Indirect Bribery v. Direct Bribery
Not even accused-appellant’s extrajudicial confession
 Both receives gift
 DB there is an agreement between officer and gift giver; IB no such
agreement
 DB agrees to perform bec of the gift; IB doesn’t have to act – mere
acceptance is enough
The principal distinction between the two crimes is that in theft the thing is taken
while in estafa the accused receives the property and converts it to his own use or
benefit. However, there may be theft even if the accused has possession of the
property. If he was entrusted only with the material or physical (natural) or de
facto possession of the thing, his misappropriation of the same constitutes theft,
but if he has the juridical possession of the thing, his conversion of the same
constitutes embezzlement or estafa."
ESTAFA BY REMOVING, CONCEALING OR DESTROYING DOCUMENTS v.
INFEDILITY IN CUSTODY OF DOCUMENTS
Elements: That there be court record: That the offender removed, office files,
documents or any other papers. concealed or destroyed any of them :That
the offender had intent to defraud another (in estafa)
Elements: offender is a public officer; abstracts destroys conceals; documents
entrusted to him; damage (no intent to defraud)
Article 294 (1) of the Revised Penal Code classifies robbery with homicide
as a crime against property with the following elements: 1) the taking of personal
property with the use of violence or intimidation against persons; 2) personal
property thus taken belongs to another; 3) the taking is characterized by intent to
gain or animus lucrandi;and 4) on the occasion of the robbery or by reason
thereof, the crime of homicide, which is therein used in its generic sense,
was committed. The intent to rob must precede the taking of human life. So
long as the intention of the felons was to rob, the killing may occur before, during
or after the robbery. It is immaterial that death would supervene by mere accident
or that the victim of homicide is other than the victim of robbery or that two or more
persons are killed. It is likewise not necessary to identify who among the
conspirators inflicted the fatal wound on the victim. Once a homicide is committed
by reason or on the occasion of the robbery, the felony committed is the special
complex crime of Robbery with Homicide
Forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape if the real objective of the
accused is to rape the victim. Based on the records, the real objective of Talan was
to rape AAA when he brought her to the place with banana trees and to Santa
Elena, Camarines Norte
No, restitution, payment or reimbursement cannot be asserted as a defense
against a prosecution for malversation of public funds or property. It has been held
in the case of People v Velasquez that the return of the money by the accused only
amounts to a mitigating circumstance; it cannot be used to exempt one from
criminal liability. Restitution, payment or reimbursement cannot be used to
exonerate one from being criminally liable for malversation but that can be used to
mitigate his liability. If restitution, payment or reimbursement is allowed to be used
as a defense, it would be easy for one to be absolved of malversation by simply
doing those things despite the fact that the accused had already malversed public
funds or property to the detriment of public interest
Payment or reimbursement is not a defense for exoneration in malversation; it may
only be considered as a mitigating circumstance. This is because damage is not
an element of malversation. Full restitution of the amount malversed, which is akin
to voluntary surrender, will not in any way exonerate an accused, as payment is
not one of the elements of extinction of criminal liability, though, at most, payment
of the amount malversed will serve as a mitigating circumstance akin to voluntary
surrender
a public officer who is not in charge of public funds or property by virtue of her
official position, or even a private individual, may be liable for malversation or illegal
use of public funds or property if such public officer or private individual conspires
with an accountable public officer to commit malversation or illegal use of public
funds or property
The estafa under Article 315, paragraph 2(d), of the Revised Penal Code (RPC)
may be committed when: (1) the offender has postdated or issued a check in
payment of an obligation contracted at the time of the postdating or issuance; (2)
at the time of postdating or issuance of said check, the offender has no funds in
the bank, or the funds deposited are not sufficient to cover the amount of the check;
and (3) the payee has been defrauded.
Attempted homicide or attempted murder committed during or on the occasion of
the robbery, as in this case, is absorbed in the crime of Robbery with Homicide
which is a special complex crime that remains fundamentally the same regardless
of the number of homicides or injuries committed in connection with the robbery –
XY card game problem
Offender has an onerous obligation to deliver something of value. (b) He alters its
substance, quantity, or quality (c) Damage or prejudice is caused to another
There is nothing in the evidence on record that would show that the victim had a
wristwatch and that accused-appellant took said watch on that fateful night, as
alleged in the information.
proves the robbery. Accused-appellant merely stated in his confession that he
announced a hold-up and thereafter he and the victim grappled for the gun. As
they struggled, accused-appellant squeezed the trigger, thus shooting the victim.
Accused-appellant then hurriedly got off the taxicab, leaving his gun behind. There
