thereof.

ARTICLE 240 - USURPATION OF EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS

Elements:
1. That the offender is a judge;
2. That he:
a. Assumes a power pertaining to the executive authorities;
b. Obstructs the executive authorities in the lawful exercise of their powers.

*Legislative officers are not liable for usurpation of powers.

ARTICLE 241 - USURPATION OF JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS
Elements:
1. That the offender is an officer of the executive branch of the Government;
2. That he:
a. Assumes judicial powers; or
b. Obstructs the execution of any order or decision rendered by any judge within his jurisdiction.

ARTICLE 242 - DISOBEYING REQUEST FOR DISQUALIFICATION

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That a proceeding is pending before such public officer;
3. That there is a question brought before the proper authority regarding his jurisdiction, which is not yet decided;
4. That he has been lawfully required to refrain from continuing the proceeding; and
5. That he continues the proceeding.

ARTICLE 243 - ORDERS OR REQUESTS BY EXECUTIVE OFFICERS TO ANY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY

Elements:
1. That the offender is an executive officer;
2. That he addresses any order or suggestion to any judicial authority; and
3. That the order or suggestion relates to any case or business coming within the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of justice.

ARTICLE 244 - UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENTS

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he nominates or appoints a person to a public office;
3. That such person lacks the legal qualifications therefor; and
4. That the offender knows that his nominee or appointee lacks the qualification at the time he made the nomination or
appointment.

*The offense is committed by nominating or by appointing. Nominate is different from recommend. Recommending, knowing
that the recommendee has no qualification, is not a crime.
*There must be a law providing for the qualifications of a person to be nominated or appointed to a public office.
ARTICLE 245 - ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY PENALTIES
Ways of committing abuses against chastity:
1. By soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to a woman interested in the matters pending before the offending
officer for decision, or with respect to which he is required to submit a report to or consult with a superior officer.
2. By soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to a woman under the offenders custody.
3. By soliciting or making immoral or indecent advances to the wife, daughter, sister or relative within the same degree by
affinity of any person in the custody of the offending warden or officer.

Elements:
1. That the offender is a public officer;
2. That he solicits or makes immoral or indecent advances to a woman; and
3. That such woman must be
a. Interested in matters pending before the offender for decision, or with respect to which he is required to submit a
report to or consult with a superior officer; or
b. Under the custody of the offender who is a warden or other public officer directly charged with the care and custody
of prisoners or persons under arrest; or
c. The wife, daughter, sister or relative within the same degree by affinity of the person in the custody of the offender.

*The mother of the person in the custody of the offender is NOT included.

Solicit - Means to propose earnestly and persistently something unchaste and immoral to a woman.

*This crime is consummated by mere proposal. If the offender succeeds in committing a crime against chastity, the solicitation and
advances are considered merely as preparatory acts.
*Proof of solicitation is NOT necessary when there is sexual intercourse.
ARTICLE 246 PARRICIDE
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 other ascendant or other
descendant, or the legitimate spouse, of the accused.

Cases of parricide when the penalty shall NOT be reclusion perpetua to death:
1. Parricide through negligence (Art. 365).
2. Parricide by mistake (Art. 249).
3. Parricide under exceptional circumstances (Art. 247).

*The child should not be less than 3 days old; otherwise the crime is infanticide. (Art. 255)
*Relationship of the offender with the victim is the essential element of the crime. Hence:
a. If a person wanted to kill a stranger but by mistake killed his own father, he will be held liable for parricide
BUT Art. 49 will apply as regards the proper penalty to be imposed, that is, the penalty for the lesser offense
in its maximum period.
b. A stranger who cooperates and takes part in the commission of the crime of parricide is not guilty of
parricide but only of homicide or murder, as the case may be. The key element in parricide is the relationship
of the offender with the victim.
c. The relationship between the offender and the victim must be alleged.

*The law does NOT require knowledge of relationship, thus, a person who killed another not knowing that the latter was his son will
still be held guilty of parricide.
*The fact that the husband only intended to maltreat his wife does not exempt him from liability for resulting and more serious
crime committed.
*Legitimacy need NOT be alleged when the accused killed his (1)father, (2) mother or (3) child.
*However with respect to the other ascendant, descendant or spouse, the relationship MUST be legitimate.
*An adopted child is considered as a legitimate child BUT since the relationship is exclusive between the adopter and the adopted
child, killing the parents of the adopter is not considered parricide of other (legitimate) ascendants.

