CRIMINAL LAW II l Atty.

Carillo l Reviewer by Tanya Ibanez

CRIMES AGAINST NATIONAL SECURITY Giving aid or comfort

1. Render assistance to them as enemies
Crimes against national security 2. Directly in furtherance of the enemies’ hostile designs
1. Treason
2. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason PP v. Agoncillo
3. Misprision of treason As said articles or materials were not exclusively for war purposes,
4. Espionage their sale did not necessarily carry an intention on the part of the
vendor to adhere to the enemy.
TREASON (Article 114)
Breach of allegiance to a government, committed by a person who PP v. Perez
owes allegiance to it. Sexual and social relations with the Japanese did not directly and
materially tend to improve their war efforts or to weaken the power
“The highest of crimes known to law” of the United States.

Elements “Whatever favourable effect the defendant’s collaboration with the

1. The offender owes allegiance to the government
2. There is a war where Philippines is involved
3. The offender
(a) levies war against the government, or
(b) adheres to the enemies, giving aid or comfort
Allegiance
The obligation of fidelity and obedience which the individuals owe to
the government under which they live or to their sovereign, in
return for the protection they receive.
Allegiance may be:
1. Permanent (Filipino citizen)
2. Temporary (Resident alien)
Japanese might have in their prosecution, the war was trivial,
imperceptible, and unintentional”
Acts constituting treason
1. Furnishing the enemy with arms, troops, supplies,
information, means of transportation
2. Taking active part in mass killings of civilians by Japanese
soldiers.
3. Being a member of the Makapili where such membership
by its very nature gave the enemy aid and comfort. (PP v.
Adriano)
Common crimes
General rule: Absorbed in the crime of treason.

Treason as a war-time offense
Treason is a war crime, hence, not an all time offense. It cannot be
committed in time of peace. However, treason may be incubated
when peace reigns. Treasonable acts may actually be perpetrated
during peace, but there are no traitors until war has started. (Laurel
v. Misa)
Two ways to commit treason
1. Levies war against the government
2. Adheres to the enemies, giving aid or comfort
Exception: Acts which are unnecessary to the commission of
treason. Rapes, wanton robbery for personal gain and other forms
of cruelties (aggravating circumstances of ignominy)
Alternatives
1. Charge the offender with treason, with the other crimes as
an inherent element, or, in the proper case, an aggravating
circumstance.
2. Charge the offender with the common crimes instead of
treason.

Take Note: In both types of treason, the purpose is to deliver the Ways of proving treason
country to a foreign power. The rule for the accused to be convicted of treason on any of the
following evidence only:
(1) Levying war
To enlist troops for military service, often by force. The assembling 1. Two witnesses must testify to the same overt act
of a body of men for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable 2. The accused must confess in open court
object.
The two-witness rule
Requisites: The testimony of two witnesses is required to prove the overt act of
The levying of war requires the concurrence of two things: giving aid or comfort. It is NOT necessary to prove adherence.

1. Actual assembling of men Overt act

2. For the purpose of executing a treasonable design by
force.
(2) Adherence and giving aid or comfort
One without the other is not treason.
Adherence to the enemy
Means intent to betray, such as when a citizen intellectually or
emotionally favors the enemy and harbours sympathies or
convictions disloyal to his country’s policy or interest.
Physical activity which constitutes the rendering of aid and comfort
PP v. Apolinar Adriano
Every act, movement, deed and word of the defendant charged to
constitute treason must be supported by the testimony of two
witnesses. Each of the witnesses must testify to the whole overt act.
Or if it is inseparable, there must be two witnesses to each part of
the overt act.
CRIMINAL LAW II l Atty. Carillo l Reviewer by Tanya Ibanez

Rules: INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING MOTIVES FOR REPRISALS

