Sei sulla pagina 1di 152


TITLE II: PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR attempted or frustrated stage of execution. Only principals and
accomplices are liable for light felonies (Article 7).
FELONIES 3. Only principals and accomplices are liable for light felonies
(Article 16).
Article 16. — Who are criminally liable. 4. Accessories are not liable for light felonies even if they are
The following are criminally liable for grave and less grave felonies: committed against persons or property (Article 16).
1. Principals
2. Accomplices IV. Active Subject And Passive Subject Of Crime
3. Accessories A. Active Subject (Criminal)
The following are criminally liable for light felonies: — Only natural persons can be the active subject of crime because
1. Principals of the highly personal nature of the criminal responsibility.
2. Accomplices o Only natural persons because he along by his act can
set in motion a cause of by his inaction make possible
POINTS the completion of a modification of the external world.
o Only natural persons can act with malice.
I. Treble Of Division Of Persons Criminally Liable o Juridical persons cannot commit crimes with willful
— The treble division of persons criminally liable for an offense purpose or malicious intent.
rests upon the very nature of their participation in the o Penalties consisting in imprisonment or deprivation of
commission of the crime. liberty can only be executed on natural persons
— When a crime is committed by many, without being equally — Juridical persons, however, are criminally liable under certain
shared by all, a different degree of responsibility is imposed special laws.
upon each and every one of them. In that case, they are o Officers, not the corporation, are criminally liable.
criminally liable either as principals, accomplices or accessories.  General Rule: a director or other officer of a
corporation is criminally liable for his acts
II. Accessories Are Not Liable For Light Felonies though in his official capacity, if he participated
— Reason: in the commission of light felonies, the social wrong as in the unlawful act either directly or as an
well as the individual prejudice is so small that penal sanction is aider, abettor or accessory, but is not liable
deemed not necessary for accessories. criminally for the corporate acts performed by
other officers or agents thereof.
III. Rules Relative To Light Felonies:  It is a settled rule that since a corporation can
1. Light felonies are punishable only hen they have been only act through its officers and agents, the
consummated (Article 7). president or manager can be held criminally
2. But when the light felonies are committed against persons or liable for the violation of a law by the entity.
property, they are punishable even if they are only in the

o However, if the law provides a penalty for the o Exception: Under Republic Act No. 9851 (Genocide
corporation, it may be punished even though the crime Law), the superiors are liable for the acts of their
was perpetrated through its agents. subordinates.
o Exception: The Anti-Torture Act contains a similar
B. Passive Subject (Injured Party) provision. Under it, senior officers who give order to
— The passive subject of a crime is the holder of the injured right: their minions to torture people are liable as principals.
the man, the juristic person, and the state.
— General Rule: Corpse or animal cannot be passive subject. As Article 17. — Principals.
such, the dead and animals have no rights that may be injured. The following are considered principals:
o Exception: Article 353, the crime of defamation may be 1. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act;
committed if the imputation tends to blacken the 2. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it;
memory of one who is dead. 3. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by
another act without which it would not have been
V. Anti-Hazing Law (Republic Act No. 8094) accomplished.
A. Principals
— Those who actually participated in the hazing. POINTS
— Parent of a frat/sorority member who owned the place where
the hazing occurred, knew of it but still did not do anything to I. Two Or More Persons Participating In The Crime
stop it. — Single individual committing a crime is always a principal by
— Officers, former officers, alumni who planned it, even if they direct participation (take direct part in the execution of the
weren’t there. act).
— Fraternity or sorority advisor who was present but didn’t stop — (Par 1.) Principal by direct participation
it. (Par 2.) Principal by induction
— Anyone present who did not prevent it. (Par 3.) Principal by indispensible cooperation

B. Accomplices II. Difference Between A Principal Under Any Of The Three Categories
— Owner of the place where the hazing occurred and who knew Enumerated In Article 17 And A Co-Conspirator
of the hazing and did not stop it. — Principal in Article 17: criminal liability is limited to his own acts
— School authorities who actually knew and consented to it. — Co-conspirator: (His) responsibility includes the acts of his
fellow conspirators (People v. Peralta)
VI. Command Responsibility
— General Rule: There is not command responsibility in Philippine ACT.” (PRINCIPALS BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION.)

I. “Take A Direct Part In The Execution Of The Act.” — A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an
— Principal by direct participation personally takes part in the agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide
execution of the act constituting the crime. to commit it (Article 8, Paragraph 2).
o Example: One who shoots at and kills another — The conspiracy in this first requisite is not a felony but only a
(homicide) or one who burns the house of another manner of incurring criminal liability.
(arson) personally executes the act of killing another or — To be a party to a conspiracy, one must have the intention to
the act of burning the house of another. participate in the transaction with a view to the furtherance
— The one who orders or induces another to commit a crime is a of the common design and purpose.
principal by induction while the other who follows the order o To hold an accused guilty as co-principal by reason of
and executes the act constituting the crime is a principal by conspiracy: it must be established that he performed
direct participation. (People v. Lao) an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy either by
— Two or more offenders as principals by direct participation. actively participating in the actual commission of the
Two or more persons may take direct part in the execution of crime or by lending moral assistance to his co-
the acts constituting crime – principals by direct participation. conspirators by his presence at the scene of the crime
or by exerting moral ascendancy over the rest of the
II. Elements For Two Or More Persons To Be Considered As Principals conspirators to move them into executing the
By Direct Participation: (“co-principals”) conspiracy. (People v. Cortez)
1. That they participated in the criminal resolution; o Mere knowledge, acquiescence or approval of the act
2. That they carried out their plan and personally took part in its without cooperation or agreement to cooperate – not
execution by acts which directly tended to the same end. enough to constitute one party to a conspiracy – there
must be intentional participation in the transaction
III. FIRST ELEMENT: Participation In The Criminal Resolution. with a view to the furtherance of the common design
— Usually, this points to a conspiracy. BUT it is also possible that and purpose. (People v. Izon)
there is no conspiracy between the actors. — Silence does not make one a conspirator.
o They will only be liable for their own/individual actions. o Silence is not a circumstance indicating participation in
— Two ore more persons are said to have participated in the the same criminal design. (People v. Gensola)
criminal resolution when they were in conspiracy at the time of — Conspiracy transcends companionship.
the commission of the crime. o The fact that the two accused may have happened to
o When there has been conspiracy or unity of purpose leave together, and one of them left a closing warning
and intention in the commission of the crime – a to the victim, cannot instantly prove a finding of
person may be convicted for the criminal act of conspiracy. (People v. Padrones)
another. — Participation in the criminal resolution essential.
o It is not enough that a person participated in the
A. Conspiracy. assault made by another in order to consider him a co-

principal in the crime committed. He must also that caused Bancoyo’s death. Also,
participate in the criminal resolution of the other. barely a few seconds elapsed which
o Cooperation which the law punishes: assistance which interval in insufficient to give rise to
is knowingly or intentionally given and which is not the criminal agreement.
possible without previous knowledge of the criminal — In the absence of a previous plan or agreement to commit a
purpose (People v. Cruz) crime, the criminal responsibility arising from different acts
 People v. Ortiz and Zausa directed against the same person is individual and not
 Facts: Bancoyo (deceased) and Ortiz collective – each of the participants is liable only for the acts he
have known each other for a long time committed.
because their wives were sisters. After o United States v. Reyes and Javier  There was no
gathering corn from the fields, Bancoyo concerted action between Javier and Reyes even
asked Ortiz from outside his house for though Javier was holding the offended party and
some water but Ortiz said that they Reyes suddenly and unexpectedly inflicted mortal
couldn’t give him water because they wounds on said offended party. It was held that Javier
had none. Bancoyo asked again to was neither a principal nor an accomplice of the crime
which Ortiz replied that they had no of homicide convicted of Reyes because he had no
water so he cannot compel them to reason to believe that Reyes would do a homicidal
give him some water and immediately attack and that in holding the off. Party he was
descended from his house carrying a voluntarily cooperating therein
shotgun and pointed it at Bancoyo. o In cases above: no anterior conspiracy = no unity of
Bancoyo, seeing the aggressive attitude purpose and intention immediately before the
of Ortiz, flung himself over Ortiz and commission of the crime; their criminal responsibility is
they struggled for the weapon. Zausa, individual
when she saw this, was inside the — In the absence of concerted action pursuant to a common
house and grabbed her spear and criminal design, each of the accused – responsible only for the
rushed outside and attacked Bancoyo consequences of his own acts.
by stabbing him on the left side of his o Araneta, Jr. v. Court of Appeals  The accused who
abdomen and his intestines protruded. inflicted the mortal wound was held guilty of murder
Bancoyo died of peritonitis that night. while the other assailants are only guilty of slight
 Held: Ortiz should be acquitted physical injuries/less serious physical injuries.
because he did not take part in the
attack of Zausa because it appears that B. Existence Of Conspiracy
there was no plan or agreement — Existence of conspiracy does not require an agreement for an
between them to carry out the attach appreciable length of time prior to the execution of its purpose.

o From the legal viewpoint, conspiracy exists if at the acquaintance among themselves – sufficient that their
time of the commission of tzhe offense the accused minds meet understandingly to bring about an
had the same purpose and were united in its execution intelligent and deliberate agreement to commit the
(People v. Binasing). offense charged.
— Conspiracy arises on the very instant that the plotters agree o Sufficient that at the time of the aggression all accused
expressly or impliedly to commit the felony and forthwith manifested in their acts a common intent or desire to
decide to pursue it. – each and everyone of the conspirators is attack to so that the act of one becomes the act of all
made criminally liable for the crime actually committed by (People v. Gupo).
anyone of them (People v. Monroy). o Conspiracy need not be proved by direct evidence
(need not be shown that the parties actually came
C. Proof Of Conspiracy together and agreed in express terms to enter into and
— Direct evidence of conspiracy: interlocking judicial confessions pursue a common design) – can be inferred from proof
of several accused and the testimony of one accused who is of facts and circumstances when taken together
discharged and made a witness against his co-accused who did indicate they are parts of a complete whole
not make any confession. o Examples:
o In the absence of any collusion among the declarants,  Two or more persons aimed at the
their confessions may form a complete picture of the accomplishment of the same unlawful object,
whole situation and may be considered collectively as each doing a part so that their acts even
corroborative and/or confirmatory of the evidence though apparently independent were
independent therefrom (People v. Castelo) connected and cooperative, showing a
o Two or more extrajudicial confessions given separately, closeness of personal assoc. and concurrence
untainted by collusion, and which tally with one of sentiment – a conspiracy may be inferred
another in all material respects, are admissible as though no actual meeting among them is
evidence of the conspiracy of the declarants. (People v. proved (People v. Mateo)
bernardo)  People v. Garduque  All the accused were
o To establish conspiracy, it is not essential that there be already armed when they met, they went
proofs to the previous agreement and decision to together in a jeep to the house where they
commit the crime – it is sufficient that the malefactors robbed the offended party and raped his maids
shall have acted in concert pursuant to the same – their conspiracy is implied even though some
objective. (People v. San Luis) of the accused were only there to show the
— Formal agreement or previous acquaintance among several location of the house
persons not necessary in conspiracy.  People v. Catubig  Offenders were all present
o In conspiracy, no formal agreement among the at the scene of the crime, acted in concert in
conspirators is necessary, not even previous attacking, assaulting, beating, chasing, and

stabbing the victims and robbing them then o People v. Madera  Two appellants not co-principals
fleeing going to their separate ways – they nor accomplices – they were not armed, did nothing to
showed through their concerted actions that help co-appellant, mere passive presence at scene of
they acted in unison and cooperated with each the crime (they were just standing behind co-appellant
other to accomplish a common felonious when he shot victim)
purpose (to rob victims) — Conspiracy shown by circumstances.
— Conspiracy must be established by positive and conclusive o People v. Vinas  Brothers Nelson and Norman Vinas
evidence. conspired to carry out the killing even though it was
o While conspiracy may be implied from circumstances only Norman who had a grudge against the deceased
attending the commission of the crime, it is because Nelson assaulted the deceased and they both
nevertheless a rule that conspiracy must be established told Sumpay their plan to kill Varela.
by positive and conclusive evidence (People v. Ancheta) o People v. Manzano  A community of design to kill:
o Proof beyond reasonable doubt = degree of proof to three brothers and nephew avenged their father (or
prove conspiracy (same as degree of proof to establish grandfather) showing concerted actions in committing
the crime); it must be established by positive and the crime
conclusive evidence; conspiracy cannot be appreciated o People v. Saliling  The four appellants were linked to
when facts are consistent with the non-participation of each other by friendship or some sort of relationship =
the accused in the fancied cabal (People v. Furugganan) conspiracy (They all had a specific role in the
o Mere presence at the scene of the crime at the time of commission of the crime)
its commission is not by itself sufficient to establish o People v. Umbrero  Conspiracy may be shown by the
conspiracy (People v. Tacca) appellants’ actuations immediately prior to, during, and
— No conspiracy, as shown by the acts of the defendant. right after the shooting of the victim
o People v. Quiosay  Appellant stabbed the deceased o People v. Timbol  Three accused arrived together at
once on the arm and ran away and his brother was the the Pasudeco offices. They menacingly demanded
one who cut off the deceased’s head. Appellant is approval of their 60-40 share of the mill denied by the
answerable only for his individual act – there was no Board of Directors of Pasudeco. They shot Pres. De Leo,
conspiracy because he didn’t stay to liquidate the Gonzales (of Pasudeco) and Capt. Olivas (peace officer)
deceased with his brother. and fled the scene together. The Supreme Court held
o People v. Lacao  Spontaneity of respective reactions that circumstances demonstrate conspiracy when the
of several accused, resulting in an attack where they all accused have all met together days before the crime.
participated, rules out the existence of conspiracy. — Conspiracy is implied when the accused had a common
Respective liabilities shall be determined by the nature purpose and were united in its execution.
of their individual participations in the felonious act. o People v. Damaso  Facts: The deceased slapped the
(Two of which are only liable as accomplices.) face of one of the three appellants in front of a

carinderia. The appellants boarded a taxi and borrowed o No participation in the criminal design when the act of
a gun of a security guard at Greenhills and came back one came so close upon the heels of that of the other.
to the carinderia where the deceased was shot by one  Reason: He had no time to see that the other
of the appellants from inside the taxi. Afterwards, the intended to case the deceased the wound he
three returned the weapon and proceeded to the did (People v. Manalo)
headquarters of the Rizal Security and Protective  Simultaneity per se is not a badge of conspiracy
Agency. Held: There is unity of purpose and unity of if the requisite concurrence of wills is absent. It
execution establishing conspiracy. is not sufficient that the attack is joint and
o People v. Delgado  Community of purpose on part of simultaneous; it is necessary that the assailants
three accused inferable from the circumstances: they are animated by one and the same purpose. –
came together to the scene of the occurrence and they in situations where assaults are not
each acted against the victim then left together to the simultaneous but instead successive, greater
house of another person, leaving the victim proof is needed to establish concert of criminal
unconscious on the ground. design (People v. Tividad)
o Examples:
D. Unity Of Purpose And Intention In The Commission Of The Crime Is  People v. Macabuhay  Facts: A, B, C, D, and E
Shown In The Following Cases: (Evidences Of Joint Responsibility) were in F’s house. Someone threw a stone at
1. Spontaneous agreement at the moment of the commission of that house. All 5 went to G’s house 40 yards
the crime sufficient to create joint responsibility. away to avenge the stone-throwing. They
o Example: Acceptance of two accused of the challenge suspected the deceased who was in G’s house
posted by the deceased and their concert attack on the to be the stone-thrower and they seized him
same clearly showed a community of purpose and and E stabbed him. Held: A, B, C, D, E – all liable
design. (People v. Ibanez) as principals by direct participation for death of
2. Active cooperation by all the offenders in the perpetration of deceased – same motive: avenge stone-
the crime. throwing.
o Example: A struck deceased, B whipped lips of  People v. Cruz, Jr.  Conspiracy was well-
deceased, C seized deceased’s left hand while D held established: one of the appellant’s companions
the right, E stabbed deceased with knife. announced the holdup while the appellant and
Held: No proof of anterior conspiracy but the manner his other companions proceeded to rob the
in which accused cooperated in the perpetration of the victims.
homicide shows they were moved by a common motive  People v. Carpio  Conspiracy manifested in
and their intention was to kill deceased the coordinated acts of the assailants: one held
Dissenting: Only individual responsibility in this case for hand of victim, another stabbed him, third gave
only E gave the fatal blow