was no mention about the taking of the wristwatch. As the prosecution failed to
prove the robbery, accused-appellant should only be convicted for homicide.
One need not be a police officer to be chargeable with arbitrary detention; A barrio
captain having the same duty as the mayor of maintaining peace and order, he can
be liable for arbitrary detention; Case at bar.
In the case of People vs. Agarin, which was a prosecution for murder, like
the present case, where the accused Huk member with his companions killed the
victim because he was a PC informer, this Court held that the crime committed is
simple rebellion and not murder, as follows: “The offense perpetrated by appellant
is murder, qualified by abuse of superior strength. Considering; however, the fact
that the killing was committed as a means to or.in the furtherance of the
subversive ends of the Hukbalahaps (HUKS) because the said appellant and
his companions, Commander Manaing and Commander Vida suspected the
deceased to have acted as a spy and had informed the BOT and Government
agencies regarding the presence of the Huks in that region, we find the said
Federico Agarin alias Commander ‘Smith’ guilty of the crime of simple rebellion
only (The Court, therefore, sustains the contention of the appellant that the crime
he committed is not murder but the crime of rebellion punishable under Articles
134 and 135 of the Revised Penal Code
Where the purpose of the raid and acts of the raiders in rising publicly and taking
up arms, were not exactly against the Government and for the purpose of doing
the things defined in Article 134 of the Revised Penal Code under rebellion, but
rather, by means of force and intimidation, to inf lict an act of hate or revenge upon
the person or property of a public official, the crime committed is sedition. In
conclusion, we find appellants guilty of sedition, multiple murder, arson, frustrated
murder and physical injuries.
The robberies were actually committed by only some of the raiders, presumably
dissidents, as an afterthought, because of the opportunity offered by the confusion
and disorder resulting from the shooting and the burning of the three houses, the
articles being intended presumably to replenish the supplies of the dissidents in
the mountains. For these robberies, only those who actually took part therein are
responsible, and not the three appellants herein. With respect to the crime of
multiple frustrated murder, while the assault upon policeman Pedro Lacorte with a
hand grenade causing him injuries resulting in his blindness in one eye, may be
regarded as frustrated murder; the wounding of Ortega, Aselo, Rivano, Garcia and
Lector should be considered as mere physical injuries.
Criminal Law; Kidnapping; Serious Illegal Detention; Elements of the Crime of
Kidnapping or Serious Illegal Detention under Article 267 of the Revised Penal
Code as amended by Republic Act No. 7659; If the victim of kidnapping and
serious illegal detention is a minor, the duration of his detention is immaterial; If
the victim is kidnapped and illegally detained for the purpose of extorting ransom,
the duration of his detention is also of no moment and the crime is qualified and
becomes punishable by death even if none of the circumstances mentioned in
paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 267 is present
n any event, even assuming arguendo that Karwin could do anything he wished to
while at appellant’s custody, it is not hard to imagine that the boy could not have
gone home, brought as he was to an unfamiliar and deserted place at the mountain
side. Indeed, it could well be that appellant left the boy alone without any restraint
precisely because he knew that it was impossible for the 5-year old Karwin to
escape and go home.
Elements of the crime of theft.—The elements of the crime of theft are the
following: (1) there was a taking of personal property; (2) the property belongs to
another; (3) the taking was without the consent of the owner; (4) the taking was
done with intent to gain; and (5) the taking was accomplished without violence or
intimidation against the person or force upon things. Under Article 310 of the
Revised Penal Code, theft is qualified when it is, among others, committed with
grave abuse of confidence, to wit: ART. 310. Qualified theft.—The crime of theft
shall be punished by the penalties next higher by two degrees than those
respectively specified in the next preceding article, if committed x x x with grave
abuse of confidence x x x.
undeniably, vasectomy denies a man his power of reproduction, such procedure
does not deprive him, “either totally or partially, of some essential organ for
reproduction.” Notably, the ordinary usage of the term “mutilation” is the deprivation
of a limb or essential part (of the body),60 with the operative expression being
“deprivation.” In the same manner, the word “castration” is defined as the removal
of the testies or ovaries.61 Such being the case in this present petition, the bilateral
vasectomy done on Larry could not have amounted to the crime of mutilation as
defined and punished under Article 262, paragraph 1, of the Revised Penal Code.
And no criminal culpability could be foisted on to respondent Dr. Agatep, the
urologist who performed the procedure, much less the other respondents
Pending determination of the falsity of the subject testimonies of private
respondents in the civil case, the criminal action for false testimony must perforce
be suspended. As such, under the attendant circumstances, although there is no
motion to suspend proceedings on the part of the private respondents, orderly
administration of justice dictates that the criminal cases should be suspended