1. If two witnesses testified to two different acts even if they
refer to the same allegation, the requirement is not VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY
fulfilled.
2. The testimony of the two witnesses need not be identical CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY
as long as they establish the same overt act
3. This rule is so restrictive that both testimonies must be FLIGHT TO ENEMY’S COUNTRY
credible, otherwise the accused is entitled to an acquittal.
PIRACY (Article 122)
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT TREASON (Article 115)
Hostes Humani Generis (Enemies of the human race)
Penalties
1. Conspiracy to commit treason Two modes of committing piracy
Prision mayor and a fine not exceeding P10,000 1. By attacking or seizing a vessel on the high seas or in
Philippine waters
2. Proposal to commit treason 2. By seizing in the vessel while on the high seas or in
Prision correccional and a fine not exceeding P5,000 Philippine waters the whole or part of its cargo, its
equipment or personal belongings of its complement or
Conspiracy to commit treason passengers.
When in time of war, 2 or more persons come to an agreement to
levy war against the government or to adhere to the enemies and to Elements
give them aid or comfort, and decide to commit it. 1. Vessel is on the Philippine seas or high seas
2. Offenders are not members of its complement or
Proposal to commit treason passengers
When in time of war, a person who has decided to levy war against 3. Offenders either
the government or to adhere to the enemies and to give them aid or a. Attack or seize the vessel
comfort, proposes it execution to some other persons.
b. Seize the whole or part of the cargo of said vessel, its
The two-witness rule does not apply equipment or personal belongings of its complement
Because it is a separate and distinct offense from that of treason. or passengers

MISPRISION OF TREASON (Article 116) High seas

The offender does not inform the proper authorities that there The jurisdiction of piracy unlike all other crimes has no territorial
exists a conspiracy to commit treason. limits, nor does it matter that the crime was committed within the
jurisdictional 3-mile limit of a foreign state, for those limits, though
Elements neutral to war, are not neutral to crimes. (PP v. Lol-Lo and Saraw)
1. Offender owes allegiance to the government, not being a
foreigner Piracy or Robbery
2. He has knowledge of a conspiracy to commit treason Strangers – piracy
against the government Crew of passengers – robbery
3. He conceals or does not disclose and make known as soon
as possible to the governor or fiscal of province or fiscal of Piracy (RPC) v. Piracy (PD 532)
city in which he resides.
RPC PD 532
Offender is
1. Principal in the crime of misprision of treason
2. But punished as an accessory to the crime of treason (2
Not a passenger nor a member of Any person
degrees lower than that of treason)
the complement or crew

ESPIONAGE (Article 117)

High seas or Philippines waters Philippine waters (attack or
CRIMES AGAINST THE LAW OF NATIONS seizure)