fist blows and the first one finally shoots determined instigators who induced the former to
deceased commit it, while the remainder cooperated in the same
3. Contributing by positive acts to the realization of a common by their presence and lending their moral support. – all
criminal intent. are thus directly responsible for the consequences and
o People v. Agbuya  Facts: Family feud between Palisoc incidents of the same
(family of C = deceased) and Agbuya (family of A and D o U.S. v. Santos  Facts: A band of 25 men captured
= accused) American soldiers and detained them somewhere. The
Held: Homicide was committed by the act of the one of soldiers were killed by some of the members of the
the two accused in shooting the deceased with a gun band in front of the accused.
which was given by the co-accused, his father, and Held: It is if no importance that the accused did not
where it also appeared that the latter contributed to himself strike the blow or blows by which the prisoners
the commission of the homicide by various other were killed. It is sufficient that he was present at the
significant acts – both father and son were properly place of the commission of the act, augmenting with his
convicted as principals in the crime. There was arms and presence the power of the band, thus aiding
common criminal intent in the case because father and the common act of all – he was considered as a
son took common cause (family feud) principal by direct participation in the crime
o People v. Mancao  Wounds which caused deceased’s prosecuted.
death were not inflicted by Mancao himself but by co- o Conspiracy is presumed when the crime is committed
accused Aguilar but Mancao having been the instigator by a band. A band raises the presumption of a previous
and aggressor by calling his harvesters to his aid (one of understanding between one offender and the others
which was Aguilar) – and wanting them to carry out the who formed the band; accused lent his thought and
criminal act started by him – Mancao is not only liable action for the realization of the criminal object
for his own acts but also for the acts of those who increasing the offensive strength of said band.
aided him. Mancao contributed the following positive  U.S. v. Asilo  Accused was a member of a
acts: Being the instigator, the aggressor and calling his band that went to the house of the deceased to
harvesters. kill him. Even if there was no evidence that the
4. Presence during the commission of the crime by a band and accused fired a shot at the deceased, he is still
lending moral support thereto, also create joint responsibility liable for homicide.
with the material executors.  People v. Bazar  Robbery was committed by
o U.S. v. Ancheta  There were 7 defendants in this a band: all the members of the band are
case. Held: All of them previously concerted action, presumed to be conspirators or co-principals
met together and witnessed the capture and later, the also in the assaults committed by the band in
violent killing of the deceased. Some took a direct part the absence of a showing that appellants
in the actual commission of the crime, others were attempted to prevent the killing of the victim

they are equally guilty of his death at the hands for serious physical injuries only because there was no
of their companions. competent proof that the three policemen intended to
o Exception: U.S. v. Fresnido  When at the start of the kill Guarino – no conspiracy or unity of purpose and
encounter the accused fled from the scene of the fight intention among them plus Chief Castillo. The three did
between the constabulary and the insurgent band – he not participate in the shooting by Castillo and could not
is not criminally liable have stopped it even if they wanted to because Chief
5. Where one of the accused knew of the plan of the others to Castillo just drew out his gun and fired.
kill the two victims and he accepted the role assigned to him, — In homicide, immediate participation in the criminal design
which was to shoot one of the victims, and he actually entertained by the slayer, is essential to the responsibility of
performed that role, he is a co-principal by direct participation one who is alleged to have taken a direct part in the killing even
in the double murder (People v. De La Cruz). if he has not himself inflicted an injury materially contributing
to the death (People v. Tamayo)
E. There May Be Conspiracy Even If There Is No Evident Premeditation
On The Part Of The Accused G. Liability Of Participants Where There Is Conspiracy
— Even if appellants were unarmed, which may indicate lack of — When there is conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. 
evident premeditation, this does not necessarily negate the Collective criminal responsibility
existence of conspiracy because conspiracy does not — U.S. v. Bundal  Defendants after conspiring together to kill
necessarily require an agreement for an appreciable time prior deceased, went to his house for purposes of carrying out their
to the occurrence. intent and prepared to cooperate to that end (even though
o See People v. Binasing. having different roles in the commission) all will be held equally
guilty as principals irrespective of the individual participation of
F. When There Is No Conspiracy, Each Of The Offenders Is Liable Only each in the material act of the murder
For The Act Performed By Him — Conspiracy adequately proven = all conspirators – liable as co-
— People v. Castillo principals. The degree of actual participation by each of the
o Facts: Guarino was quarreling with Terencia and conspirators is immaterial. As conspirators, each is equally
policeman Machica tried to stop them. Guarino responsible for the acts of their co-conspirators. (People v. De
stabbed Machica instead. Then Policeman Campos was la Cruz)
able to bring Guarino to the municipal building where — Where there is conspiracy to commit a felony, all the
another Policeman Boco hit Guarino. Chief of Police conspirators are liable for its consequences.
Castillo came and shot to death Guarino in front of the o People v. Villamora  There was no conspiracy to kill
three policemen Machica, Campos, and Boco (who all deceased and Barauel only hit him with an iron bar.
had inflicted serious physical injuries to Guarino) Held: Since there was conspiracy to punish Acuna, with
o Held: Only Chief Castillo was guilty of murder qualified resulted to his death, ALL the conspirators are
by treachery. Machica, Campos, and Boco were liable responsible for the consequences that arose from the

punishment. Note: The ruling is in accordance with the with increased numbers – continue the assault – are
provision of Article 4, paragraph 1, of the RPC. liable for manslaughter when the victim is killed by a
— Conspiracy may cover persons previously undetermined. knife wound inflicted by one of them during the
o If it appears that there was a general plan to kill anyone beating, although in the beginning they did not
who might put up violent resistance, then the accused contemplate the use of a knife
are liable for all the natural and inherent consequences o People v. Espiritu  Four assailants acted in
of such plan (People v. Timbol) conspiracy, pretended to look for a lost carabao in
Bernardo’s house and then killed him. As conspirators,
H. Liability Of A Conspirator For Another Conspirator’s Acts Which they are each liable for the attack on Bernardo,
Differ Radically And Substantially From That Which They Intended To regardless of who actually pulled the trigger or wielded
Commit. the club that killed him
— Conspirator should necessarily be liable for the acts of another — Liability of offenders in robbery if committed by a band: any
conspirator even though such acts differ radically or member of a band (at least four armed men) is liable for any
substantially from that which they intended to commit. (People assault committed by the other member of the band, unless it
v. Enriquez) be shown that he attempted to prevent the same. (Article 296
— Boyd v. U.S.  Wound made with the knife on leg of person of Revised Penal Code)
assaulted was the primary cause of death and the author of this A conspirator is not liable for another’s crime which is not an object of
injury has not been identified (the attorneys of the accused the conspiracy or which is not a necessary and logical consequence
defended that the infliction of injury by means of a cutting thereof.
instrument was not within the scope of the agreement and that — People v. Umali  Only the Huks (allies of defendant Umali)
the one who should be held liable is the one who inflicted the committed robbery which was NOT an object of the conspiracy.
wound). Held: The Court did not agree. Accused had Held: Defendant Umali not liable for robbery BUT liable for
undoubtedly conspired to do so grave personal injury to the sedition, arson, and murder – the objects of the conspiracy
deceased which have resulted in death, the accused cannot Other defendants not held liable for the killings of persons not covered
escape from the legal effects of their acts that a wound was by the conspiracy.
inflicted in a different way from that which they intended. — People v. De la Cerna  Appellant cannot be held liable for the
— As has been said by the U.S. Supreme Court: “If a number of killing od the deceased (Cabizares) even though there was a
persons agree to commit, and enter upon the commission of a conspiracy between him and his co-conspirator because the
crime which will probably endanger human life such as robbery, conspiracy was to kill Rafael only and no one else.
all of them are responsible for the death of a person that The rule has always been that co-conspirators are liable only
ensues as a consequence” for acts done pursuant to the conspiracy.
o U.S. v. Patten  Conspirators who join in a criminal For other acts done outside the contemplation of the co-
attack on a defenseless man with dangerous weapons – conspirators or which are not necessary and logical
victim knocked down – tries to escape – pursues him

consequences of the intended crime, only the actual responsible for all the acts of others done in furtherance of the
perpetrators are liable. conspiracy) The degree of actual participation is immaterial.
When the conspirators selected a particular victim and another (People v. Maranion)
person was killed by one of them, only that conspirator who When there is conspiracy, the fact that an element of the offense is
killed another person is liable. not present as regards one of the conspirators is immaterial.
— Versus People v. Enriquez & People v. Rosario  Conspirators — U.S v. Hernandez  Complex crime of seduction by means of
are liable for the acts of another conspirator even though such usurpation of official functions; One of the accused pretended
acts differ radically and substantially from that which they to be a minister and fake-married the other accused with a girl
intend to commit (in accordance to provision of Article 4 in order for the girl to have marital relations with the other
paragraph 1 of RPC) accused
A person in conspiracy with others, who had desisted before the crime Held: Element of performance of official functions was present
was committed by the others, is not criminally liable. with accused only. But the other accused was sentenced to the
— People v. Timbol  Appellant was a member of the conspiracy penalty for and the same crime complexed with seduction
but desisted before the crimes were committed (left the which he actually committed.
Pasudeco offices long before killings took place)
Held: Appellant Dalmacio Timbol is not criminally liable. All are liable for the crime of abduction, even if only one acted with
“Conspiracy alone without the execution of its purpose is not a lewd designs.
crime punishable by law except in special instances” (Article 8) — Essential element of the crime of abduction: lewd designs on
— People v. Mappala  An act of a conspirator who ran away as the part of the offender (Article 342 – forcible abduction;
soon as the aggression was started by his co-conspirators, and Article 343 – consented abduction)
called for help of other people who responded is an act of — People v. Loyola  Canaria conspired with Loyola to forcibly
desistance which removes the case from the established rule abduct Caridad and Canaria made positive over acts necessary
that the act of one is the act of all. to the realization of the abduction
When there is conspiracy, it is not necessary to ascertain the specific Held: Even though Loyola alone acted with lewd designs,
act of each conspirator. Canaria was still liable for abduction because in a conspiracy
— It is not necessary to ascertain the specific acts of aggression the act of one is the act of all
committed by each of the culprits since having participated in In multiple rape, each rapist is equally liable for the other rapes.
the criminal resolution the act of one is the act of all. (People v. — Each defendant is responsible not only for rape personally
Mendoza) committed by him but also for the rape committed by the
— Conspiracy having been established: it is immaterial who of the others because they cooperated in the commission of rape
conspirators fired the fatal shot (People v. Canoy) perpetration by the others, by acts without which would not
— All persons taking part in the crime shall be held guilty as have been accomplished
principals. (Even though not all accused took part in actual
commission of every act constituting the crime – each is I. Exceptions: (from equal liability)

1. Crime of parricide – element of relationship must be present as — Facts: Diong in order to avoid an execution of judgment against
regards all the offenders him in a civil case transferred his properties by conveyance to
 Ex. Wife and son of deceased conspired and did kill latter – Baranda who only participated by falsely testifying in court that
both are guilty of parricide BUT if wife and a stranger conspired he acquired said properties with sufficient consideration
and killed deceased, only the wife is guilty of parricide and the — Held: Baranda’s alleged participation in the fraud only consists
stranger will be guilty of homicide or murder of his assertion of ownership in the properties conveyed which
 Reason for exception: Article 62 paragraph 3 provides that does not justify his conviction as a participant in the fraud. His
aggravating circumstances which arise from private relations of resolution to accept the benefit of the fraudulent conveyances
offender with offended party shall serve to aggravate only may have been formed only after the act of Diong. His guilt as
liability of principals, accomplices, and accessories to whom co-conspirator in the fraud is, therefore not proved.
such circumstances are attendant. Provision applies when — Note: Baranda would be liable as co-principal if he concurred
element of felony arises from private relation of offender with with Diong at the time or before the execution of the deeds of
offended party. conveyance.
2. Crime of murder where treachery is an element of the crime –
all offenders must at least have knowledge of the employment There could be no conspiracy to commit an offense through
of treachery at time of execution of act or their cooperation negligence.
therein — Conspiracy presupposes an agreement and a decision to
o Ex. A and B conspired to kill C but carried out their plan commit a felony, when it appears that the injuries inflicted on
without previously considering the means, methods, or the offended party were due to the reckless imprudence of two
forms, in killing C; only A employed treachery but since or more persons, it is not proper to consider conspiracy
B was present when A employed treachery – both are between or among them.
liable for murder BUT if B remained outside so that he In cases of criminal negligence or crimes punishable by special law,
did not know that A employed treachery – only A is allowing or failing to prevent an act to be performed by another,
liable for murder and B is liable for homicide makes one a co-principal.
o Reason for exception: Article 62 par 4. Provides that — People v. Santos  professional driver of passenger truck let
circumstances which consist in the material execution his conductor drive the truck and they had an accident with a
of the ac, or in the means employed to accomplish it, jeepney which resulted to the death of one its passengers
shall serve to aggravate the liability of only those Held: Both the driver and the conductor were held liable as co-
persons who had knowledge of them at the time of the principals of homicide and damage to property through
execution of the act or their cooperation therein reckless imprudence under Act. No 3992 and Article 365 of
I. Participation in another’s criminal resolution must either precede or — U.S. v. Siy Cong Bieng and Co Kong  a storeowner’s employee
be coetaneous with the criminal act. (Coetaneous: of the same age or sold adulterated coffee and the storeowner did not know that
duration)  People v. Tan Diong the coffee was sold by his employee

Held: Both the storeowner and the employee were held liable each of them should perform a positive act directly
as principals (criminally liable under the Pure Food and Drugs contributing to the accomplishment of their common purpose.
Act) o People v. Mandagay  Murder case where offenders
previously agreed to commit said crime, not only the
IV. SECOND ELEMENT: That The Culprits “Carried Out Their Plan And one who inflicts the fatal wound is considered a
Personally Took Part In Its Execution By Acts Which Directly Tended principal but also the others to held the victim or stood
To The Same End.” guard outside. The acts of each and every one of the
offenders are all directed to the same end, which is the
A. The Principals By Direct Participation Must Be At The Scene Of The killing of the victim. Criminal responsibility in such a
Crime, Personally Taking Part In Its Execution. case is collective.
— General Rule: Principal by direct participation must personally — Only serving as guard pursuant to the conspiracy is a principal
take part in executing the criminal plan to be carried out. This by direct participation.
means that he must be at the scene of the commission of the o People v. Canumay  Appellants were part of plan to
crime, personally taking part in its execution. rob victim. At time of robbery they stood guard outside
o People v. Ong Chiat Lay  Held that one of the accused the house. Held: They are equally liable as the others.
not a principal by direct participation because he was o U.S. v. Reogilon  One who stands guard outside the
absent from the scene of the fire when the crime of house to keep others away or warning fellow
arson was committed by other accused conspirators while the latter are murdering the
— Exception: For as long as the conspirators perform specific acts occupant – takes direct part in commission of crime of
that were coordinated pursuant to the conspiracy, they are all murder and is guilty as a principal by direct
principals. Even if their acts are performed in different places. participation. He is in fact present, aiding, and abetting
o People v. Santos  There was conspiracy to kidnap in the commission of the crime.
and kill the victim and only one of the conspirators — Exception: People v. Samano
kidnapped the victim and after turning him over to his o Facts: Accused jointly tried for murder of three
co-conspirators for execution, left the spot where the persons. They were members of a guerilla unit and
victim was killed. Held: The one who kidnapped the were being charged of taking the deceased to their
victim was liable for murder committed by the others headquarters and beating him to death while
because he already performed his part and the killing investigating him on charges of espionage. Accused
was done by his co-conspirators in pursuance of the Samano and Alcantara acted as guards at place of crime
conspiracy. but did so in obedience to superior orders and without
knowledge that the deceased under investigation
B. The Acts Of Each Offender Must Directly Tend To The Same End. would be killed. There was no evidence that there was
— While principals by direct participation personally take part in conspiracy between those who pleaded guilty and the
the execution of their common purpose, it is not necessary that present appellants.

oHeld: When there is no conspiracy or unity of criminal PAR 2: “THOSE WHO DIRECTLY FORCE OR INDUCE OTHERS TO
purpose and intention indicating participation in the COMMIT IT.” (Principals By Induction)
criminal resolution, mere passive presence at the scene
of another’s crime does not constitute complicity. I. “Those Who Directly Force Or Induce Others To Commit [The Act].”
— BUT SEE People v. Masagnay  The Supreme Court held that a — Those who directly induce others to commit the act are called
person could be held liable as a conspirator even though he “principals by inducement” or “principals by induction” from
does not know every single detail of the crime, for as long as he the Spanish “autores por induccion”.
knows his role. — “Inducement” comprises price, promise of reward, command
and pacto (opinion of Viada and SC of Spain).
C. When The Second Requisite Is Lacking, There Is Only Conspiracy To
Commit A Crime II. The Principal By Induction Becomes Liable Only When The Principal
— IF this 2nd requisite is lacking: there is, at most, only conspiracy By Direct Participation Committed The Act Induced.
among several defendants who participated in criminal — People v. Ong Chiat Lay  One cannot be held guilty of having
resolution; if the crime they agreed and decided to commit is instigated the commission of the crime without first being
not treason, rebellion or sedition, they are not criminally liable. shown that the crime was actually committed by another.
— Example: — The qualifying circumstance of price, reward or promise in
o People v. Asaad  Four accused merely attended Article 14 is considered for both the principal by inducement
conferences and assented out of respect and fear and and principal by direct participation.
after commission of murders they joined other accused
in celebrating with a fiesta, by way of custom, they III. Two Ways Of Becoming Principal By Induction
were neither co-principals nor accomplices Under Article 17, paragraph 2:
o People v. Timbol  Dalmacio Timbol was acquitted of 1. By directly forcing another to commit a crime, and
the charge of murder because he merely conspired 2. By directly inducing another to commit a crime.
with his co-accused to kill deceased but left the place
before they began shooting him. A. By Directly Forcing Another To Commit A Crime
o People v. Pelagio  G’s participation in the first Two ways of directly forcing another to commit a crime:
meeting involved him in the conspiracy because he told 1. By using irresistible force.
the other the location of the house to be robbed, this 2. By causing uncontrollable fear.
however is inadequate to make him criminally liable as — In these cases (using force or causing fear), there is no
a conspirator. This because conspiracy alone without conspiracy, not even a unity of criminal purpose and intention.
execution of its purpose is not a crime punishable by Only the one using force or causing fear is criminally liable. The
law except in special instances which does not include material executor is not criminally liable because of Article 12,
robbery. (Article 8) paragraph 5 and 6.