*ARTICLE 247 DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES

Elements:
1. That a legally married person or a parent surprises his spouse or his daughter, the latter under 18 years of age and living with
him, in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person;
2. That he or she kills any or both of them, or inflicts upon any or both of them any serious physical injury, in the act or
immediately thereafter; and
3. That he has not promoted or facilitated the prostitution of his wife or daughter, or that he or she has not consented to the
infidelity of the other spouse.

*The requisites of Art. 247 must be established by the evidence of the defense and accused cannot enter into a conditional plea of
guilty and be sentenced with destierro since the prosecution will have to charge the defendant with parricide and/or homicide, in
case death results, or of serious physical injuries in other cases.
*For Art. 247 to apply, the offender must prove that he actually surprised his wife and (her paramour) in flagrante delicto, and that
he killed the man during or immediately thereafter. Evidence of the victims promiscuity, is inconsequential to the killing.

Surprise - To come upon suddenly and unexpectedly.

*Sexual intercourse does NOT include preparatory acts.

Immediately thereafter - The discovery, the escape, the pursuit and the killing must all form part of one continuous act.

*The accused must be a legally married person and the word spouse shall include wife.
*The parent need NOT be legitimate.
*No liability for less serious or slight physical injuries suffered by third persons during the commission of the act under this article
*Justification for Art. 247. The law considers the spouse or parent as acting in a justified burst of passion.

ARTICLE 248 - MURDER

Murder - Unlawful killing of any person which is not parricide or infanticide, provided that any of the following circumstances is
present:
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;
2. In consideration of a price, reward or promise;
3. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment or assault upon a railroad, 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 calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive
cyclone, epidemic, or any other public calamity;
5. With evident premeditation; or
6. With cruelty, by deliberately and inhumanly augmenting the suffering of the victim, or outraging or scoffing at his person or
corpse (As amended by RA No. 7659).
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.
2. 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.
3. That when the other circumstances are absorbed or included in one qualifying circumstance, they cannot be considered as
generic aggravating.
4. That any of the qualifying circumstances enumerated in Art. 248 must be alleged in the information.

Outraging (physical act) - Means to commit an extremely vicious or deeply insulting act.
Scoffing (verbal act) - 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 .
*If homicide or murder is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm, such use of an unlicensed firearm shall be considered as
an aggravating circumstance. (R.A. No. 8294, Sec. 1)
*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.
ARTICLE 249 - HOMICIDE
Homicide - The unlawful killing of any person, which is NOT parricide, murder or infanticide. Intent to kill is conclusively presumed
when death results; evidence of intent to kill is important only in attempted or frustrated homicide. Intent to kill is usually shown
by the kind of weapon used and part of the body wounded. Elements: 1. That a person was killed; 2. That the accused killed him
without any justifying circumstance; 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. The use of an unlicensed
firearm is an aggravating circumstance in homicide and is NOT to be considered as a separate offense (RA No. 8294, Sec. 1).
Corpus Delicti Actual commission of the crime charged and not the body of the person killed. Accidental Homicide 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. 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. 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. 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 vs. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 152176, October 1, 2003). There is no such crime as
frustrated homicide through imprudence. ARTICLE 250 PENALTY FOR FRUSTRATED PARRICIDE, MURDER, OR HOMICIDE Courts
may impose a penalty two degrees lower for frustrated parricide, murder or homicide. Courts may impose a penalty three degrees
lower for attempted parricide, murder or homicide. This provision is permissive, NOT MANDATORY. An attempt on or conspiracy
against the life of the Chief Executive, member of his family, any member of his cabinet or members of latters family is punishable
by death (PD 1110-A). ARTICLE 251 DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY 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 coconspirators; 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. 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 vs.
Unlagada, G.R. No. 141080, September 17, 2002). In such a case, the crime committed is homicide under Art. 249. The victim
may be a participant or non-participant thereof. ARTICLE 252 PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY 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. ARTICLE 253 GIVING ASSISTANCE TO
SUICIDE Acts punished: 1. By assisting another to commit suicide, whether the suicide is consummated or not. 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 or property is hurt or damaged. 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.
Euthanasia or Mercy-Killing Is a practice of painlessly putting to death a person suffering from some incurable disease. 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. ARTICLE 254 DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS 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.
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. 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; 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.