Crimes against the law of nations

1. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals Anti-Hijacking Law
2. Violation of neutrality This violation mainly consists in compelling a change in course or
3. Correspondence with hostile country destination of an aircraft.
4. Flight to enemy’s country
5. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high seas or in Qualifying circumstances
Philippine waters 1. Firing upon a pilot, crew or passenger
2. Explode or attempt to explode a bomb to destroy the
aircraft
3. Crime is accompanied by serious physical injuries or rape
CRIMINAL LAW II l Atty. Carillo l Reviewer by Tanya Ibanez
CRIMES AGAINST THE FUNDAMENTAL LAWS OF THE STATE
1. Arbitrary detention
2. Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper
judicial authorities
3. Delaying release
4. Expulsion
5. Violation of domicile
6. Search warrants maliciously obtained and abuse in the
service of those legally obtained
7. Searching domicile without witnesses
8. Prohibition, interruption, and dissolution of peaceful
meetings
9. Interruption of religious worship
10. Offending religious feelings
ARBITRARY DETENTION (Article 124)
Penalties
1. AM max – PC min (detention not exceeding 3 days)
2. PC med and max (more than 3 but not more than 15 days)
3. PM (more than 15 but not more than 6 months)
4. RT (more than 6 months)
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He detains a persons
3. Detention is without legal grounds
Public officer must be one who is
1. Vested with authority to detain (policeman)
2. Vested with authority to order detention (judge)
Take note: If the offender is a public officer not authorized to detain
or order detention – illegal detention
Detention is not limited to actual confinement
1. Confinement in an enclosure
2. Deprive one of liberty
3. Placed in confinement
4. Restraint on his person (can move in and out of person but
under surveillance)
Examples of detention without legal grounds
1. Quarrelling with barangay lieutenant’s barangay (Gellada)
2. Mere suspicion that Taruc was part of the plot to
assassinate the President (Taruc v. Carlos)
Warrantless arrest (When allowed)
Rule 113, Section 5, Revised Rules of Court
A peace officer or a private person may, without a warrant, arrest a
person
1. When in his presence, person to be arrested has
committed, actually committing, or is attempting to
commit an offense
2. When an offense has just been committed and he has
probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of
facts and circumstances that the person has committed it.
3. When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has
escaped from a penal establishment
DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS (Article 125)
Elements
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He detains another for some legal ground
3. He fails to deliver the detained person to the proper
judicial authorities within:
a. 12 hours – crimes punishable by light penalties
b. 18 hours – correctional penalties
c. 36 hours – afflictive or capital penalties
Failure to deliver to the proper judicial authorities
This does not mean the physical delivery of the person but rather
the filing of an information or complaint with the corresponding
court or judge, who has the jurisdiction to issue a warrant of arrest
or an order of commitment of the prisoner.
The period does not include Sundays and official holidays
An election day or a special holiday should not be included in the
computation of the period prescribed by law for the filing of
information in the instances of warrantless arrests.(Soria v. Desierto)
SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED (Article 129)
Two acts punished
1. Obtaining a warrant maliciously
2. Exceeding authority or use of unnecessary force in the
implementation of a warrant lawfully obtained
Elements of procuring a search warrant without just cause
1. Offender is a public officer or employee
2. He procures a search warrant
3. There is no just cause
Uy Kheytin v. Villareal
The warrant is not allowed for the purpose of obtaining evidence of
an intended crime, but only after lawful evidence of an offense
actually committed.
OFFENDING RELIGIOUS FEELINGS (Article 133)
Elements
1. The acts complained of were performed in
a. A place devoted to religious worship
b. During the celebration of any religious ceremony
2. The acts must be notoriously offensive to the feelings of
the faithful
Acts notoriously offensive
There must be a deliberate intent to hurt the feelings of the faithful.
CRIMES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER
REBELLION OR INSURRECTION (Article 134)
Elements:
1. Public uprising by taking up arms against the government
2. The purpose is
a. To remove from the allegiance to said government or
its laws
- Territory of the Philippines or any part thereof
- Anybody of land, naval or other armed forces
CRIMINAL LAW II l Atty. Carillo l Reviewer by Tanya Ibanez
b. To deprive the Chief Executive or Congress, any of its
powers or prerogatives
Purpose must be clear
Evidence that persons who burned the radio facilities shouted
“Mabuhay and NPA” DOES NOT furnish logical conclusion that they
are member of the NPA or that their act was an act of rebellion or
insurrection.
Political motivation must be shown
The political motivation must be shown in order to justify the finding
that the crime committed is rebellion. Hence, just because it is
alleged that the appellants were members of the MILF does NOT
necessarily mean that the crime of kidnapping was committed in
furtherance of a rebellion. (PP v. Abdilla Linandang)
Rebellion as a continuing crime
It is anchored on an ideological base which compels the repetition of
the same acts of lawlessness and violence until the overriding
objective of overthrowing organized government is attained.
Unlike common offenses such as adultery, murder, arson which
generally end upon their commission.
Warrantless arrest in rebellion
There is still a need to comply with the constitutional requirements
of a valid warrantless arrest.
Hence, mere suspicion of being a Communist Party member or a
subversive is absolutely NOT a ground for the arrest without a
warrant of the suspect.
Subversion Act (Act No. 1700)
Penalizes membership in any organization or association committed
to subvert the Government. (Repealed by RA 7636)
No complex crimes in rebellion
Hernandez ruling
There is no complex crime of rebellion with murder and other
common crimes. This rule should ONLY apply to common crimes
committed in pursuance or on the occasion of rebellion.
Therefore, if the crime is done for private purposes or profit, without
any political motivation, the crime should be separately punished.
On the occasion of a rebellion
An unintended effect of an activity that constitutes rebellion
Example: Committing a common crime to escape capture or arrest
COUP D’ETAT (Article 134-A)
Crime of mutiny under the Articles of war.
The attack is on any military camp, or installation, communication
networks, public utilities or other facilities needed for the continued
exercise and possession of power.
Elements
1. Offender is a person belonging to the military or police or
holding any public office or employment
2. It is committed by means of a swift attack accompanied by
violence, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth
3. The attack is directed against duly constituted authorities,
military camp/installation, communication network, public
utilities, or facilities needed for the exercise and continued
possession of power
4. Purpose of the attack is to seize or diminish state power.
PENALTY FOR REBELLION, INSURRECTION OR COUP D’ETAT
(Article 135)
A person in the government service who participates or executes
directions or commands of others is qualifying.
If the rebellion, insurrection or coup d’etat is under the command
of unknown leaders, those who in fact directed, spoke for them,
signed receipts or performed similar acts shall be deemed leaders.
CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL (Article 136)
Mere conspiracy or proposal to commit the crimes of coup d’etat,
rebellion or insurrection is punishable under this article.
DISLOYALTY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS (Article 137)
Take Note
There MUST be an ongoing rebellion for this felony to be
committed.
Acts of disloyalty
1. Failing to resist by all the means in their power
2. Continuing to discharge the duties of their office under the
control of the rebels
3. Accepting appointment to office under the control of
rebels
INCITING TO REBELLION OR INSURRECTION (Article 138)
Elements
1. Offender does not take up arms or not in open hostility
against the government
2. He incites others to acts constituting rebellion
3. It is by means of speeches, proclamations, writings,
emblems, banners or other representations tending to the
same end.
SEDITION (Article 139)
Elements
1. A public uprising that is tumultuous
2. The offender employs force, intimidation or other means
outside of legal methods
3. The purpose of the offenders is to attain any of the ff:
a. To prevent the promulgation or execution of any law
or holding of any popular election
b. To prevent the national, provincial or municipal
government, or any public officer from freely
exercising his functions, or prevent the execution of
any administrative order
c. To inflict any act of hate or revenge upon the person
or property of any public officer or employee
CRIMINAL LAW II l Atty. Carillo l Reviewer by Tanya Ibanez