B. By Directly Inducing Another To Commit A Crime o An inexperienced boy of tender age was persuaded by
Two ways of directly inducing another to commit a crime: a person to steal the jewels of his grandmother; the
1. By giving price, or offering reward or promise. person was found guilty of theft by inducement
o Both the one giving the price or offering reward or o Minors under 15 are easily susceptible to suggestions
promise and the one committing the crime in of inducer because they have no discernment or
consideration thereof are principals (former by judgment of their own so when they are induced to
inducement and latter by direct participation). There is commit a crime, the influence of the inducer is the
collective criminal responsibility. determining cause of the commission of the crime
o This applies even if the inducer does not pay the o Words of command of a father may induce his son to
principal by direct participation after the commission of commit a crime. Moral influence of the words of a
the crime. father (his words of command) may determine the
2. By using words of command. course of conduct of a son (because of the obedience
o Both the person who used the words of command and due to him). Compare With: same words coming from
the persons who commits the crime (because of the a stranger which would make no impression
words of command) are equally liable. There is also  People v. Bautista  The accused (exercising
collective responsibility. dominance and ascendancy) compelled his 3-
year old son to throw a stone at another boy
C. The Inducement May Be By Acts Of Command, Advice, Or Through which caused injury to the latter’s eye was a
Influence, Or Agreement For Consideration principal by inducement.
— Inducement and the commission of the crime wherein the 3. By using words of command.
inducer becomes the principal (with same extent and effect as o People v. Gensola  The command given must be the
if he had physically committed the crime) may exist in acts of moving cause of the offense. The evidence showed that
command, of advice, agreement for a consideration, or through the accused would have acted on his own volition even
an influence so effective that it alone determines the without the words of command (“Rufino, strike him!”)
commission of the crime o People v. Agapinay  An utterer will not be liable as
1. The promise of love can be sufficient inducement. principal by inducement if the imprudent utterance
o Example: A has a paramour B, who loved C. A told D to was said in the excitement of the hour or in heat of
kill B with the promise that he does, he will possess her anger (and not in a nature of a command that had to be
entirely. D killed B. A is a principal by inducement obeyed)
(People v. Ramos). o It must appear that the inducement was of such nature
2. The words of advice or the influence must have actually and was made in such a way as to become the
moved the hands of the principal by direct participation. determining cause of the crime and that such
inducement was uttered with the intention of
producing the result. (People v. Castillo)

o The inciting words must have great dominance and 5. The material executor of the crime has no personal reason to
influence over the person who act; they ought to be commit the crime.
direct and as efficacious or powerful as physical or o If the principal by direct participation has a personal
moral coercion or violence itself. (People v. Canial) reason to commit the crime, the supposed words of
inducement cannot be the determining cause.
D. Elements To Hold Person Liable As Principal By Inducement o People v. Kiichi Omine  Facts: Omine shouted
Through The Use Of Commands “pegale y matale” to Autor and he struck the deceased
— All five requisites must be present in order that a person using on the breast but before the utterance he had already
words of command be held liable as principal by inducement: struck the deceased with a fist blow on the right eye
1. That the one uttering the words of command must have the Held: Omine was not a principal by induction because
intention of procuring the commission of the crime. Autor had already struck beforehand and the utterance
2. That the one who made the command must have an was not sufficient because it doesn’t show that Omine
ascendancy or influence over the person who acted. has any particular influence over Autor. Autor = guilty
o U.S. v. Ganao  When B (a very influential figure in of serious physical injuries and Omine was acwuitted.
their community) selected A (his nephew who was poor
and depended on him) to commit the crime – the IV. Elements To Be Considered A Principal By Inducement
influence exercised by B over A was so great and 1. That the inducement be made directly with the intention of
powerful that the latter could not resist it. procuring the commission of the crime; and
3. That the words used must be so direct, so efficacious, so 2. That such inducement be the determining cause of the
powerful as to amount to physical or moral coercion. commission of the crime by the material executor.
o Efficacious – a person who makes accused believe that — U.S. v. Idanan  To constitute inducement, there must be on
the person to be killed was the one who stole the the part of the inducer the most positive resolution and the
accused’s property = guilty as principal by inducement; most persistent effort to secure the commission of the crime
even though the accused seem to have a personal together with the presentation to the person induced of the
reason, it was the inductor who made him believe so. very strongest kind of temptation to commit the crime.
o Powerful – U.S. v. Ganao.
4. The words of command must be uttered prior to the A. Examples
commission of the crime. — People v. Otadora
o This requisite is lacking when the commission of the o (First requisite) It was clear that she had the intention
crime has already been commenced when the words of of procuring the commission of the crime when she
inducement are uttered. furnished her co-accused the gun to kill the deceased
o A son who was already in combat with another was o (Second requisite) The accused promised her co-
told by the father “Hit him” – the father was not accused pecuniary gain which was the determining
responsible for the injuries inflicted after advice given cause of the commission of the crime

— People v. Alcontin would be followed or any real intention that it produce the
o (First requisite) A married woman suggested to her result. In such a case, the one who spoke the word or
paramour that he kill her husband; Held: the performed the act would not be guilty of the crime committed
proposition of the woman constituted something more by the other. (U.S. v. Idanan)
than mere counsel or advice that her co-defendant was — Example:
entirely free to accept or not. o A decision of the Supreme Court of Spain (cited in U.S.
o (Second requisite) The married woman’s promise of v. Idanan) held that a woman who robbed her husband
being able to freely live together with the paramour because a person told her that that’s the only thing to
was the determining cause of the commission of the do to him because he was stingy and treated her badly
crime – the person was not guilty of the crime committed of
— People v. Caimbre the crime of robbery by inducement because an
o Facts: Appellant was being prosecuted for uttering “you imprudent and ill-conceived advice is not sufficient; the
had better kill him” when his co-accused was attacking person did not have the intention of procuring the
the victim. commission of the crime.
o Held: Appellant was acquitted because he lacked the
first requisite because there was nothing to show that VIII. SECOND ELEMENT: That Such Inducement Be The Determining
appellant had any reason to have Olipmo killed; lacked Cause Of The Commission Of The Crime By The Material Executor
second requisite because he had no sufficient moral — The inducement must precede the act induced and must be so
influence over co-accused to make him obey blindly; influential in producing the criminal act that without it, the
and fourth requisite was lacking because his co-accused act would not have been performed.
had already boloed the victim before he uttered the o It is necessary that the inducement be the determining
words cause of the commission of the crime by the principal
by direct participation – that, without such inducement
VI. FIRST ELEMENT: That The Inducement Be Made Directly With The the crime would not have been committed (Decision of
Intention Of Procuring The Commission Of The Crime SC of Spain).
— The principal by inducement should be obeyed. o Inducement exists if the nature of the command or
advice is that without its concurrence – the crime
A. A Thoughtless Expression Without Intention To Produce The Result would not have materialized (People v. Cruz).
Is Not An Inducement To Commit A Crime — Price given to the principal by direct participation after the
— A chance word spoken without reflection/ a wrong commission of the crime, without prior promise to give a price
appreciation of a situation/ an ironical phrase/ a thoughtless or reward, could not be an inducement.
act may give birth to a thought or resolution to commit a crime
in the mind of one – without the one who spoke the word or
performed the act having any expectation that his suggestion

A. The one charged of inducing the commission of the crime is not — Proof of such extremes is usually required to justify such
liable if the person who actually committed a crime had a reason of conclusion.
his own to commit the crime. — Proof in unnecessary where the principal actor admits being
— People v. Castillo impelled and that he acted pursuant to a previous plan or
o Facts: Marincho Castillo (son) was slapped on the face conspiracy to kill and promise to condone his indebtedness
by the deceased Vargas. After 2 months, appellant (People v. Ulip)
Castillo (father) was talking to Vargas while holding a — There is collective criminal responsibility when words of
revolver (but not pointed to him). Suddenly, Marincho inducement were used.
came from behind and hacked the head of Vargas.
When he was about to hack him the second time, his C. One Who Planned The Crime Committed By Another Is A Principal
father told him “You kill him” and then they By Inducement
surrendered to the authorities. — Persons who planned the crime committed by other persons
o Held: Castillo is not guilty of being a co-principal by are guilty as authors by inducement.
inducement because Marincho has already given — If The Crime Committed Is Not Contemplated In The Order
Vargas a fatal blow on the head before Castillo Given, The Inducement Is Not Material And Not The
allegedly said “You kill him” because the utterances Determining Cause Thereof.  People v. Lawas
must be sufficient enough to be the determining cause o Facts: Accused Lawas was head of the home guards in a
of committing the crime barrio in Lanao and he orderd his men to shoot at
— Can a person who is present during a homicide but has no Moros suspected of having killed 11 Christian residents.
direct part in the act can be held criminally liable for inciting Some of the home guards fired at women and children
and encouraging another with expressions like “go ahead”, “hit at the second floor of the house.
him”, “there you have him”, “now is the time”? o Held: Lawas is not guilty of murder for the killing of the
o It depends upon whether these words were spoken women and children as principal by induction because
under conditions that give them a direct and his order was to fire at Moros on the ground and
determinative influence upon the mind of the principal clearly did not intend for women and children to be
actor. (People v. Tamayo) fired at.

B. Ascendancy Or Influence As To Amount To Moral Coercion Is Not IX. Principal By Induction In Falsification
Necessary When There Is Conspiracy — People v. Po Giok To  The employee did the overt act of
— To consider as principal by induction one who advises or incites entering false facts on the residence certificate of the accused
another to perpetrate an offense, it is essential to show that because the accused induced him to do so by supplying him
the advisor had so great an ascendancy or influence that his those facts. Held: Accused was a principal by inducement. The
words were so efficacious and powerful as to amount to moral employee was a mere innocent agent of performing the act
coercion. constituting the crime hence employee was not criminally liable

because he had no knowledge of the falsity of the facts o The crime committed by the principal by direct
supplied by the accused. participation must be that commanded by the principal
by inducement.
X. Principal By Inducement v. Offender Who Made Proposal To — A principal by inducement may still be held liable even if the
Commit A Felony principal by direct participation is exempt (Article 332).
o Example: falsification of documents, when the criminal
Principal By Inducement Offender Who Proposed To induces an 8-year-old to commit the crime.
Commit A Felony — Where the principal by inducement instructs the principal by
There is inducement to commit a There is inducement to commit a direct participation to do something – without necessarily
crime crime thinking of the possible consequences – both will be liable for
Liable only when crime is Mere proposal to commit a felony the proximate result. In short, Article 4 applies.
committed by principal by direct is punishable in treason or o Example: A told B to punch C in the back. C dies. Both
participation rebellion; person to whom are liable for the resulting death of C.
proposal is made should NOT
commit the crime XII. Possessor Of Recently Stolen Property Is A Principal
Inducement involves ANY crime Must involve ONLY treason and — Possessor of a recently stolen article is considered a principal,
rebellion to be punishable not an accessory or accomplice, unless he proves otherwise
satisfactorily and that another person who gave him the article
XI. Effects Of Acquittal Of Principal By Direct Participation Upon The was the one who stole it (Section 5(j), Rule 131, Rules of Court)
Liability Of Principal By Inducement
1. Conspiracy is negative by acquittal of co-defendant. PAR. 3: “THOSE WHO COOPERATE IN THE COMMISSION OF THE
2. It must be shown that another has actually committed the OFFENSE BY ANOTHER ACT WITHOUT WHICH IT WOULD NOT HAVE
crime; otherwise one cannot be guilty of instigating the crime. BEEN ACCOMPLISHED.” (Principals By Indispensible Cooperation)
o If the one charged as principal by direct participation
I. Meaning Of The Term “Cooperate”
was acquitted because he acted without criminal intent
or malice – his acquittal is not ground for acquitting the — To cooperate means to desire or wish in common a thing. The
principal by inducement. common will or purpose does not necessarily mean pervious
o Reason for rule: In exempting circumstances, when the understanding because it can be explained or inferred from the
act is not voluntary because of lack of intent – there is a circumstances of each case (People v. Apelgido).
crime committed but no criminal; in intentional
felonies, act of a person does not make him criminal II. Elements To Be Liable As Principal By Indispensable Cooperation:
unless his mind be criminal. 1. Participation in the criminal resolution.
— Mistake of identity of the victim committed by the principal by
direct participation. The principal by inducement is not liable.

2. Cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing Indispensable Cooperation. B is Principal by Direct
another act, without which it would not have been Participation.
IV. SECOND REQUISITE: Cooperation must be indispensible without
III. FIRST ELEMENT: Participation In The Criminal Resolution which the commission of the crime would not have been
— The participation of a principal by indispensable cooperation is accomplished.
different from the overt act committed by a principal by direct — If the cooperation is not indispensible, the offender is only an
participation. accomplice.

A. Being A Co-Conspirator Is Not Necessary A. “Cooperate X X X By Another Act”

— A principal by indispensable cooperation need not be a party in — Act of the principal by indispensible cooperation should be
the planning stage of the conspiracy for he may become a different from the act of the principal by direct participation.
principal at the moment of the execution of the crime with the — Law says “by another act” which means it should not be the act
other principals, if his act was indispensable to the crime. of one who would be classified as principal by direct
o Hence, even if he was absent at the meeting where the participation.
planning occurred, if his act showed that it was — Examples:
indispensable to the criminal design of the principal by o U.S. v. Javier  Facts: C was the one who forced and
direct participation, he will be liable as a principal by dragged the girl to the back of the house where J was
indispensable cooperation. waiting to perpetrate the crime. C had a previous
agreement with J. After delivering the girl, C left so that
B. May There Be Cooperation By Acts Of Negligence? J can consummate the prearranged rape. Held: C
— A person becomes a co-principal through acts of negligence cooperated in the perpetration of the crime by acts
cooperates in the commission of estafa through falsification or without which its commission would not have been
malversation through falsification (without which the accomplished.
commission of the crime could not have been accomplished).  Act of cooperation: forcible taking of the girl to
— The one who cooperated in the commission of the crime was the place of commission of rape by other
held guilty of the same crime through reckless imprudence accused.
(Samson v. Court of Appeals).  Act of execution: sexual intercourse with the
woman against her will.
C. The Principal By Indispensable Cooperation Need Not Be In The o U.S. v. Lim Buanco  Facts: R, employee of a bank,
Scene Of The Crime indorsed upon a check drawn by B so that B, even
— Example: A, who lives in the U.S., gives B poison to kill C. B used without sufficient funds in the bank, may still draw the
the poison to kill C here in the Philippines. A is Principal by amount of the check when he presents it to the cashier
of the bank. The endorsement of R was in connivance

