Page:of 32

Automatic Zoom
1

CRIMINAL LAW
BOOK 1 (ARTICLES 1
-
99, RPC)
FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
MALA IN SE AND MALA PROHIBITA
PADILLA v. DIZON
(158 SCRA 127)
The respondent
-
judge has shown gross ignorance of
the law in holding that to convict the accused for
violation of Central
Bank Circular No. 960 i.e.,
smuggling of foreign
currency out of the country, the
prosecution must establish that the accused had the
criminal intent to violate the law. The respondent ought
to know that proof of malice or deliberate intent (mens
rea) is n
ot essential in offenses punished by special
laws, which are mala prohibita.
IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES
INTOD ET. AL. v CA
(215 SCRA 52)
G.R. No. 103119
Intod fired at Palangpangan's room, although in reality,
the latter was not present in his room; thus, Intod
failed
to kill him. The factual situation in the case at bar
presents an inherent impossibility of accomplishing the
crime. Under Article 4, paragraph 2 of the Revised
Penal Code, such is sufficient to make the act an
impossible crime
.
Legal
impossibility occurs where the intended acts
even if completed, would not amount to a crime.
PEOPLE v DOMASIAN
(219 SCRA 245)
The accused illegally detained a child and sent a ransom
note to the latter's parents, but the child was rescued even
before the
ransom note was received. The act cannot be
considered an impossible crime because there was no
inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or the
employment of inadequate or ineffective means, and the
delivery of the ransom note after the rescue of the
victim
did not extinguish the offense, which had already been
consummated when the accused deprived the child of his
liberty.
STAGES OF EXECUTION
PEOPLE v LAMAHANG
(91 Phil 703)
The accused was caught in the act of making an opening
with an iron bar on the wall of a store, and succeeded in
breaking one board and in unfastening another from the
wall. The crime committed was not attempted robbery but
only attempted trespass to dwell
ing, since based on the
facts established, his intention was to enter by means of
force into the said store against the will of its owner.
PEOPLE v PANCHO
(
416 SCRA 506
)
November 27, 2003
G.R. 136592
-
93
Under Art. 6
,
in relation to Art. 335
,
of the Re
vised Penal
Code, rape is attempted when the offender commences
the commission of rape directly by overt acts, but does
not perform all the acts of execution which should
produce the crime of rape by reason of some cause or
accident other than his own spon
taneous desistance.
There is no attempted rape in this case because the
accused just dragged the victim and held her feet, which
are not indicative of an intent or attempt to rape the
victim.
PEOPLE v ORANDE
(415 SCRA 699)
November 12, 2003
G.R. No.
141724
The trial court convicted the accused of frustrated rape
due to the fact that the latter did not succeed in inserting
his penis in the victim’s vagina. There is no such crime as
frustrated rape. Instead, the accused is guilty of
consummated rape since perf
ect penetration is not
essential for the consummation of rape.
VALENZUELA v PEOPLE
(525 SCRA 306)
The accused argued that he should only be convicted of
frustrated theft for taking cartons of detergent from the
supermarket since he was immediately appre
hended by
the security guard. Thus, was not able to freely dispose
of the said stolen articles. Theft cannot have a frustrated
stage and the accused is guilty of consummated theft
since he has obtained possession over the stolen item
and the presumed inabi
lity of the offender to freely
dispose of the stolen property does not negate the fact
that the owners have already been deprived of their right
to possession upon the completion of the taking.
Unlawful
taking is deemed complete from the moment the offende
r
ga
ins possession of the thing. The ability of the offender
to freely dispose of the property stolen is not a
constitutive element of the crime of theft.
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL
PEOPLE v RECONES, ET. AL.
(310 SCRA 809)
July 20, 1999
G. R. No. 129535
Three (3) accused were charged with murder. The first
one hit the victim repeatedly with a stone marker, the
second one pummeled the victim with his fists while the
third only watched and acted as lookout in case others
will try to intervene. All of them,
including the lookout, are
guilty of murder and are accountable for the death of the
victim on the principle that the act of one is the act of all.
Proof of a previous agreement to commit a felony is not
necessary to establish conspiracy, it being sufficie
nt that
the acts of the accused, before, during, and after the
commission of the felony, demonstrate its existence.
6
U.S. V. HICKS
(14 PHIL 217)
T
he acc
used and the victim illicitly lived together
for 5
years. A
fter they separated, the accused killed the victim
for living with another man. No mitigating circumstance
was considered in his favor, not even the loss of reason
and self
-
control produced by jeal
ousy as alleged by the
defense, inasmuch as the only causes which mitigate the
criminal responsibility for the loss of self
-
control are
those
which
ori
ginate from legitimate feelings and
not those
which arise from vicious, unworthy, and immoral
passions.