d. To commit, for political or social ends, any act of hate
or revenge against any private person or any social
class
e. To despoil them, for any political or social end, any
person, municipality, provincial or national
government of all its property or any part thereof.
Tumultuous
In sedition, there must be at least 4 offenders because Article 153
defines tumultuous as caused by more than 3 persons who are
armed or provided with means of violence.
Take note: The elements of public uprising and the object must both
be present, otherwise there is no sedition.
Complex crime of sedition
There is NO prohibition to complex sedition with other common
crimes. (unlike rebellion)
Seditious words
Perez has uttered seditious words. He has made a statement and
done an act which tended to instigate others to cabal or meet
together for unlawful purposes. He has made a statement and done
an act which suggested and incited rebellious conspiracies. He has
made a statement and done an act which tended to disturb the
peace of the community and the safety or order of the government.
PP b. Nabong
“Overthrow the present government and establish our own
government, the government of the poor. Use your whip so that
there may be marks on their sides”
The seditious tendency must be clear
Anyone reading these dramas or seeing them presented could not
fail to understand their seditious tendencies. (US v. Juan Abad)
Rebellion and Sedition distinguished

Instances of sedition
1. Offenders were 50 and they were armed, the purpose was Rebellion Sedition
clearly to attack Mayor Puzalan (Umali case)
2. Soldiers were prevented from freely exercising their
functions as they were prevented from implementing the Public uprising and Rising publicly and tumultuously
warrant of arrest against one Datu Tahil. (Tahil v. Tarson) taking up of arms
3. Firing on policemen, a passing street car and the police
station (Cabrera case)
Remove, deprive... Nos 1-5 Art 139
Public uprising must concur with object of sedition

Apurado Other acts punishable are Other acts punishable are

No public uprising, the crowd was not armed and they were fairly conspiracy, proposal and inciting conspiracy and inciting (Proposal
orderly and well-behaved. is not punishable)

Mendoza
Object/purpose was not known. The accused attacked a truck Absorbs common crimes Does not absorb
carrying policemen. common crimes

CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION (Article 141)