with B knowing he didn’t have funds but indorsed it o Malversation through falsification of public documents
still. Held: R was a principal by indispensible committed by a public officer in conspiracy with a
cooperation. private individual. Private individual may be liable for
 Act of cooperation: Certification that the check malversation (People v. Sandaydiego).
was entitled to payment o Husband gives poison to friend to kill wife. Friend is
 Act of execution: Crime of estafa by B liable for homicide, and husband for parricide.
committed as principal by direct participation –
the fraudulent cashing of the cash that OTHER MATTERS
damaged the bank To be liable as principals, the offender must fall under any of the
o In the 2 cases, the cooperation of the other accused three concepts defined in Article 17.
was the performance of an act different from the act of — A person who assists one who commits the crime of arson and
execution of the crime committed by the other who knows the latter’s purpose (but whose participation in the
accused. arson is not known) may not be considered as a principal
— If cooperation of one accused consists in doing an act necessary because his acts were neither direct nor absolutely necessary
in the execution of the crime, he is a principal by direct for the commission of the offense nor did it induce the said
participation. commission (SC of Spain decision)
o Example: In a homicide case one of the offenders held
the victim while the other was stabbing him. The one Collective criminal responsibility.
who held victim was principal by direct participation, — Present when offenders are criminally liable in the same
BUT there are cases where the Supreme Court manner and to same extent; penalty imposed must be same for
considered such accused as a principal by indispensible all.
cooperation — Who has collective criminal responsibility?
o Principals by direct participation.
B. Liability Of Conspirators Who Took Turns In Raping A Girl. o Principal by induction with the principal by direct
— People v. Villa  Four persons took turns in raping a girl; others participation (EXCEPT the principal by induction who
held her while one had intercourse with her. directly forced another to commit a crime).
Held: Each of them is responsible for his own act of rape and o Principal by indispensible cooperation with the
also for the acts of the others. Four sentences were imposed on principal by direct participation.
each accused.
Individual Criminal responsibility.
V. A Principal By Indispensable Cooperation May Commit A Crime — If there is no previous conspiracy/ unity of criminal purpose and
Different From A Principal By Direct Participation intention immediately before commission of crime/ community
— Example: of criminal design = criminal responsibility arising from different

acts directed against one and the same person is individual and determined independently of and separately from
not collective. liability of principal by direct participation (People v.
— Each of the participants is liable only for the act committed by Rafael).
him. — Dismissal of case against principal: If the case is dismissed
Example of individual responsibility.  cited in People v. Martinez against the principal by direct participation, the case against
— Facts: Deceased assaulted a group of three individuals, in their the accessory/accomplice must also be dismissed because the
(incomplete) self-defense, two of them caused less serious liability of the accomplice/accessory is subordinate to that of
physical injuries on the assailant deceased while one inflicted a the principal by direct participation. The accomplice/accessory
fatal wound. is like a shadow that follows the principal by direct participation
— Held: Only the one who gave the fatal wound would be and not the other way around (PCGG v. Desierto).
principally liable for homicide and the others liable only for less o Principal by direct participation acquitted because
serious physical injuries. crime was not committed at all. What happens to
accomplice/accessory? They can’t be charged. Crime
Article 18. — Accomplices. was not committed.
Accomplices are those persons who, not being included in Article 17, o Dismissal of the case against the accomplice/accessory
cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous does not result to the dismissal of the case against the
acts. principal by direct participation.
— Exemption of principal from criminal liability: BUT if the
POINTS principal by direct participation is exempted from the crime, it
does not follow that the accomplice/accessory is exempted, or
I. Quasi-Collective Criminal Responsibility that the case against the accomplice/accessory should be
— Between collective and individual criminal responsibility  dismissed as well.
quasi-collective criminal responsibility. — Principal by direct participation is dead. Can accomplice/
— In quasi-collective responsibility, some are principals and others accessory still be charged? Yes, they can still be prosecuted.
are accomplices.
II. The Participation Of An Accomplice Presupposes The Commission
A. Liability Of Accomplice Based On Principal Of The Crime By The Principal By Direct Participation
— May one be charged and convicted as accomplice/accessory — Principal element of complicity: concurrence of will of
even before the principal is charged or convicted? Should the accomplice with the will of the author of the crime (principal).
PDP first be convicted before the accomplice/accessory be o He is not a principal (so he must not be part of the
charged or convicted? conspiracy), but he supplies material or moral aid to
o As long as the commission of the crime is proven the principal in an efficacious way.
beyond reasonable doubt, determination of criminal — The accomplice cooperates by previous or simultaneous acts in
responsibility of accessory/accomplice may be the execution of the offense by the principal.

o He intends to, and does, take part in the crime. IV. An Accomplice Does Not Have Previous Agreement Of
o BUT, his cooperation is not indispensable to the crime. Understanding Or Is Not In Conspiracy With The Principal By Direct
III. “Not being included in Article 17.” — Accomplice does not enter into conspiracy with principal by
— An accomplice does not fall under any of the three concepts direct participation nor does he have a previous agreement or
defined in Article 17. understanding with him to commit a crime BUT he participates
— Those who cooperated by previous or simultaneous acts cannot to a certain point in the common criminal design.
be held liable as principals but as accomplices. — Accomplices come to know of the criminal resolution of the
principals after the latter have reached a decision to commit a
A. In Case Of Doubt As To Whether Principal Or Accomplice crime. The accomplice does not decide the commission of a
— In case of DOUBT – participation of offender is considered as crime. The accomplice just agrees after the criminal resolution
accomplice rather than principal. is accomplished, he does not conspire. But if the accomplice
o Quantum of proof lacking = milder form of criminal commits an act of execution, he becomes a PDP.
liability: as accomplice. — NOTE: An accomplice gets a penalty one degree lower than that
o People v. Celemente  eyewitness unable to assert if provided for the principal in a consummated felony (Article 52).
appellants hit the fallen man (uncertain participation in
homicide) and there was no conspiracy shown. Held: A. Accomplice v Conspirator
appellants declared accomplices only.
— Mere presence at scene, knowledge of plan, and acquiescence Conspirator Accomplice
is insufficient ground to hold a person as conspirator therefore Knowing and agreeing with criminal design
will be held liable only as accomplice. Knowledge of the criminal Gets knowledge of the criminal intent
intention is because they after principals have reached the
B. When The Participation Of An Accused Is Not Disclosed, He Is Only decided the specific course of decision – and then they agree to
As Accomplice action cooperate in its execution
— In criminal cases, the participation of accused must be proved Decide that a crime should be Merely concurs to do the crime;
by positive and competent evidence (beyond reasonable committed merely assent to the plan and
doubt) BY the prosecution. It can't be presumed.
cooperate in its accomplishment
— People v. Ubina: If a person assists in arson because he knows
Authors of a crime Instruments who perform acts not
the purpose of the principal, but his participation is
essential to perpetration of offense
undisclosed. Held: His actions are neither direct nor absolutely
necessary for the commission of the offense nor induce the
B. May A Co-Conspirator Be Held Liable As An Accomplice Only?
— If technically the accused are co-conspirators BUT their
participation was not absolutely indispensible to the

consummation of the murder  court should favor milder form — There must be a principal by direct participation before there
of liability = accomplice. could be an accomplice.
— Example: o The principal originates the design and the accomplice
o People v. Anin  Even with knowledge of criminal merely concurs with it.
intent but the overt acts of co-accused was still not — Cooperation which the law punishes: assistance knowingly or
indispensible to the crime of homicide = accomplice. intentionally given and which is not possible without previous
o People v. Nierra  Even with community of design but knowledge of the criminal purpose.
role in homicide or murder was of a minor character = o People v. Lingad  Taxi driver knowing that co-accused
accomplice. were going to make a hold-up let’s them use his cab to
o BUT SEE People v. Manzano and People v. Mendoza where the crime will be staged and waited for them
Once proved that accused had conspired with others after. Held: taxi driver is an accomplice
accused, liability only as accomplice is untenable; the o U.S. v. Bello  Sentry permitted some convicts to go
act of one is the act of all out of jail accompanies by guard then the convicts
committed robbery. Held: Sentry not liable as
Community of Design Participation in the Criminal accomplice because he had no knowledge of their
Resolution intention to commit robbery when he let them out
Does not necessarily mean that Implies conspiracy
there is conspiracy but it may A. Community of design.
develop into one — The accomplice intends by his acts, to commit or take part in
Mere concurrence with criminal Entering into an agreement and the execution of the crime  Carino v. People
purpose deciding to commit a felony o Facts: Appellant was the close friend of Dr. Lava (the
accused in crime of rebellion). Lava has been helping
V. Elements To Be Liable As Accomplices: appellant’s family in terms of health services and in
1. There be community of design: knowing the criminal design of return when accused Dr. Lava asked for shelter and
the principal by direct participation and concurs with him/her in food from appellant, he provided the same for Lava not
that purpose. knowing that he was helping a “rebel”. Lava was part of
2. That he cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous the Huks and appellant helped Lava open bank
or simultaneous acts by supplying material or moral aid in the accounts and assisted them with money matters.
execution of the crime in an efficacious way. Held: Appellant was not considered an accomplice to
3. There be a relation between the acts by the principal and the rebellion because his acts of helping did not fall under
accomplice. the definition of rebellion in RPC nor does he fall under
Art 18’s definition of accomplice because his intent to
VI. FIRST ELEMENT: Community Of Design rebel against the government was not proven and his

assistance was not efficacious enough to make Held: Servant was an accomplice and master was a
insurrection or rebellion successful. principal by direct participation.
o People v. Maliao  Accused facilitated commission of 2. When the accomplice saw the criminal acts of the principal.
crime by providing his house as the venue of the crime. o People v. Tamayo  Ramon was choking the deceased
Even though he had no direct participation in the then Jose delivered a blow on the head of the deceased
crime’s execution, he was present throughout it, and which Ramon saw but he still continued with choking
he did not do anything to stop the malefactors nor help the deceased.
the victim therefore he is guilty as accomplice in crime Held: Ramon is an accomplice; showed that Ramon
of rape with homicide approved/participated with the criminal design of Jose
— The community of design need not be to commit the crime because he continued choking deceased after the blow.
actually committed. It is sufficient if there was a common o People v. Cagalingan  A. Cagalingan stabbed the
purpose to commit a particular crime and that the crime deceased first then J. Cagalingan and Romina Jr.
actually committed was a natural or probable consequences stabbed the deceased after.
of the intended crime. Held: Even if there shows a community of design with
o People v. Largo  Verzo caused Salazar and Largo to the principal, the stabbing of J Cagalingan and Romina
load a time bomb in a plane which killed the deceased Jr. were not indispensible to the commission of the
and others. Held: Salazar and Largo were accomplices crime because A Cagalingan’s stabbing was fatal
in the crime of Verzo who was the principal already, therefore the two are only accomplices.
o U.S. v. De Jesus  Three men entered Osete’s house to o People v. Manansala:  Even after the first knife thrust
abduct his daughter but instead they ended up killing delivered to the deceased, the accused did not try to
Osete. Two other men were stationed outside by the stop the other accused either by word or overt act
carriage, which brought them there to be lookouts. Held: Accused is an accomplice because even if his
Held: The two are accomplices because even if the initial intent was free from guilt, it became tainted after
homicide was not part of the original plan, it was a he saw the first knife thrust delivered.
possibility to carry out the abduction. — In case there is no conspiracy or unity of criminal
purpose/intention among accused, what should be considered
B. How An Accomplice Acquires Knowledge Of The Criminal Design Of is the criminal design/intent entertained by the accused that
The Principal. inflicted the more or most serious wound on the victim. This
1. Principal informs or tells the accomplice of the former’s can be inferred from the nature of the weapon or the body part
criminal purpose. injured.
o U.S. v. Sotto  Master told his servant that he would — No knowledge of the criminal design of the principal – not an
abduct the a girl under 18 years and he prompted said accomplice.
servant to induce the girl to leave her home and the o People v. Ibanez  Even if the act of the accused
servant did. (holding deceased’s neck from behind) coincided with

the other accused’s act of stabbing, simultaneousness 1. By previous acts.

does not itself demonstrate the concurrence of will nor o Lending of a dagger or pistol to murderer knowing his
the unity of action and purpose which are the bases of criminal purpose.
the responsibility of two or more individuals o U.S. v. Flores  Pharmacist (knowing the criminal
o U.S. v. Flores  Limbo was employee of the Bureau of purpose) furnishes the accused with the drug which he
Printing and stole bank certificates for cattle used in order to help him rape the victim.
registration and sold to co-defendant Flores. Flores o When the owner of the gun knew that it would be
used these to sell horses, which they got through theft. used to kill a particular person, and the principal used
Limbo had no part nor knowledge nor share in the sale it to kill another person, the owner of the gun is not
of the stolen horses. an accomplice as to the killing of the victim.
Held: Limbo liable only for theft of bank certificates but  People v. De la Cerna  Serapio borrowed the
was neither a principal nor an accomplice nor an rifle of Sulpicio in order to kill Rafael (as per
accessory of the theft committed by the other their agreement) but then Serapio used it to kill
defendants Casiano. There was no evidence that Sulipicio
was aware that Serapio would do so. Held:
C. Concurrence With The Criminal Purpose Of Another May Make One Sulpicio acquitted for the killing of Casiano
A Co-Principal 2. By simultaneous acts.
— Even if only one of the accused originated the criminal design o People v. Escarro  No previous agreement or
and the other merely concurred BUT BEFORE the actual understanding with co-defendant but defendant held
commission of the crime BOTH of them agreed and decided to hand of victim and tried to take away his revolver while
commit it, then the other will now be held a principal and not co-defendant attacked victim.
an accomplice because he has become a co-conspirator. o People v. Crisostomo  No conspiracy among the 6
o BASICALLY, you are an accomplice if the original person persons – three detained offended woman were
will commit the crime with or without your help. You principals in crime of illegal detention and three others
are dispensable! Replaceable! held victim’s companion to prevent latter from helping
victim were accomplices.
VII. SECOND ELEMENT: Cooperates In The Execution Of The Offense
— The accomplice cooperates with the principal by direct A. The Cooperation Of An Accomplice Is Not Due To A Conspiracy
participation BUT his cooperation is only necessary and not — People v. Francisco  Facts: Francisco (then Mayor in Isabela)
indispensable. was accompanied by Berganio, Badua, Dasalla, and Tagasa
— However if there is conspiracy: the nature of the cooperation when he brought Corpus from the municipal building to the
becomes immaterial. constabulary and wanted the Corporal to detain him there. But
Corporal refused because they didn’t have a detention cell and
A. Examples Of Cooperation By Accomplice

so they brought Corpus to another Barrio and Corpus Moral aid: through advice, encouragement, or
disappeared and was not seen anymore. agreement.
Held: Companions of Francisco were held as accomplices  But the advice, encouragement, or agreement
because even if there was no conspiracy, they helped Francisco should not be the determining cause of the
being Corpus around in a jeep. Their acts constitute commission of the crime by the principal by
cooperation by simultaneous or previous acts. direct participation or else the one who gave it
would be a principal by inducement.
B. When The Acts Of The Accused Are Not Indispensable In The Killing, — Example:
They Are Merely Accomplices o People v. Ubina  Ubina conspired with five persons to
— People v. Villegas  Nature of the killing was an offshoot of a kill Carag because he lost in an election to him and he
spontaneous turn of events – not a previously conceived was also insulted by Carag. The five persons brought 3
ambush as seen by the use of stones of the accused. Held as others where Carag was killed but they did not
accomplices because they cooperated by simultaneous acts participate in the act of killing itself. Held: The 3 others’
which were not indispensable. presence and company was not indispensable and
— People v. Resayaga  Acts of blocking the people who tried to essential to the perpetration of the murder but they
help victim is one of help and cooperation to assailants but not were present and they gave moral support =
indispensable to stabbing of victim. Held as accomplice accomplices.
— People v. Parcon  No conspiracy but one acted as look-out or o People v. Balili  No proof appellant conspired with
guard in crime of robbery with homicide held as accomplice malefactors but he went with them, knew of criminal
intent, and stayed outside of house while other robbed
C. The Accomplice Merely Supplies The Principal With Material Or and killed victim. Held: Appellant is an accomplice
Moral Aid Without Conspiracy With The Latter because he supplied material and moral aid
— Being present and giving moral support when a crime is being o People v. Vicente  Inflicting stab wounds to victim
committed will make a person responsible only as accomplice only after victim fell on ground and only because he
in the crime committed. wanted to show a feeling of camaraderie with other
o If knowledge of criminal purpose of principal is absent = accused or a “show-off” or an expression of sympathy –
giving aid or encouragement either morally or guilty only as accomplice because his act was not
materially in commission of crime or mere presence at necessary and indispensable for the criminal assault
scene of crime does not make one an accomplice
(People v. Toling). D. Wounds Inflicted By An Accomplice In Crimes Against Persons
— The moral aid may be through advice, encouragement, or Should Not Have Caused The Death Of The Victim
agreement. — Accomplice should not have inflicted a mortal wound (or else
o Material aid: external acts. liable as principal).