With regard to the crime of false testimony, considering that the penalties provided
therefor in article 180 of the Revised Penal Code are, in every case, made to
depend upon the conviction or acquittal of the defendant in the principal case, the
act of testifying falsely does not therefore constitute an actionable offense until the
principal case is finally decided
FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC ORDER, ETC.
1. That the offender makes in a document statements in a narration of
facts;
2. That he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated
by him;
3. That the facts narrated by the offender are absolutely false;
Political crimes are those directly aimed against the political order, as well as such
common crimes as may be committed to achieve a political purpose. The decisive
factor is the intent or motive. If a crime usually regarded as common, like homicide,
is perpetrated for the purpose of removing from the allegiance "to the Government
the territory of the Philippine Islands or any part thereof," then said offense
becomes stripped of its " common" complexion, inasmuch as, being part and parcel
of the crime of rebellion, the former acquired the political character of the latter
Treason, in its more general sense, is the " violation by a subject of his allegiance
to his sovereign or liege, lord, or to the supreme authority of the State." (Century
Dictionary) Sedition, in its more general sense, is "the raising of commotions or
disturbances in the State
Evidence of motive of the offender is important when the person in authority or his
agent who is attacked or seriously intimidated is not in the actual performance of
his official duty

4. That the perversion of truth in the narration of facts was made with the
wrongful intent of injuring a third person
Where the position is confidential in nature, such as field agents of the National
Bureau of Investigation, the civil service requirements and/or citizenship may be
matters of importance in the selection of the. agents. Hence, the untruthful
statements made in the personnel information sheet are material and violate the
integrity of the document.
When the person in authority or his agent is attacked and killed while in the
performance of his duty or by reason thereof, the crime should be direct assault
with homicide or murder, as the case may be in view of the provisions of Article 48
of the Code
The slight physical injuries sustained by the policeman, then in the performance of
his duty, is absorbed in the crime of direct assault, as the same is the necessary
consequence of the force or violence inherent

"A" is liable for sedition, on the one hand, and for all the separate and individual the outcry is more or less unconscious outburst which, although rebellious or
crimes committed in the course thereof namely, the serious physical injuries seditious in nature, is not intentionally calculated to induce others to commit
inflicted on “B” and arson, for the burning of the house of "B" rebellion or sedition, it is only public disorder

Estafa through misappropriation to exist, the following elements must be present:
1. That money, goods or other personal property is received by the offender in
trust, or on commission, or for administration, or under any other obligation
involving the duty to make delivery of, or to return, the same; 2. That there be
misappropriation or conversion of such money or property by the offender, or
denial on his part of such receipt; 3. That such misappropriation or conversion or
denial is to the prejudice of another; and 4. That there is a demand made by the
offended party to the offender
No, it is imperative first to show which statement (the SALN or the ITR) was false
by other evidence than the contradictory statements, in light of which they may be
both true, both false, one false and the other true, not to mention partial truths and
partial falsehoods, in one or the other
If the falsification of a private document is committed as a means to commit estafa,
the proper crime to be charged is falsification. If the estafa can be committed
without the necessity of falsifying a document, the proper crime to be charged is
estafa
Making transactions prejudicial to lawful commerce or to increase the market price
of merchandise. The person liable is the: a. Manufacturer, b. Producer, c.
Processor, or d. Importer of any merchandise or object of commerce.
The term " charivari" includes a medley of discordant voices, a mock serenade of
discordant noises made on kettles, tins, horns, etc., designed to annoy and insult
Quasi-recidivism is a special aggravating circumstance where a person, after
having been convicted by final judgment, shall commit a new felony before
beginning to serve such sentence, or while serving the same. The aggravating
circumstance of " reiteracion" requires that the offender against whom it is
considered shall have served out his sentences for the prior offenses. Here,
all the accused were yet serving their respective sentences at the time of the
commission of the crime of murder. The special aggravating circumstance of quasi-
recidivism (Art. 160, R.P.C.) was correctly considered against all the accused
" Mutilation" means to take off part of the metal either by filing it or substituting it
for another metal of inferior quality
Actually uttering false or mutilated coin, knowing it to be false or mutilated, is a
crime under Art. 165, even if the offender was not in connivance with the
counterfeiter or mutilator

The third element of perjury requires that the accused had willfully and deliberately
asserted a falsehood—a mere assertion of a false objective fact is not sufficient—
the assertion must be deliberate and willful. Perjury being a felony by dolo, there
must be malice on the part of the accused; Good faith or lack of malice is a valid
defense vis-à-vis the allegation of deliberate assertion of falsehood in perjury
cases.

Attendance in meetings to discuss, among others, plans to bring down a

government is a mere preparatory step to commit the acts constituting Rebellion
under Article 134. Even the prosecution acknowledged this, since the felony
charged in the Information against Beltran and San Juan in Criminal Case No. 06-
452 is Conspiracy to Commit Rebellion and not Rebellion.

Falsification of documents under paragraph 1 of Article 172 refers to falsification

by a private individual or a public officer or employee who did not take advantage
of his official position, of public, private or commercial documents. Its elements are:
(1) that the offender is a private individual or a public officer or employee who did
not take advantage of his official position; (2) that he committed any of the acts of
falsification enumerated in Article 171; and (3) that the falsification was committed
in a public, official or commercial document

1st element - Petitioner’s functions as disbursing officer did not include the duty to
make, prepare or otherwise intervene in the preparation of the falsified travel
expense voucher. His function was only to pay payees of treasury warrants and
other cash vouchers or payrolls

2nd element - petitioner was found by both the CFI and the CA to have offered Cruz
a share of the proceeds in exchange for his act of falsification. That promise was
the inducement for the falsification

In arbitrary detention under Art. 124, the detention is illegal from the beginning; in
arbitrary detention under Art. 125, the detention is legal in the beginning but the
illegality of the detention starts from the expiration of any of the periods of time
specified in Art. 125, without the detained prisoner detained having been delivered
to the proper judicial authority