Take Note: Only conspiracy to commit sedition is punishable.
Proposal to commit sedition is not a felony.
INCITING TO SEDITION (Article 142)
Acts punished
1. Inciting others to the accomplishment of any act which
constitutes sedition
2. Uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to
disturb the public peace
3. Writing, publishing or circulating scurrilous libels which
tend to disturb the public peace.
4. Knowingly concealing such evil practices
5. Inciting others by means of speeches, proclamations,
writings, emblems, cartoons, banners, or other
representations tending to the same end.
PP v. Perez
“The Filipinos, like myself, must use bolos for cutting off Wood’s
head for having recommended a bad thing for the Filipinos, for he
has killed our independence.”
DIRECT ASSAULT (Article 148)
Two forms of committing direct assault
1. Employing force and intimidation to attain any of the
purposes of rebellion and sedition
2. Attacking, employing force, seriously intimidating or
seriously resisting any person in authority or his agents
while engaged in the performance of official duties, or on
the occasion of such performance.
Elements of 1st form
1. Offender employs force or intimidation
2. Aim is to attain any of the purposes of rebellion or objects
of sedition
3. No public uprising
Elements of 2nd form
1. Offender attacks, employs force, seriously intimidates,
seriously resists
2. A person in authority or his agent
3. The person in authority or his agent is engaged in actual
performance of duties is assaulted on occasion of such
performance.
CRIMINAL LAW II l Atty. Carillo l Reviewer by Tanya Ibanez

4. Offender knows victim is a person in authority or his agent Take note: Whether the offended party is a person in authority or an
in the exercise of his duties agent of a person in authority, the intimidation or resistance MUST
5. No public uprising be serious.

Person in authority Examples:

Person directly vested with jurisdiction
Examples:
1. Mayor
2. Division superintendent of schools
3. President of sanitary division
4. Teachers, professors
5. Barangay captain/chairman
Agent
Person charged with the maintenance of public order and protection
and security of life and property
Examples:
1. Policeman
2. Barrio councilman (barangay councillor)
3. Barrio policeman (barangay tanod)
4. A person who comes to the aid of a person in authority
Question of law
As to whether a public officer or employee is a person in authority is
a matter of law, therefore, ignorance thereof is not an excuse.
US v. Alvear
A conviction of the grave offense of direct assault cannot be
sustained where there is a reasonable doubt as to whether the
accused knew or ought to have known that the persons assaulted
were persons in authority.
Question of law against question of fact
It is not an excuse tos ay that one does not know that a mayor is a
person in authority or a policeman is an agent of a person in
authority.
But if it is questionable is the accused knows that the person
assaulted is a policeman, then the crime of direct assault is not
committed. (i.e. when the policeman was not in uniform)
Employment of force
Person in authority – need NOT be of a serious character because
when the offender lays hands on a person in authority, the crime is
qualified.
Agent – must be of a serious character.
1. Threatening a policeman who was about to arrest the
accused and striking him with a knife as he was
approaching even though he was not hit.
2. Pointing a gun at a military police captain
Engaged in the performance of duties
Examples:
1. A governor who was shot while holding office in the
capitol
2. A governor who was elbowed while on his way to inspect
the office of the chief of police
3. A barangay captain who reprimanded someone for unruly
behaviour during a dance
4. A fiscal who was on his way to another municipality to
investigate a matter upon order of the solicitor general.
NOT engaged in the performance of duties
1. A barrio lieutenant who intervened in a case investigated
by a justice of the peace
2. A mayor who approached a person who was disturbing a
meeting of a candidate supported by him
3. A teacher who went out of the classroom to talk to his
creditor
On the occasion of such performance
Means “because” or “by reason”
Examples:
1. A justice of the peace who was assaulted on his way home
because he ad earlier reprimanded the accused in his
court
2. A barangay captain who was killed by the accused on his
way home after he had an altercation with tem about
unpaid slaughter fees
Qualified direct assault
1. Committed with a weapon
2. Offender is a public officer or employee
3. Offender lays hands on a person in authority
Complex crime
A complex crime usually results whenever the crime of direct assault
is committed.