— U.S. v. Zalsos  Both were liable as co-principals because both — There must be a relation between the criminal act of the
inflicted a mortal wound on the neck of the victim even if R principal and the act of the one charged as accomplice.
originated the intention to assault deceased and Z just assisted o Not enough that a person entertains an identical
action of initiator of the crime criminal design as that of the principal – there must be
— Following cases – other accused were held as accomplices a relation between the criminal act of principal by
only – wound inflicted by them were not the cause of death: direct participation and of person charged as
o People v. Azcona  wounds inflicted did not materially accomplice.
contribute to death of deceased. o People v. De la Cruz  Reyes attacked and passed his
o People v. Tamayo  wound inflicted not of a character hand over his girlfriend’s body and their families
that would result to death of deceased. decided that the father of Reyes would punish him.
o People v. Cortes  accused armed with clubs struck Brother of the girl planned to avenge the honor of his
victim, AS he fell by fatal blow made by principal, and sister armed himself with a pistol. When he was about
he did not cause serious injuries on deceased. to attack Reyes, Reyes was stabbed by his sister and
o People v. Antonio  stoning victim already mortally died. Brother was accused as accomplice. Held: No
wounded by other accused. liability by reason of participation if there is no relation
— In These Cases, The Following Rules Are Indicated: between criminal act of principal by direct participation
1. One who had the original criminal design is the person who (girl) and of the person charged as accomplice
committed resulting crime. (brother).
2. The accomplice, after concurring in criminal purpose of
principal, cooperates by previous or simultaneous acts. A. An Accomplice May Be Liable For A Crime Different From That
If by simultaneous act – accomplice acts while crime is being Which The Principal Committed
committed by principal by direct participation or immediately — People v. Babiera  It was not shown that C and D knew of the
thereafter (ex. Principal already attacked the victim). manner A attacked B but they knew that A had unlawfully
3. Accomplice in crimes against persons does not inflict the more attacked B. Held: C and D were guilty as accomplices in crime of
or most serious wounds. homicide (A was guilty of murder qualified by treachery)
o Example: C stabbed B first, and as B was in dying — People v. Valdellon  NARIC guard A asked C to help him (A)
condition, A gave a fist blow on B’s face – A is an get some sacks of rice from the NARIC warehouse then A sold
accomplice. them to D. Held: C is only guilty as accomplice in commission of
o Reason: When A gave a fist blow after C gave a mortal simple theft. A guilty of qualified theft because of the qualifying
wound, it shows that A concurred in the criminal circumstance of grave abuse of confidence (this did not apply
purpose of C. to C because he wasn’t affiliated with NARIC).
— People v. Doble  Appellants joined in plan to rob by providing
VIII. THIRD ELEMENT: Relation Between The Acts banca for the robbery but there was killing committed in the
course of the robbery by the principals (others). Held:

Appellants only accomplices because they couldn’t have and their acts collectively demonstrate the existence of
prevented the killing because they were left at the banca a common design, conspiracy becomes evident and all
will be liable as principals.
IX. Accomplice v. Principal — Principals and accomplices both know and agree with the
A. In General, An Accomplice: criminal design. They have that in common. Difference lies in
— Does not take direct part in commission of act. the fact that conspirators know the criminal intention because
— Does not force nor induce others to commit it. they themselves have decided to commit the crime;
— Does not cooperate in the commission of the crime by another accomplices just come to know about it after.
act without which it would not have been accomplished.
— Cooperates in the execution of the act by previous or B. Accomplice v. Principal by Indispensable Cooperation
simultaneous actions.
Accomplice Principal by Indispensable Cooperation
As to… Principals Accomplices Participation of offender in a Case of a co-principal by cooperation –
Inducement Without such Inducement or utterance is case of complicity – indispensible.
inducement, crime not indispensable with or necessary only.
would not be without such, the crime would
committed still be committed (since — Examples: One lends dagger or pistol knowing borrower is
principal already determined going to commit murder – cooperation with a previous act but
to commit the crime) not indispensable cause offender could have borrowed or
Cooperation Indispensable Minor gotten weapon from someone/somewhere else
When acts are Act before or during the commission of the crime — People v. Templonuevo  Accused (with knowledge of
committed intention of other accused to kill the deceased) struck deceased
Conspiracy Decide the crime’s Merely concurs with the plan on forehead with piece of wood facilitating subsequent slaying
commission already decided of deceased because it made him unconscious. Held: Accused is
Authors of the crime Mere instruments who guilty as accomplice
perform acts not essential to — People v. Geronimo  Romeo held the victim while the others
the perpetration boloed him (without conspiracy among them) Held: Romeo is
only an accomplice because others could have hacked
— Mere knowledge and participation therefore do not suffice to deceased even without him holding
make one a conspirator, for such are elements also of an
accomplice, especially if even without his participation (like a C. Accomplice v. Principal By Direct Participation
look-out), the crime could have been accomplished.
o However, where the acts of the accused show that he Accomplice Principal By Direct Participation
shared in the community of purpose with the principals Person entertained owner of a If the person was in the same

house (some distance away from place talking to the owner of the any of the following manners:
the said place) while robbers were house (distracting him and serving 1. By profiting themselves or assisting the offender to profit by
assaulting it – so that owner will as guard to warn companions the effects of the crime.
not return until after robbery has robbing the place) – he is a 2. By concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the
been consummated – an principal by direct participation. effects or instruments thereof, in order to prevent its
accomplice in the crime because discovery.
he cooperated by a simultaneous 3. By harboring, concealing, or assisting in the escape of the
act but not indispensable (U.S. v. principals of the crime, provided the accessory acts with
Diris). abuse of his public functions or whenever the author of the
No conspiracy with principals In conspiracy with other principals crime is guilty of treason, parricide, murder, or an attempt to
take the life of the Chief Executive, or is known to be
X. Liability Of Accomplices Under Special Laws habitually guilty of some other crime.
— Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law (Presidential
Decree 532)  anyone who aids or abets piracy or robbery in POINTS
the highway is considered an accomplice, not an accessory.
— Human Securities Act (Republic Act No. 9372)  an I. Definition
accomplice basically follows the same definition of the Revised — An accessory does not participate in the criminal design, nor
Penal Code. cooperate in the commission of the felony, but with knowledge
— Genocide Law (Republic Act No. 9851)  an accomplice is one of the commission of the crime he subsequently takes part in
who facilitates the commission of the crime. three ways mentioned in the article.
— Anti-Torture Act (Republic Act No. 9745)  there is no
definition of an accomplice. (So I guess follow the Revised Penal II. Important Words And Phrases In Article 19
Code for having suppletory effect?) A. “Having Knowledge”
— Are there accomplices in bigamy? A, a married man, marries B — An accessory must have knowledge of the crime, and with that
who knew of A’s subsisting marriage. knowledge took part in subsequent to its commission.
o One case (Can’t find the citation which J-Call o In the absence of the purchaser’s knowledge at the
mentioned") said A is a PDP, while B is an accomplice. time of transaction that such goods were of illegal
o Another case (People v. Nepomuceno, G.R. No. L- origin, the customer who purchases such goods cannot
40624, June 27, 1975) said A is a PDP, while B is a PIC. be held criminally responsible as accessory (People v.
Article 19. — Accessories. — Mere possession of stolen property does not make the accused
Accessories are those who, having knowledge of the commission of an accessory where the thief was already convicted.
the crime, and without having participated therein, either as o Rational: It is within the real of possibilities that the
principals or accomplices, take part subsequent to its commission in individual received the stolen property honestly, in the

legal course of transaction without knowing that it was conclusion is that he had knowledge of their illegal
stolen (People v. Racimo). source.
— Entertaining suspicion that a crime has been committed is not
enough. B. “Commission Of The Crime”
o Knowledge and suspicion are not synonymous terms: — The crime committed by the principal must be proved beyond
 Suspicion  being the imagination of the reasonable doubt.
existence of something without proof, or upon — People v. Pardito  where there is doubt as to whether the
very slight evidence or upon no evidence at all. woman committed the crime of parricide or not (i.e. not
 Knowledge  known actual facts. conclusively proven), the fact that the servant helped bury the
— Knowledge of the commission of a crime may be acquired body does not make him an accessory in parricide.
subsequence to the acquisition of stolen property.
o U.S. v. Montano C. “Without Having Participated Therein Either As Principals Or
 Facts: Robbers took and carried away a Accomplices”
carabao. These were found in the possession of — Facts: A attacked B, and B fell. C and D then each hit B with a
A who acquired them without knowing they piece of wood. B died and was buried by all three.
had been illegally taken. Owners informed A Issue: Can anyone be held as an accessory?
that they were stolen and agreed to pay half of Held: No. A is principal by direct participation. C and D are
what A had paid for them. When the owners accomplices.
returned with the payment, A said the
carabaos were returned to the seller. D. “Take part subsequent to its commission”
 Issue: Is A liable as an accessory? — The accessory takes part after the crime has been committed.
 Held: Yes. To declare the accused guilty as
accessory, it is not necessary that he should PAR 1: BY PROFITING THEMSELVES OR ASSISTING THE OFFENDER TO
have acquired the property knowing at that PROFIT BY THE EFFECTS OF THE CRIME.
time that it had been stolen. It is sufficient that
after acquiring that knowledge, he concealed I. Note:
or disposed of the property, thereby depriving — The crime committed by the principal in this paragraph may be
the owner thereof. any crime, but it must not be a light felony.
— Knowledge of the commission of the crime may be established
by circumstantial evidence. II. Important Words And Phrases
o People v. Dalena  When a person knew his co- A. “By Profiting Themselves By The Effects Of The Crime”
accused had no legitimate business and there was no — Intent to gain is not enough, there must have been actual gain
rational reason for the accused to believe that his co- or material benefit.
accused’s possession of said goods were legitimate, the — Examples:

o One who received a property knowing it was stolen, I. Note:

and used it (People v. Tanchoco). — The crime committed by the principal in this paragraph may be
o One who shared the reward for the commission of the any crime, but it must not be a light felony.
crime profited through it (U.S. v. Empainado).
— The accessory should not take the property without the II. Important Words And Phrases
consent of the principal otherwise it would be theft. A. “Body Of The Crime”
— When is profiting by the effects of the crime punished as the — Corpus Delicti  the body/substance of the offense or crime.
act of principal and not the act of accessory? o This is proof that a specific offense was in fact
o When a person knowingly acquired or received committed by someone.
property taken by the brigands (Article 307). o Made up of 2 things: (1) Existence of a certain act or
o Anti-Fencing Law (Presidential Decree No. 1612)  a result forming the basis of the criminal charge (criminal
person is liable as principal if he buys, sells, possesses event), and (2) Existence of a criminal agency as the
or profits from the commission of robbery or theft. cause of this actor result (criminal responsibility).
 BUT they may also be charted as accessories to — There must be an attempt to hide the body of the crime.
the crime of robbery or theft. It’s up to the o People v. De la Cruz  Facts: Accused was ordered to
prosecution what the charge will be. board the jeep not knowing or even suspecting the
reason for it. He did not take part in the killing, nor
B. “Assisting The Offender To Profit By The Effects Of The Crime” profit, nor try to help conceal it as the bodies were
— Examples: merely thrown in the ditch. Held: Accused must be
o A person knowing the item was stolen, sells it for the acquitted.
thief (U.S. v. Galanco). — Concealing or destroying the effects or instruments of the
o Those who acted as runner or couriers in kidnapping crime to prevent its discovery.
for ransom (People v. Magsino). o Accused is an accessory has he helped hide the weapon
— An accessory should not be in conspiracy with the principal used to kill. The pistol or knife is the instrument of the
(otherwise he would also be punished as principal). crime.
o U.S. v. Tan Tiap Co — Examples:
o Facts: A conspired with others to steal goods, and o Assisting in the burial of the victim (U.S. v. Leal).
agreed to pay upon delivery of goods. o Making it appear that the victim had to be killed
o Held: A is guilty of the crime of theft as principal, not because he resisted by placing a gun in his hand when
just accessory. already dead (U.S. v. Cuison).
o The mere act of carrying the cadaver of one unlawfully
PAR. 2: BY CONCEALING OR DESTROYING THE BODY OF THE CRIME TO killed when it was buried to prevent the discovery of
PREVENT ITS DISCOVERY the crime, is sufficient to make him responsible as an
accessory (People v. Galleto)

o REQUISITE: The accessory must have knowledge of the

B. “To Prevent Its Discovery” principal being habitually guilty of some other crime.
— Its  refers to the crime. — A mayor who refused to prosecute the offender is an accessory.
— What is being concealed is the body of the crime, the effects or U.S. v. Yacat  Mayor of the town of Cabiao refused to
instruments NOT the principal who committed the crime. There prosecute the crime of homicide thus making it possible for the
must be an effort to prevent the discovery of the crime. offender to escape.
— Accused policemen witnessed the killing of the victim by co-
PAR. 3: BY HARBORING, CONCEALING OR ASSISTING IN THE ESCAPE accused. Policeman failed to arrest culprit and even told co-
OF THE PRINCIPAL OF THE CRIME accused not to tell the other policeman. Was policeman an
accessory? Damn right he was, under 3rd paragraph. It was his
I. Two Classes Of Accessories Contemplated In Paragraph 3 duty to arrest culprit and not to conceal commission of crime
A. Public Officers by silence or misleading authorities that accused was really
1. The accessory is a public officer. culprit. By his acts, he abused his public position (People v.
2. He harbors, conceals or assists in the escape of the principal. Antonio).
3. The public officer acts with abuse of his public functions. — One who kept silent with regard to the crime he witnessed is
4. The crime committed by the principal is any crime, provided it not an accessory.
is not a light felony. o U.S. v. Caballeros  Person who saw the commission
of murder and kept silent and does not report to
B. Private Persons authorities, is not liable for anything.
1. That the accessory is a private person o U.S. v. Romulo  Person who volunteers false
2. That he harbors, conceals or assists in the escape of the author information tended to deceive the prosecution and
of the crime. assist in concealing the guilty party is liable.
3. That the crime committed by the principal is either: — A policeman who aids a murderer escape prison is liable for
a. Treason infidelity, while the latter is liable for evasion of sentence.
b. Parricide o May the policeman be held liable as accessory for
c. Murder evasion of sentence of the murderer?
d. Attempt on the life of the President  Justice Callejo: YES.
e. That the principal is known to be habitually guilty of  But isn’t the policeman a PDP or PIC?
some other crime. Leviste couldn’t have escaped were it
not for the actions of the policeman.
II. “Habitually guilty of some other crime” (ewan.)
— Example: A person who previously punished for less physical  Boado: Those who assist the principal to escape
injuries three times, and then commits estafa is a “habitually maybe prosecuted under Presidential Decree
guilty”, and whoever helps in his escape becomes an accessory. No. 1829 for obstruction of justice not as

accessory but as a principal, provided that a Principal Accomplice Accessory

separate information shall be prepared for the Takes direct part or cooperate or Does not take direct part or
crime of obstruction. induce in the commission of the cooperate in or induce the
crime commission of the crime
III. Accessories Liability Is Subordinate And Subsequent Cooperates in the commission of Does not cooperate in the
— Reason: The accessory’s participation therein is subsequent to the offense prior, during or after. commission of the offense by
the crime’s commission, and his guilt is directly related to that acts either prior thereto or
of the principal. simultaneous therewith.
o If the facts alleged are not proven in the prosecution Participation takes place prior, Participation always takes place
instituted or do not constitute a crime, no legal during and after AFTER the commission of the
grounds exist for convicting a defendant as an crime.
accessory since no crime has been perpetrated (U.S. v. Knows the criminal design of the Knows the commission of the
Mendoza). principal offense
— Is conviction of accessory possible even if principal is acquitted? No exemption Exempted under Article 20 and
o YES, if the crime was in fact committed, but the for light felonies under Article 16
principal was acquitted because of Article 12.
Provides direct or Provides Acts in the 3 ways enumerated
o See p. 590 – 591 for examples. indispensable material or under Article 19
— Apprehension and conviction of the principal is not necessary
participation, or moral aid in an
for the accessory to be held criminally liable.
was liable for efficacious way
o So long as the requisites for the existence of the crime
inducement. but not in a
are present and that someone committed them, the
accessory may be held criminally liable.
o In the same way, the trial of the accessory may be
to the offense
resolved prior to that of the principal so long as the
above is satisfied. Full penalty 1 degree lower 2 degrees lower than principal
o The accessory may be prosecuted and convicted even if Article 20. — Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability.
the principal is not yet apprehended, so long as the
The penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon
crime has been proved to exist.
those who are such with respect to their spouses, ascendants,
— The accused cannot be held liable as accessory if the principal
descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers and sisters, or
charged with murder died before trial because had he been
relatives by affinity within the same degrees, with the single
alive, he might have been found guilty of only homicide.
exception of accessories falling within the provisions of paragraph 1 of
the next preceding article.
IV. Accessory Distinguished From Principal And From Accomplice.