U.S. V. DELA CRUZ
March 29, 1912
G.R. N
o
.L
-
7094
The accused, in the heat of passion, killed his former
lover upon discovering her
in flagrante
in carnal
communication with a mutual acquaintance. The accused
was entitled to the mitigating circumstance because in
this case, the impulse upon which defendant acted and
which naturally "produced passion and obfuscation" was
not that the woman declined
to
have illicit relations with
him
but the sudden revelation that she was untrue to him,
and his discovery of her in flagrante in the arms of
another.
PEOPLE v RABAO
(
67 PHIL 255
)
April 10, 1939
G.R. N
o
.L
-
46530
The accused and his wife had a heated
argument
because the wife wanted
to give their sick child a bath
which was against
the wishes of the accused. The C
ourt
considered mitigating circumstance in his favor since,
although he transgressed the law by an unjust attack on
his wife, the accused did
not really have the intention of
committing so grave a crime as parricide, and
the
quarrel
that led to the aggression had its origin from the natural
and justifiable desire of the accused, as a father, to
prevent his child, which was then ill, from being
given a
bath.
PEOPLE v DAWATON
(389 SCRA 277)
September 17, 2002
G.R. No
. 146247
In trying to avail of the mitigating circumstance of
voluntary surrender, the accused argues that he was not
arrested but "fetched" as he voluntarily went with the
policemen when they came for him. That he did not try to
escape or resist arrest after he wa
s taken into custody by
the authorities did not amount to voluntary surrender and
it is also settled that voluntary surrender cannot be
appreciated where the evidence adduced shows that it
was the authorities who came looking for the accused.
PEOPLE v VI
ERNES
(372 SCRA 231)
December 13, 2001
G.R. No
. 136733
Going to the police station “to clear his name” does not
show any intent of the accused to surrender
unconditionally to the authorities. The act of surrender
must
be
spontaneous,
accompanied
by
an
ack
nowledgment of guilt, or an intention to save the
authorities the trouble and the expense that search and
capture would require.
PEOPLE v ABOLIDOR
(423 SCRA 260)
February 18, 2004
G.R. No
. 147231
The accused surrendered to the authorities more than
one year
after the incident
in order to disclaim
responsibility for the killing of the victim. The Court did
not consider the mitigating circumstance of voluntary
surrender because: (1)
the facts of the
case do not show
repentance
or acknowledgment of the crime nor intention
to save the government the trouble and expense
necessarily incurred in his search and capture; and (2) at
the time of his surrender, there was a pending warrant of
arrest against him.
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
PEOPLE v CALISO
(58 PHIL 283)
July 1, 1933
G.R. N
o
.L
-
37271
In t
he commission of the crime
,
the aggravating
circumstance of grave abuse of confidence was present
since the appellant was the domestic servant of the
family and was sometimes the deceased child's "amah".
The circumstance
that
the crime ha
d
been committed in
the
dwelling of the offen
ded party which was
considered
by the lower court as a
nother aggravating circumstance
should be disregarded as both the victim and the
appellant were living in the same house.
PEOPLE v LORA
(113 SCRA 366)
March 30, 1982
G.R. No
.L
-
49430
The accused was charged for the crime of serious illegal
detention with murder for illegally detaining a 3
-
year old
child, and attacking the same, which resulted to the
child's death. There are three aggravating circumstances
in this case, namely: (1) lack
of respect due to the tender
age of the victim; (2) cruelty, for gagging the victim's
mouth with stockings thereby causing slow suffocation;
and (3) abuse of confidence since the main duty of the
accused in the household was to take care of the minor
chil
d.
PEOPLE v LAGUARDIA
(148 SCRA 133)
February 27, 1987
G.R. N
o
.L
-
63243
The following aggravating circumstances were present in
this case of robbery with homicide: (1) despoblado or
uninhabited place since evidence shows that the accused
lay in wait for
the truck being driven by the victim at an
isolated portion of the highway, choosing that particular
spot where they could commit the crime without
disturbance or discovery and with easy opportunity for
escape; and (2) use of motor vehicles because the
32
to reflect on the consequences of her instant decision to
swerve her car to the light without stepping on her
brakes.
PEOPLE v BUAN
(22 SCRA 1383)
The exoneration of Jose Buan, by the Just
ice of the
Peace (now Municipal
Court
)
of Guiguinto, Bulacan, of
the charge of slight physical injuries through reckless
imprudence, prevents his being prosecuted for serious
physical injuries through reckless imprudence in the
Court of First Instance of the province, where both
charges are de
rived from the consequences of one and
the same vehicular accident, because the second
accusation places the appellant in second jeopardy for
the same offense.