Degree of force Examples:

Serious 1. Murder with direct assault
Three offenders struck a policeman several times with a club. 2. Attempted homicide with direct assault

Not serious Take Note: Light felonies like slight physical injuries cannot be
Hitting a policeman on the breast with a fist, or delivering fist blows complexed with other crimes.
which did not hit the latter
INDIRECT ASSAULT (Article 149)
Intimidation or resistance
Person in authority – serious Elements
Agent – serious 1. A person in authority or his agent is the victim of direct
assault
CRIMINAL LAW II l Atty. Carillo l Reviewer by Tanya Ibanez
2. A person comes to the aid of such person in authority or
agent
3. The offender makes use of force or intimidation upon such
person
There must be direct assault being committed
When it is only the person coming to the aid of a policeman that is
attacked, there is NO indirect assault as there is no direct assault
being committed.
If a private individual comes to the aid of policeman and the accused
attacks the private individual, is the crime direct assault?
NO. It is simply indirect assault, assuming that direct assault was
committed against the policeman.
For the crime to be considered direct assault, it must be a person in
authority that such private individual aided, because it is only then
that he can be considered an agent.
(Art 152 par 2 Any person who comes to the aid of person in
authority shall be deemed an agent of a person in authority)
RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO A PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR
HIS AGENT (Article 151)
Par 1. Resistance and serious disobedience
Par 2. Simple disobedience
Take Note: In this felony, the person in authority or his agent MUST
be engaged in the performance of official duties.
Elements of Resistance and Serious disobedience
1. Person in authority or his agent is engaged in the
performance of official duty or gives a lawful order to the
offender
2. The offender resists or seriously disobeys the person in
authority or his agent
3. The act is not direct assault, indirect assault or
disobedience to summons
Take Note:
Resistance must NOT be serious otherwise it is a case of direct
assault. However, disobedience MUST be serious.
Example:
The accused who struck a policeman on the breast as the latter was
arresting him.
Disobedience must be to an order actually directed to the accused
In the Ramayrat case, the order was directed to the sheriff of the
court to place the plaintiff in possession of the land involved in the
case. The order was directed to the sheriff and NOT to the accused.
The former merely ordered the latter to deliver the property to the
plaintiff.
Elements of Simple Disobedience
1. An agent of a person in authority is engaged in the
performance of official duty or gives a lawful order to the
offender
2. The offender disobeys such order
3. The disobedience is NOT serious (i.e. lying on the road
when told to clear the entrance to a plant)
TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBANCES (Article 153)
Examples:
1. Serious disturbance in a public place, office or
establishment
2. Interrupting or disturbing performances, functions or
gatherings or peaceful meetings
3. Making an outcry tending to incite rebellion or sedition in
any meeting, association or public place
4. Displaying placards or emblems which provoke a
disturbance of public order
5. Burning with pomp the body of one who has been legally
executed
Disturbance must be of a serious nature
i.e. planned or intended
US v. Domingo
In the excitement of a hotly contested campaign, some allowances
must be made for the tense state of public feeling, and not every
petty incident should be magnified into a matter of grave import.
When the offender is a participant or private individual
Article 153 applies to:
1. A public officer who is a participant
2. Private individual
When the one who disturbs the meeting is a public officer who is
NOT a participant, Article 131 (Prohibition of peaceful meeting) or
Article 132 (Interruption of religious worship) is applicable.
Outcry
The outcry is a more or less unconscious outburst and not
intentionally calculated to induce others to commit rebellion or
sedition.
ALARMS AND SCANDALS (Article 155)
Examples:
1. Discharging any firearm, rocket, firecracker or other
explosive within any town or public place, which produces
alarm or danger
2. Instigating or taking part in any charivari or other
disorderly meeting offensive to another or prejudicial to
public tranquillity
3. Disturbing the public peace while wandering about at
night or while engaged in other nocturnal activities
4. Causing any disturbance or scandal in public places while
intoxicated
Discharge any firearm
1. The discharge must be intended to merely cause alarm,
otherwise it might be some other crime (i.e. discharge of
firearm or attempted homicide)
2. Must produce alarm or danger as a consequence
Charivari
1. A medley of discordant voices, a mock serenade of
discordant noises made on kettles, tins, horns, etc.,
designed to annoy and insult.
CRIMINAL LAW II l Atty. Carillo l Reviewer by Tanya Ibanez