 Facts: Husband conceals the property stolen by

I. Basis For Exemption his wife to profit from it later.
— Based on ties of blood, and preservation of the cleanliness of  Held: Husband is liable as an accessory since he
one’s name, which compels one to conceal crimes committed is driven not by affection for his wife, but
by relatives so near as those mentioned in this article. profit.
— Only accessories under paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 19 are
II. Principals Related To Accessories Exempt From Criminal Liability exempt from criminal liability if they are related to the
— When principal is his: principals.
o Spouse o Examples of exemptions:
o Descendant  A son who helps his father bury the body of the
o Ascendant murdered victim.
o Legitimate, natural or adopted brother, sister or  Grandson who having knowledge of the
relative by affinity within the same degree. robbery by his grandfather destroys the body
of the crime.
III. Extent Of Coverage  Person who helps his brother escape after the
— Exemption applies even if the accessory is related to only two latter committed treason.
of found principals guilty of murder (U.S. v. Abanzado). — Liability of a public officer when related to the principal
— Relationship by affinity between surviving spouse and blood o Facts: Public officer abused his office in order to assist
relatives of the deceased spouse survives even after the death the escape of his brother who had committed murder.
of the deceased spouse. o Issue: Is he liable as an accessory?
— Nephew or niece is not included among such relatives. o Held: He is an accessory BUT does not have criminal
liability. Ties of blood or relationship constitutes a more
IV. Accessory Is Not Exempt From Criminal Liability Even If The powerful incentive than the call of duty.
Principal Is Related To Him If Such Accessory (1) Profited By The
Effects Of The Crime, Or (2) Assisted The Offender To Profit By The
Effects Of The Crime
— If the accessory performs the two acts mentioned, he is liable
even if the principal falls within the listed relatives because
such acts are prompted not by affection but be detestable
o Does concealing of the effects of the crime, not to
prevent its discovery, but to obtain gain, fall under
Article 19(2)?

TITLE III: PENALTIES 2. Self-defense  measure of such to protect society from the
threat and wrong inflicted by the criminal.
3. Reformation  object of punishment is to correct offender.
4. Exemplarity  to deter others from committing crimes.
5. Justice  retributive justice, a vindication of absolute right and
moral law violated by the criminal.
— Social defense and exemplarity justify the penalty of death.
I. Definitions
When a person has proved to be a dangerous enemy of society,
— Penalty is the suffering that is inflicted by the State for the
it must protect itself by taking the life in retribution for the
transgression of a law.
offense, and to serve as an example and warning to others.
o Signifies pain i.e. suffering undergone because of the
action of human society, by one who commits a crime.
V. Three-fold purpose of penalties under RPC
1. Retribution or expiation  commensurate with the gravity of
II. Different Juridical Conditions Of Penalty (acc. to classical school)
the offense.
1. Must be productive suffering – without affecting the integrity
2. Correction or reformation  shown by the rules that regulate
of the human personality.
the execution of penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty.
2. Must be commensurate with the offense – different crimes
3. Social defense  shown by inflexible severity to recidivists and
must be punished with different penalties.
habitual delinquents.
3. Must be personal – no one should be punished for the crime of
VI. Constitutional restriction on penalties
4. Must be legal – it is the consequence of a judgment according
— “Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel punishment
to law.
5. Must be certain.
o Cruel and unusual  punishment that is so
6. Must be equal for all.
disproportionate to the offense so as to shock the
7. Must be correctional.
moral sense of all reasonable men.
o Constitutional stricture refers to penalties which are
III. State’s Purpose For Punishing Crime inhuman and barbarous, or shocking to the conscience
— To secure justice  The state has… (Weems v. U.S.), and fines and imprisonment are not in
o An existence of its own to maintain. this category (People v. Dionisio).
o A conscience of its own to assert.
o Moral principles to be vindicated.
Article 21. – Penalties that may be imposed.
No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not prescribed by law
IV. Theories Justifying Penalty
prior to its commission.
1. Prevention  and suppress the danger to the State arising
from the criminal acts of the offender.

POINTS No Penalty Prescribed By Law Prior To Its Commission

— U.S. v. Yam Tung Way
I. State Policy About Punishing Crimes o Facts: A allegedly reproduced and sold fraudulent
— This article prohibits the government from punishing any copies of another’s literary work. No copyright law.
person for any felony with any penalty, which has not been o Held: A cannot be punished because at that time no
prescribed by the law. law defined and penalized such act.
o Has no application to the Revised Penal Code, because Subsidiary penalty for a crime can’t be imposed if “not prescribed by
all felonies defined in the Revised Penal Code has a law prior to its commission”
prescribed penalty. — U.S. v. Macasaet
o May only be invoked when a person is being tried for o Facts: Macasaet was charted and convicted for
an act or omission for which no penalty has been violating Act No. 1189 punishable by a fine. At that
prescribed by law. time, no law provided for imprisonment for failure to
— This is a guarantee to the citizen of this country that no act of pay fine by reason of insolvency. Act No. 1732 which
his will be considered criminal until the government has made provides such penalty, and took effect during trial. The
it so by law and has provided a penalty. court imposed subsidiary imprisonment.
o No imprisonment at the discretion of the court. There o Held: Subsidiary imprisonment cannot be imposed
must be limits imposed by the law. because it took effect AFTER the commission of the
o In Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 and libel, the Supreme Court crime.
issued admin orders giving preference to fine over
imprisonment. This doesn’t mean that the SC abolished Article 22. – Retroactive effect of penal laws.
imprisonment. Penal laws shall have a retroactive effect in so far as they favor the
— The favorable judgment by the appellate court on an accused person guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual criminal, as this term is
will be applied to his co-accused if it is favorable and applicable defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code, although at the time of the
to the latter. publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and
— Court can impose either fine or imprisonment. But it can never the convict is serving the same.
imposed “fine and/or imprisonment.” Accused can’t choose
how he wants to serve his sentence. POINTS

II. Reason For The Provision I. Article 22 Not Applicable To Provisions Of Revised Penal Code
— A law cannot be rationally obeyed unless it is first shown. — Application to Revised Penal Code may only be invoked where
— Man cannot be expected to obey an order that has not been some former or subsequent law is under consideration.
given. — Article 10 doesn’t bar application of Article 22 to special laws.

III. Examples

o If by amendment to the Revised Penal Code or special the Motor Vehicle law took effect after the incident,
law, the punishment is made less severe than provided which made the driver liable for only one complex
for in this Code, the accused may invoke Article 22. crime under the RPC instead of two separate crimes.
Issue: Can RA 587 be used?
A. Must Necessarily Relate: Held: Even though RA 587 took effect after the
1. To penal laws existing prior to the Revised Penal Code, in which incident, it can be given retroactive effect.
the penalty was less severe than those of the code OR o Exception applies to a law dealing with prescription of
2. To laws enacted subsequent to the Revised Penal Code, in crime.
which the penalty is more favorable to the accused.
III. Reason For The Exception
B. Courts Can Apply This Provision, Even If Not Invoked By The — The sovereign in enacting a subsequent penal law more
Accused favorable to the accused has recognized that the greater
severity of the former law is unjust.
II. Rule — However, the new law may provide otherwise
— General Rule: Give criminal laws prospective effect. o Republic Act No. 4661 decreasing the prescription of
o People v. Changco  Facts: Before Article 365 (RPC) libel from 2 years to 1 year provides that it shall not
was amended, slight physical injuries through reckless apply to cases of libel already filed in court at the time
imprudence was not punishable. On September 21, of its approval.
1954, accused committed such act. On June 21, 1957, o Republic Act No. 9346 prevents the imposition of the
RA 1790 was approved thus making the amendments. death penalty, and could be apply retroactively
Issue: Can accused be punished? because it favors the accused.
Held: The amended Article 365 punishing the act  Even if no more death penalty, the
cannot be given retroactive effect such as to punish the classification of heinous crimes still remains
accused. because of the possibility that it will once again
o Giving a law retroactive effect, if unfavorable to the be revived. Moreover, civil liability is still
accused will violate the constitutional inhibition as to dependent on the nature of heinous crimes
ex post facto law. (See “Criminal Law in General”) (People v Bon).
— Exception: To give criminal laws retroactive effect when  Even if the offender is a habitual delinquent,
favorable to the accused. this law will still benefit him. Congress intended
o Lapuz v. Court of Appeals  Facts: Bus driver convicted it to benefit even the habitual delinquent.
separately of (1) homicide with serious physical injuries
through reckless imprudence and (2) damage to IV. Revised Penal Code Was Not Given Retroactive Effect
property through reckless imprudence for the
destruction caused to the other bus. RA 587 amending

— Thus, acts committed in violation of a conditional pardon (a — The principle that criminal statutes are retroactive so far as
violation of RPC) prior to the effectivity of the RPC cannot be they favor the culprit does not apply to the latter’s civil liability
punished (Peope v. Carballo). because the rights of the offended party or innocent third
parties are not within the gift of arbitrary disposal of the State.
V. Important Words And Phrases
A. “Although At The Time Of The Publication Of Such Laws A Final B. A New Law Increasing Civil Liability Cannot Be Retroactive
Sentence Has Been Pronounced And The Convict Is Serving The Same” — Thus, Commonwealth Act No. 284 which increased the
— Provision of Article 22 that penal laws shall have retroactive minimum indemnity for the death of a person by reason of the
effect insofar as they favor the person guilty of a felony is commission of a crime from P1,000 to P2,000 was not given
applicable even if the accused has already started or is serving retroactive effect (People v. Panaligan).
his sentence.
— The favorable retroactive effect of a new law may find the VII. Article 22 v. Article 3661
defendant in one of these three situations: — The two articles mean that while felonies and
o The crime has been committed and prosecution begins. misdemeanors committed prior to the date of effectiveness
o Sentence has been passed but service has not begun. of the Revised Penal Code shall be punished in accordance
o The sentence is being carried out. with the Code or Acts in force at the time of their
— In any case, the favorable new statute benefits him and should commission, the same should not be the case IF such Code
apply to him. or Acts are unfavorable to the guilty party for the general
— Example: case of Robin Padilla where his sentence was principle on the retroactivity of favorable penal laws,
shortened after the passing of a new law that decreased the recognized in Article 22, should then apply.
penalty of illegal possession of firearms.
VIII. Repeal Of Laws
B. “Who Is Not A Habitual Criminal?” A. Lagrimas Case v. Tamayo Case
— Habitual criminals are not entitled to benefit of the provisions
of the new favorable statute. Lagrimas Tamayo
— A person shall be deemed to be a habitual delinquent if within Facts  Petitioner convicted for  Accused was convicted for
a period of ten years from the date of his release or last assault upon a public official violating a municipal
conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical and penalized under Article ordinance.
injuries, robbery, theft, estafa, or falsification, he is found guilty 251 of the old penal code.  Pending his appeal, the
of any said crimes a third time or oftener (Rule 5, Article 62)
Article 366. Application of laws enacted prior to this Code. — Without
VI. In Connection To Civil Liability prejudice to the provisions contained in Article 22 of this Code, felonies and
A. Retroactive Effect Not Applicable To Civil Liability misdemeanors, committed prior to the date of effectiveness of this Code shall
be punished in accordance with the Code or Acts in force at the time of their

 Article 149 of the RPC ordinance was repealed and C. Repeal Of Penal Law Which Impliedly Repealed An Old Penal Law
does not prescribe a penalty the act complained of was no Revives The Old Law
for the same crime. longer a crime. — Thus, when Act 1697, which repealed provisions of the old
Held Petition denied. The intent Case dismissed. A person Penal Code, was itself repealed by old Administrative Code, the
of the RPC was to insure cannot be prosecuted, penalty of the Old Penal Code which was lighter than Act 1697
elimination of crimes convicted and punished for was imposed (U.S. v. Soliman).
penalized by former acts acts no longer criminal.
before its enforcement. It D. No Retroactive Effect Of Penal Laws As Regards Jurisdiction Of
should not have the effect of Court
pardoning the guilty. — The jurisdiction of a court to try a criminal action is to be
Ratio Legislature re-enacted the The repeal (completely determined by the law in force at the time of instituting the
provision of Article 251 of eliminating the section of the action, not at the time of the commission of the crime.
the old Penal Code in the ordinance under which the — Jurisdiction of courts in criminal cases is determined by the
Revised Penal Code, but accused was being prosecuted) allegations of the complaint or information, not by the findings
does not punish an assault was absolute. the court may make after trial.
upon a public school teacher
anymore. Article 149 of the IX. What Penalty May Be Imposed For The Commission Of A Felony?
Revised Penal Code did not — Only the penalty prescribed by law prior to the commission of
absolutely repeal. the felony may be imposed (Article 21).
Where the repeal is by The repeal in this case is — Felonies are punishable under the laws in force at the time of
reenactment, the court has absolute, not a reenactment or their commission (Article 366).
jurisdiction to try and punish repeal by implication. No — But the penalty prescribed by a law enacted after the
an accused person under the saving clause too. commission of the felony may be imposed, if it is favorable to
old law. the offender (Article 22).

B. Criminal Liability Under Repealed Law Subsists: Article 23. – Effect of pardon by the offended party.
1. When the provisions of the former law are reenacted; or A pardon of the offended party does not extinguish criminal action
2. When the repeal is by implication; or except as provided in Article 344 of this Code; but civil liability with
3. When there is a saving clause regard to the interest of the injured party is extinguished by his
— Right to punish offenses committed under an old penal law is express waiver.
not extinguished if the offenses are still punished in the INGLES SAYS THIS IS AMENDED BY RA 8353
repealing law. POINTS

I. Important Words And Phrases


A. “A Pardon By The Offended Party Does Not Extinguish Criminal — The ONLY act that can extinguish the penal action after
Action” institution of criminal action is marriage between offender and
— Crime committed is an offense against the state. In criminal offended party.
cases, the intervention of the aggrieved parties is limited to Pardon under Article 344 is only a bar to criminal prosecution
being witnesses for the prosecution. — Article 89 providing for the total extinction of criminal liability
— Only the Chief Executive can pardon offenders (Article 36). does not mention pardon by the offended party as one of the
Compromise does not extinguish criminal liability causes of totally extinguishing criminal liability.
— There may be a compromise upon the civil liability arising from
an offense, but such compromise shall not extinguish the public C. “But Civil Liability With Regard To The Interest Of The Injured Party
action for the imposition of the legal penalty (Article 2034, Civil Is Extinguished By His Express Waiver”
Code). — Two classes of injury:
— A contract stipulating for the renunciation of the right to o Social injury  disturbance and alarm resulting from
prosecute an offense or waiving the criminal liability is void. the offense.
The consideration or subject-matter is illegal. o Personal injury  caused to the victim who suffered
damage either to his person, property, honor or her
B. “Except As Provided In Article 344 Of This Code” chastity.
— The offended party in the crimes of adultery and concubinage — Social injury is sought to be repaired by imposition of penalty.
CANNOT institute criminal prosecution IF he shall have The state has an interest and therefore cannot be extinguished
consented or pardoned the offenders. by pardon of offended party.
o In case of pardon, BOTH offenders must be pardoned. — Personal injury is repaired through indemnity, which is civil in
o The pardon may be IMPLIED through continued nature, and can thus be EXPRESSLY waived. The State has not
inaction of the offended party after learning the reason to insist on its payment.
— In the crimes of seduction, abduction, rape or acts of Article 24. – Measures of prevention or safety which are nor
lasciviousness, there shall be no criminal prosecution if the considered penalties.
offender has been EXPRESSLY pardoned by the offended party The following shall not be considered as penalties:
or her parents, grandparents, or guardian. 1. The arrest and temporary detention of accused persons, as
Pardon under Article 344 must be made before start of prosecution well as their detention by reason of insanity or imbecility, or
— When complaint for the above crimes have been filed in court, illness requiring their confinement in a hospital.
a motion to dismiss based solely on pardon by the offended 2. The commitment of a minor to any of the institutions
party given after the filing of the complaint will be denied by mentioned in Article 80 and for the purposes specified
court. therein.
3. Suspension from the employment of public office during the
trial or in order to institute proceedings.

4. Fines and other corrective measures which, in the exercise of — Plunder Act (Republic Act No. 7080) - suspension of public
their administrative disciplinary powers, superior officials may official after filing of a valid information.
impose upon their subordinates. — VAWC (Republic Act No. 9262) – offended party entitled to
5. Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the civil laws protection orders, or accused must file a bond to.
may establish in penal form.


I. “As Well As Their Detention By Reason Of Insanity Or Imbecility”

— Refers to “accused persons” who are detained “by reason of
insanity or imbecility”.
— “THEIR” in the second clause of paragraph 1 refers to “accused

II. They are not considered penalties

— Because they are not imposed as a result of judicial
— Paragraphs 1, 3 and 4 are preventive measures.
— Paragraph 2 is not a penalty because it is not imposed by the
court. The imposition of the sentence in such case is
o Note: This has been repealed by the Juvenile Justice
— Fines mentioned in Paragraph 4 should not be imposed by the
court, or else they will constitute a penalty.
— Paragraph 5 is illustrate in the case of parents who are stripped
of their parental authority if found guilty of the crime of
corruption of their minor children.

III. Relevant Special Penal Laws

— PNP Act (Republic Act No. 6975) – preventive suspension of
policemen during criminal trials (Sections 41 and 47).
— Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (Republic Act No. 3019) –
suspension of public official after filing of a valid information.

CHAPTER 2: CLASSIFICATION OF PENALTIES Perpetual or temporary special disqualification,

Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted
Article 25. – Penalties which may be imposed. for, the profession or calling.
The penalties which may be imposed according to this Code, and their Civil interdiction,
different classes, are those included in the following: Indemnification,
Forfeiture or confiscation of instruments and proceeds of the
SCALE offense,
Capital punishment:

Afflictive penalties: I. “The Penalties Which May Be Imposed According To This Code x x x
Reclusion perpetua, Are Those Included” in Article 25 only
Reclusion temporal, — The Revised Penal Code does not prescribe the penalty of life
Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification, imprisonment for any of the felonies therein defined, that
Perpetual or temporary special disqualification, penalty being invariably imposed for serious offenses penalized
Prision mayor. not by the Revised Penal Code but by special law.
— Examples:
Correctional penalties: o Sentence of “five years in Bilibid” is defective because it
Prision correccional, does not specify the exact penalty prescribed in the
Arresto mayor, RPC (US v. Avillar)
Suspension, o Penalty of life imprisonment or cadena perpetua is
Destierro. erroneous as it has been abolished. The correct term is
reclusion perpetua. (People v. Abletes).
Light penalties: — Reclusion perpetua is not the same as life imprisonment as the
Arresto menor, Code does not prescribe life imprisonment as a penalty. It is a
Public censure. penalty used by special laws. Reclusion perpetua entailed
imprisonment for at least 30 years after which the convict
Penalties common to the three preceding classes: becomes eligible for parole. It also carried with accessory
Fine, and penalties such as perpetual special disqualification.
Bond to keep the peace.
II. R.A. 9346 Prohibited The Imposition Of The Death Penalty
ACCESSORY PENALTIES — Signed into law on June 24, 2006 and provided for the
Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification, imposition of penalty of reclusion perpetua in lieu of death

when the law violated makes use of the nomenclature of the 2. Deprivation of freedom (reclusion, prision, arresto)
penalties of the RPC. 3. Restriction of freedom (destierro)
4. Deprivation of rights (disqualification and suspension)
III. Classifications Of Penalties 5. Pecuniary (fine)
A. Principal v. Accessory Penalties
— Two classifications C. Classification Of Penalties According To Their Gravity
o Principal Penalties  those expressly imposed by the 1. Capital
court in the judgment of conviction. 2. Afflictive
o Accessory Penalties  those that are deemed included 3. Correctional
in the imposition of the principal penalties. 4. Light
— Principal Penalties according to their divisibility — Corresponds to Article 9: Grave, less grave, light felony
o Divisible Penalties  are those that have fixed
duration and are divisible into three periods D. Public Censure Is A Penalty
o Indivisible Penalties  those which have no fixed — Being a penalty, not properly imposed in acquittal.
duration. — The court may only impose a penalty if the accused is found
 Death guilty. The power to mete out punishments; a finding of guilt
 Reclusion Perpetua must precede the punishment.
 Perpetual absolute or special disqualification
 Public censure IV. Court Acquitting The Accused May Criticize His Acts Or Conduct
— Penalties are either principal or accessory — The court, while acquitting an accused, may permit itself
o Perpetual or temporary absolute/special nevertheless to criticize or reprehend his acts or conduct in
disqualification and suspensions may be principal or connection with the transaction out of which the accusation
accessory penalties, because they are formed in two arose.
general classes.
o Article 236  punishes the crime of anticipation of V. Reclusion Perpetua
duties of public office through suspension as principal — Court should use proper Revised Penal Code nomenclature
penalty. — Indivisible penalty (Reclusion Perpetua, Perpetual absolute or
o Article 226, 227 and 228  punishing infidelity of special disqualification, public censure)
public officers in the custody of documents, provide for
o Not affected by mitigating or aggravating
temporary special disqualification as a principal
circumstances. The penalty is imposed in its entirety,
even if there is special aggravating or two mitigating, it
will not be affected.
B. Classification Of Penalties According To Subject-Matter o But if PRIVILEGED mitigating, it may be reduced by 1 or
1. Corporal (death) 2 degrees.

— After imprisonment of 30 years, eligible for pardon. — Compare with bond for good behavior (Article 248 for grave
o Court may not impose “30 years of reclusion perpetua,” and light threats only). Failure to post bond for good behavior
they should just impose reclusion perpetua. means destierro for accused. Failure to post bond to keep the
o The 30 years does not refer to the duration of reclusion peace.
perpetua, but to the eligibility of parole and for
purposes of computing the three-fold rule. VIII. Instances When Lesser Offense Absorbs Graver Offense
— Different from life imprisonment — Rebellion (RT) absorbs murder (RP)
o Exception: In Presidential Decree No. 818 (Syndicated — Forcible abduction (RT) absorbs illegal detention of a woman
Estafa), imprisonment is a maximum of 30 years with (RP)
accessory penalties provided by Revised Penal Code for — Slavery involving kidnapping of a person (PM) absorbs
30 years. kidnapping (RP)

VI. Disqualification And Suspension Article 26. – When afflictive, correctional, or light penalty.
A. Dual Personality Of Disqualification And Suspension A fine, whether imposed as a single of as an alternative penalty, shall
— It can be a principal penalty be considered an afflictive penalty, if it exceeds 6,000 pesos; a
o Temporary disqualification – 6years, 1 day to 12 years. correctional penalty, if it does not exceed 6,000 pesos but is not less
o Suspension – 6 months, 1 day to 6 years. than 200 pesos; and a light penalty if it less than 200 pesos.
— It can also be an accessory penalty
o Follow the period of the principal penalty. POINTS
o Court cannot extend the disqualification or suspension
if it merely follows the principal penalty, can’t extend
I. “Whether Imposed As A Single Or As An Alternative Penalty”
beyond principal penalty.
— Example: Article 144 punishing disturbance of proceedings, the
penalty is arresto mayor or a fine ranging from P200 to P1,000.
B. Suspension
— All prisoners whether under preventive detention or serving
A. Penalties Cannot Be Imposed In The Alternative
final sentence, cannot practice their profession or engage in
— The law does not permit any court to impose a sentence in the
any business or occupation, or hold office, elective or
alternative, its duty being to indicate the penalty imposed
appointive, while in detention.
definitely and positively.
— Fine is not a substitute for imprisonment. It’s completely
VII. Bond To Keep The Peace
— Bond to keep the peace is a principal penalty yet there is no
crime in Book II that imposes it. No occasion to mete this
II. Article 26 Merely Classifies Fines And Has Nothing To Do With The
penalty on a convict.
Definition Of Light Felony

— If the fine prescribed by the law for a felony is exactly P200, it is

a light felony because Article 9, Paragraph 3 which defines light
felonies should prevail.
— What if exactly P200, how do you reconcile Article 9 and Article
o Article 9 should prevail when the issue is prescription of
crime. It’s considered a light felony and prescribes in 2
o Article 26 should prevail when the issue is prescription
of penalty. It’s considered correctional, and prescribes
in 10 years.

A. Fine Is:
1. Afflictive – over P6,000
2. Correction – P200 to P6,000
3. Light penalty – less than P200

B. Bond To Keep The Peace Is By Analogy:

1. Afflictive – over P6,000
2. Correctional – P200 to P6,000
3. Light penalty – less than P200

III. Who Receives The Fines

— Fine is not given to the complainant; it is given to the State.
Fine is for vindication!
— Accused can use his cash bail bond to pay his fine, if he is
convicted. Law does not prohibit him from using his cash bail
bond to pay his fine. It is only meant to ensure his attendance
during the process.


I. Duration Of Each Different Penalties
1. Reclusion perpetua – 20 yrs. and 1 day to 40 yrs.
Article 27.
2. Reclusion temporal – 12 yrs. and 1 day to 20 yrs.
Reclusion perpetua. — Any person sentenced to any of the perpetual
penalties shall be pardoned after undergoing the penalty for thirty 3. Prision mayor and temporary disqualification – 6 years. and 1
day to 12 yrs, except when disqualification is accessory penalty,
years, unless such person by reason of his conduct or some other
in which case its duration is that of the principal penalty.
serious cause shall be considered by the Chief Executive as unworthy
4. Prision correctional, suspension, and destierro – 6 months and
of pardon.
1 day to 6 yrs, except when suspension is an accessory penalty
in which case its duration is that of the principal penalty.
Reclusion temporal. — The penalty of reclusion temporal shall
5. Arresto mayor – 1 month and 1 day to 6 months.
be from twelve years and one day to twenty years.
6. Arresto menor – 1 day to 30 days
7. Bond to keep the peace – the period during which the bond
Prision mayor and temporary disqualification. — The duration of the
shall be effective is discretionary on the court.
penalties of prision mayor and temporary disqualification shall be
from six years and one day to twelve years, except when the penalty
II. Temporary Disqualification And Suspension When Imposed As
of disqualification is imposed as an accessory penalty, in which case
Accessory Penalties, Have Different Durations – They Follow The
its duration shall be that of the principal penalty.
Duration Of The Principal Penalty.
Prision correccional, suspension, and destierro. — The duration of the
III. In What Cases Is Destierro Imposed?
penalties of prision correccional, suspension and destierro shall be
from six months and one day to six years, except when suspension is 1. Serious physical injuries or death under exceptional
circumstances (Article 247).
imposed as an accessory penalty, in which case, its duration shall be
that of the principal penalty. 2. In case of failure to give bond for good behavior (Article 284).
3. As a penalty for the concubine in concubinage (Article 334).
Arresto mayor. — The duration of the penalty of arresto mayor shall 4. In cases where after reducing the penalty by one or more
degrees, destierro is the proper penalty.
be from one month and one day to six months.

IV. Bond To Keep The Peace Is Not Specifically Provided So As A

Arresto menor. — The duration of the penalty of arresto menor shall
Penalty For Any Felony And Therefore Cannot Be Imposed By The
be from one day to thirty days.
Bond to keep the peace. — The bond to keep the peace shall be
required to cover such period of time as the court may determine.

— Bond for good behavior under Article 284 of the Code is only 3. The duration of other penalties: the duration is from the day
required of a person making a grave or light threat, and not in on which the offender commences to serve his sentence.
other cases or crimes.
II. Rules In Cases Of Temporary Penalties:
Article 28. – Computation of penalties. — If under detention  Rule 1 applies
If the offender shall be in prison, the term of the duration of the — If not detained  Rule 3 applies
temporary penalties shall be computed from the day on which the Examples of temporary penalties:
judgment of conviction shall have become final. 1. Temporary absolute disqualification
2. Temporary special disqualification
If the offender be not in prison, the term of the duration of the 3. Suspension
penalty consisting of deprivation of liberty shall be computed from
the day that the offender is placed at the disposal of the judicial III. Rules In Cases Of Penalties Consisting Of Deprivation Of Liberty
authorities for the enforcement of the penalty. The duration of the — Not in prison  Rule 2 applies.
other penalties shall be computed only from the day on which the — In prison (e.g. preventive imprisonment)  Rule 3 applies
defendant commences to serve his sentence. — Exemption: offender is entitled to deduction of full time or 4/5
of the time of his detention (See Article 29).
POINTS Examples of penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty:
1. Imprisonment
I. Rules In Computation Of Penalties: 2. Destierro
1. When the offender is in prison: the duration of temporary
penalties is from the day on which the judgment of conviction Article 29. – Period of preventive imprisonment deducted from term
becomes final. of imprisonment.
o Reason for Rule 1  Computation begins from the date Offenders or accused who have undergone preventive imprisonment
conviction becomes final and not from the day of his shall be credited in the service of their sentence consisting of
detention, because under Article 24 the arrest and deprivation of liberty, with the full time during which they have
temporary detention is not considered a penalty. undergone preventive imprisonment if the detention prisoner agrees
o An accused who appealed will commence serving his voluntarily in writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed
sentence from the date the appellate court upon convicted prisoners, except in the following cases:
promulgated its decision, NOT when the trial court 1. When they are recidivists, or have been convicted previously
promulgated it (Ocampo v. Court of Appeals). twice or more times of any crime; and
2. When the offender is not in prison: the duration of penalties 2. When upon being summoned for the execution of their
consisting in deprivation of liberty, is from the day that the sentence they have failed to surrender voluntarily.
offender is placed at the disposal of judicial authorities for the
enforcement of the penalty. If the detention prisoner does not agree to abide by the same

disciplinary rules imposed upon convicted prisoners, he shall be o Exception: Youthful offenders shall be credited in the
credited in the service of his sentence with four-fifths of the time service of his sentence with the full time he spent in
during which he has undergone preventive imprisonment. (As actual confinement and detention. The written consent
amended by Republic Act No. 6127, June 17, 1970). to abide by the disciplinary rules is not necessary.
(Article 197, Presidential Decree No. 603).
Whenever an accused has undergone preventive imprisonment for a o Exception: Section 41, Juvenile Justice Act states that
period equal to or more than the possible maximum imprisonment of any form of physical restraint imposed on a child in
the offense charged to which he may be sentenced and his case is not conflict with the law including his community service or
yet terminated, he shall be released immediately without prejudice to commitment to a rehab center shall be considered as
the continuation of the trial thereof or the proceeding on appeal, if preventive imprisonment. Thus:
the same is under review. In case the maximum penalty to which the  If the minor juvy is imprisoned pending trial, he
accused may be sentenced is destierro, he shall be released after shall be credited with the service of the
thirty (30) days of preventive imprisonment. (As amended by Republic sentence with the full time in which the child
Act No. 6127, and further amended by E.O. No. 214, prom. July 10, was preventively imprisoned.
1987.)  If the child has served the full time, director can
When is there preventive imprisonment? determine if child still has to stay in rehab.
— 4/5 Time  if the detention prisoner does not agree to abide
POINTS by said disciplinary rules.

I. When Is There Preventive Imprisonment? III. The Credit Is Given In The Service Of Sentences “Consisting Of
— The accused undergoes preventive imprisonment when the Deprivation Of Liberty”
offense charged is non-bailable, or even if bailable, he cannot — Destierro constitutes “deprivation of liberty.”
furnish the required bail. o Although destierro is not imprisonment, a person
— Preventive penalties are considered even in the case of penalized with such may still be credited with the time
perpetual punishments. This article does not make any he underwent preventive imprisonment.
distinction between temporal and perpetual penalties. o If destierro is the maximum penalty to which the
accused may be sentenced, he must still be released
II. The Full Time Or Four-Fifths Of The Time During Which The after serving whatever prison sentence (for example
Offenders Have Undergone Preventive Imprisonment Shall Be arresto menor) is required, since destierro is not served
Deducted From The Penalty Imposed in prison (See p.634).
— Full Time  if the detention prisoner agrees voluntarily in
writing to abide by the same disciplinary rules imposed upon A. Credit When Punished Only With A Fine
convicted prisoners. — If the offense for which the offender is undergoing preventive
imprisonment is punishable by imprisonment or a fine, and

upon conviction the court imposed on him only a fine, there is

no credit to be given.
— The fine imposed cannot be lessened in light of one’s
preventive imprisonment.

B. Credit When Punished With Imprisonment

1. The convict is to be released immediately if the penalty
imposed after trial is less than the full time or four-fifths of the
time of the preventive imprisonment.
o The accused is to be released immediately whenever
he has undergone preventive imprisonment for a
period equal to or more than the possible maximum
imprisonment for the offenses charged.
o In such case, file a petition for habeas corpus to secure
your release – if you’re not released.
2. Offenders not entitled to the full time or four-fifths of the time
of preventive imprisonment:
a. Recidivists or those previously convicted twice or more
of any crime (Habitual delinquent is included).
b. Those who, upon being summoned for the execution of
their sentence, failed voluntarily to surrender.

C. Credit When Punished With Imprisonment And Fine

— What if the accused is detained, then sentenced to
imprisonment and fine, and he has already served his sentence
but has not yet paid the fine, may he be released? No. He has
to pay the fine first.

SECTION 2 – EFFECTS OF PENALTIES ACCORDING TO THEIR the term of the sentence, according to the nature of said penalty, of
RESPECTIVE NATURE the right to vote in any popular election for any public office or to be
elected to such office. Moreover, the offender shall not be permitted
Article 30. – Effects of the penalties of perpetual or temporary to hold any public office during the period of his disqualification.
absolute disqualification.
The penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification for Article 33. – Effects of the penalties of suspension from any public
public office shall produce the following effects: office, profession or calling, or the right of suffrage.
1. The deprivation of the public offices and employments which The suspension from public office, profession or calling, and the
the offender may have held even if conferred by popular exercise of the right of suffrage shall disqualify the offender from
election. holding such office or exercising such profession or calling or right of
2. The deprivation of the right to vote in any election for any suffrage during the term of the sentence.
popular elective office or to be elected to such office.
3. The disqualification for the offices or public employments and The person suspended from holding public office shall not hold
for the exercise of any of the rights mentioned. another having similar functions during the period of his suspension.
In case of temporary disqualification, such disqualification as is
comprised in paragraphs 2 and 3 of this article shall last during Article 34. – Civil interdiction.
the term of the sentence. Civil interdiction shall deprive the offender during the time of his
4. The loss of all rights to retirement pay or other pension for any sentence of the rights of parental authority, or guardianship, either as
office formerly held. to the person or property of any ward, of marital authority, of the
right to manage his property and of the right to dispose of such
Article 31. – Effect of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special property by any act or any conveyance inter vivos.
The penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification for Article 35. – Effects of bond to keep the peace.
public office, profession or calling shall produce the following effects: It shall be the duty of any person sentenced to give bond to keep the
1. The deprivation of the office, employment, profession or peace, to present two sufficient sureties who shall undertake that such
calling affected; person will not commit the offense sought to be prevented, and that
2. The disqualification for holding similar offices or employments in case such offense be committed they will pay the amount
either perpetually or during the term of the sentence, determined by the court in its judgment, or otherwise to deposit such
according to the extent of such disqualification. amount in the office of the clerk of the court to guarantee said
Article 32. – Effects of the penalties of perpetual or temporary special
disqualification for the exercise of the right of suffrage. The court shall determine, according to its discretion, the period of
The perpetual or temporary special disqualification for the exercise of duration of the bond. (Read also Art. 284)
the right of suffrage shall deprive the offender perpetually or during

Should the person sentenced fail to give the bond as required he shall b. Disqualification for holding similar offices or
be detained for a period which shall in no case exceed six months, if he employments perpetually or during the term of the
shall have prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and shall not sentence.
exceed thirty days, if for a light felony. 3. The penalties of perpetual or temporary special disqualification
for the exercise of the right to suffrage produce the following
POINTS effects:
a. Deprivation of the right to vote or to be elected to any
I. Perpetual v. Temporary public office.
— Perpetual  effective during the lifetime of the convict even b. Cannot hold any public office during the period of
after serving his sentence. disqualification.
— Temporary  lasts during the term of the sentence and 4. The penalties of suspension from public office, profession or
removed after service of the same calling or the right to suffrage produce the following effects:
o Exception: (1) Deprivation of public office or a. Disqualification from holding such office or exercising
employment, and (2) loss of all rights to retirement pay such profession or calling or right of suffrage during the
or other pension for any office formerly held. term of the sentence.
b. If suspended from public office, the offender cannot
II. Outline Of The Effects Of Penalties Under Articles 30-35 hold another office having similar functions during the
1. The penalties of perpetual or temporary absolute period of suspension.
disqualification for public office produce the following effects: 5. Civil interdiction shall produce the following effects:
a. Deprivation of public offices and employments, a. Deprivation of the rights of parental authority or
even if by election. guardianship of any ward.
b. Deprivation of right to vote or to be elected. b. Deprivation of marital authority.
c. Disqualification for the offices or public c. Deprivation of the right to manage his property and of
employments and for the exercise of any of the the right to dispose of such property by any act or any
rights mentioned. conveyance inter vivos.
d. Loss of right to retirement pay or pension for any Note: A convict can prepare a will because it’s not a
office formerly held. donation inter vivos.
2. The penalties of perpetual or temporary special Disqualification 6. Bonds to keep the peace:
for public office, profession or calling produce the following a. The offender must present two sureties who shall
effects: undertake that the offender will not commit the offense
a. Deprivation of the office, employment, profession or sought to be prevented, and in that case that such
calling affected. offense be committed they will pay the amount
determined by the court.

b. The offender must deposit such amount with the clerk

of court to guarantee said undertaking. I. Effects Of Pardon By The President
c. The offender may be detained, if he cannot give the 1. A pardon shall not restore the right to hold public office or the
bond, for a perios not less than 6 months if prosecuted right of suffrage.
for grave or less grave felony, or for a period not to 2. It shall not exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil
exceed 30 days, if for a light felony. indemnity. The pardon cannot make an exception to this rule.

II. Disqualification Is WITHHOLDING Of A Privilege, NOT Denial Of A II. Limitation Upon The Exercise Of The Pardoning Power:
Right 1. That the power can be exercised only after conviction.
— Manifest purpose of the restrictions is to preserve the purity of o Any application of pardon should not be accepted until
elections. One rendered infamous by conviction of a felony, or the appeal is withdrawn.
other base offense indicative of moral turpitude, is unfit to o Agencies and instrumentalities of the govt. must require
exercise the privilege of suffrage or to hold office. proof (e.g. certification of the court regarding
withdrawal of such appeal).
III. What Suspension From Exercise Of Profession Covers 2. That such power does not extend to cases of impeachment
— Suspension, which deprives the offender of the right of
exercising any kind of profession or calling covers such calling or III. Pardon Granted In General Terms Does Not Include Accessory
trade as for instance that of broker, master plumber, etc. Penalties
— Only the effect of the principal penalty is extinguished.
IV. Bond To Keep Peace Is Not Bail Bond — Exception: Where facts show that the purpose of the Chief
— Bond to keep the peace or for good behavior is imposed as a Executive is precisely to restore lost rights.
penalty in threats (Article 284). o When an absolute pardon is granted AFTER the term of
— This differs from bail bond which aims to secure provisional imprisonment has expired it removes all that is left of
release pending final judgment. the consequences of conviction.
— Suppose a pardon is granted after the convict served 30 years of
Article 36. – Pardon; its effect. imprisonment. Does it also pardon the perpetual absolute
A pardon shall not work the restoration of the right to hold public disqualification?
office, or the right of suffrage, unless such rights be expressly restored o No, because Article 30 is silent about the length and
by the terms of the pardon. Article 36 requires that such restoration be EXPRESS.

A pardon shall in no case exempt the culprit from the payment of the IV. Pardon Of Chief Executive v. Pardon Of Offended Party
civil indemnity imposed upon him by the sentence.
Chief Executive Offended Party
POINTS Extinguishes criminal liability Doesn’t extinguish criminal liability

Doesn’t include civil liability Civil liability can be waived 1. The reparation of the damage caused.
Pardon should be AFTER Pardon should be BEFORE 2. Indemnification of consequential damages.
conviction and to any of the institution of criminal prosecution 3. The fine.
offenders. and to both offenders. 4. The costs of the proceedings.

Article 37. – Cost. – What are included. POINTS

Costs shall include fees and indemnities in the course of the judicial
proceedings, whether they be fixed or unalterable amounts previously I. Order For Pecuniary Liability
determined by law or regulations in force, or amounts not subject to 1. The reparation of the damage caused
schedule. 2. Indemnification of the consequential damages
3. Fine (a pecuniary penalty under Article 25)
POINTS 4. Cost of proceedings
Note: 1 and 2 pertain to the offended party. 3 and 4 pertain to the
I. The Following Are Included In Costs: government.
1. Fees
2. Indemnities in the course of judicial proceedings A. What If Guilty Of Several Offenses?
— Follow the chronological order of the dates of final judgment
II. Rules: rendered against the convict, beginning with the first final
1. Costs are chargeable to the accused in case of conviction. judgment.
o Thus in case of acquittal, the costs are de oficio, each
party bearing his own expenses. II. When Is Article 38 Applicable?
1. No costs against the Republic, unless the law provides the — It is applicable in case the property of the offender should not
contrary (Sec. 1, Rule 142, Rules of Court) be sufficient for the payment of all his pecuniary liabilities. The
2. Payment of costs is discretionary (of the courts) order of payment is provided in this article, and must be
o Whether the costs should be assessed against the observed.
accused lie within the discretion of the court. The — There is reparation in the crime of rape when the dress of the
government may request the court to assess costs woman was torn. This is distinct from indemnity (U.S. v.
against the accused, but not as a right. No attorney’s Yambao).
fees shall be taxed as a cost against the adverse party.
Article 39. – Subsidiary penalty.
Article 38. – Pecuniary liabilities. – Order of payment. If the convict has no property with which to meet the fine mentioned
In case the property of the offender should not be sufficient for the in paragraph 3 of the next preceding article, he shall be subject to a
payment of all his pecuniary liabilities, the same shall be met in the subsidiary personal liability at the rate of one day for each eight pesos,
following order: subject to the following rules:

1. If the principal penalty imposed be prision correccional or — There is no subsidiary penalty for nonpayment of (1) reparation
arresto and fine, he shall remain under confinement until his of the damage caused, (2) indemnity, and (3) costs of
fine referred in the preceding paragraph is satisfied, but his proceedings.
subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed one-third of the o He can’t be ordered to serve subsidiary imprisonment
term of the sentence, and in no case shall it continue for more for failure to pay pecuniary liability (reparations), but he
than one year, and no fraction or part of a day shall be can serve for pecuniary penalty (fine).
counted against the prisoner. — It is the penalty prescribed or imposed by the court, not the
2. When the principal penalty imposed be only a fine, the penalty provided for the Code which should be considered in
subsidiary imprisonment shall not exceed six months, if the determining whether or not subsidiary penalty should be
culprit shall have been prosecuted for a grave or less grave imposed.
felony, and shall not exceed fifteen days, if for a light felony. — Subsidiary imprisonment is not imprisonment for debt since it
3. When the principal penalty imposed is higher than prision does not arise from an obligation to pay a sum of money arising
correccional no subsidiary imprisonment shall be imposed from a contract.
upon the culprit.
4. If the principal penalty imposed is not to be executed by II. Judgment of conviction must impose subsidiary imprisonment
confinement in a penal institution, but such penalty is of fixed — That the accused will undergo subsidiary imprisonment in case
duration, the convict, during the period of time established in of insolvency can only be imposed if specifically imposed in the
the preceding rules, shall continue to suffer the same judgment of conviction.
deprivation as those of which the principal penalty consists. — Subsidiary imprisonment is not an accessory penalty.
5. The subsidiary personal liability which the convict may have — The decision need not state that there should not be any
suffered by reason of his insolvency shall not relieve him from subsidiary imprisonment when the law forbids it.
the fine in case his financial circumstances should improve. (As
amended by Republic Act No. 5465, April 21, 1969.) III. “If Accused Has No Property With Which To Meet The Fine”
— Article 39 applies only when the accused has no property with
POINTS which to meet the fine. If the accused has enough property, he
cannot choose subsidiary imprisonment instead of paying.
I. What Is Subsidiary Penalty?
— It is a subsidiary personal liability to be suffered by the convict IV. The Word “Principal” Should Be Omitted
who has NO property with which to meet the fine he is — Spanish: cuando la pena impuesta  when the penalty imposed
penalized with, at the rate of one day for each eight pesos. — Spanish text should be controlling.
o Retroactive application of Republic Act No. 5465: An act
amending Article 29 of Revised Penal Code increasing V. Rules:
the rate per day of subsidiary penalty from two pesos 1. Prision Correcional or arresto and fine  Subsidiary
and fifty centavos to eight pesos. imprisonment not to exceed 1/3 of the term of the sentence

and in no case to continue for more than one year. Fraction or deserves an additional penalty of 12 years and 1 day of
part of a day not counted. reclusion temporal, there is no subsidiary imprisonment.
2. Fine only  Subsidiary imprisonment not to exceed 6 months, if
the culprit is prosecuted for a grave or less grave felony, and not VIII. The Subsidiary Penalty Is The “Same Deprivation As Those Of
to exceed 15 days if for a light felony Which The Principal Penalty Consists”
3. Higher than Prision Correcional  NO subsidiary imprisonment — If the principal penalty is imprisonment, the subsidiary penalty
4. Penalty is not to be executed by confinement but of fixed must also be imprisonment.
duration  Subsidiary penalty shall consist in the same — If the principal penalty is suspension, the subsidiary penalty
deprivations as those of the principal penalty, under the same must also be suspension.
rules as in numbers 1, 2 and 3.
5. In case the financial circumstances improve  He shall pay the IX. The Convict Who Served Subsidiary Penalty May Still Be Required
fine notwithstanding the fact the convict suffered subsidiary To Pay The Fine
personal liability therefor. — See Article 39, paragraph 5.

VI. The Penalty Imposed Must Be (1) Prision Correccional, (2) Arresto X. No Subsidiary Penalty In The Following Cases:
Mayor, (3) Arresto Menor, (4) Suspension, (5) Destierro Or (6) Fine 1. When the penalty imposed is higher than Prision Correcional
Only 2. For failure to pay the reparation of the damage caused,
— If the penalty imposed by the court is not one of them, indemnification and the costs of the proceedings
subsidiary penalty cannot be imposed. There is no subsidiary 3. When the penalty imposed is fine and a penalty not to be
penalty, if the penalty imposed by the court is prision mayor, executed by confinement in a penal institution which has NO
reclusion temporal, or reclusion perpetua. fixed duration
o If imprisonment is 6 years and 1 day, it is prision mayor,
and therefore no subsidiary imprisonment can be XI. Subsidiary Imprisonment Under Special Laws
imposed. — Persons convicted of violation of special laws are liable to
— Penalty not to be executed by confinement, but has a fixed subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency in the payment of
duration (e.g. suspension, destierro)  can impose subsidiary. indemnity, except where the indemnity consists in unpaid
— Penalty not to be executed by confinement, but has no fixed internal revenue tax.
duration (e.g. public censure)  cannot impose subsidiary. — Act No. 1732 (Rules in case the court shall impose a fine as a
whole or as part of the punishment for any criminal offense
VII. Additional Penalty For Habitual Delinquency Should Be Included In made punishable by any special law.)
Determining Whether Or No Subsidiary Penalty Should Be Imposed o These provisions are applicable to offense made
— Even if the penalty imposed is not higher than prision punishable by acts of the Philippine Legislature.
correctional, if the accused is a habitual delinquent who — Rules

a. When the court merely imposes a fine, the subsidiary

liability shall not exceed 6 months, at the ate of one day
of imprisonment for every P2.50
b. In case both fine and imprisonment are imposed, the
subsidiary liability shall not exceed 1/3 of the term of
the imprisonment, and in no case shall it exceed 1 year.
c. In case the imprisonment is for more than 6 years in
addition to a tine, there shall be no subsidiary
d. When a fine is imposed for violation of any municipal
ordinance or ordinances of the City of Manila, the rate is
one day for ever P1.00, until the fine is satisfied,
Provided, that the total subsidiary imprisonment does
not exceed 6 months if the penalty imposed is fine
alone; and not more than 1/3 of the principal penalty, if
the it is imposed together with imprisonment.
— Since the Tax Code does not provide for the imposition of a
subsidiary penalty in case of insolvency, no subsidiary
imprisonment can be imposed.

XII. Subsidiary Imprisonment, Like Accessory Penalties, Not Essential In

Determining Jurisdiction
— What determines jurisdiction of the Court in criminal cases is
the extent of the penalty, which the law imposes for the crime
charged in the information or complaint.
— It is settled rule that subsidiary imprisonment, like accessory
penalties, is not essential in the determination of the criminal
jurisdiction of a court.


PENALTIES ARE INHERENT Article 44. – Arresto. – Its accessory penalties.
The penalty of arresto shall carry with it that of suspension of the
Article 40. – Death – Its accessory penalties. right to hold office and the right of suffrage during the term of the
The death penalty, when it is not executed by reason of commutation sentence.
or pardon shall carry with it that of perpetual absolute
disqualification and that of civil interdiction during thirty years POINTS
following the date of sentence, unless such accessory penalties have
been expressly remitted in the pardon. I. Outline Of Accessory Penalties INHERENT In Principal Penalties:
1. Death, when not executed by reason of commutation or
pardon  (a) Perpetual absolute disqualification, (b) Civil
Article 41. – Reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal. – Their
accessory penalties. Interdiction for 30 years
The penalties of reclusion perpetua and reclusion temporal shall carry 2. Reclusion Perpetua and Reclusion Temporal  (a) Civil
Interdiction for life or during the sentence, (b) Perpetual
with them that of civil interdiction for life or during the period of the
absolute disqualification
sentence as the case may be, and that of perpetual absolute
3. Prision Mayor  (a) Temporary absolute disqualification, (b)
disqualification which the offender shall suffer even though pardoned
perpetual special disqualification from suffrage
as to the principal penalty, unless the same shall have been expressly
4. Prision Correcional  (a) Suspension fro Public office,
remitted in the pardon.
profession or calling, (b) perpetual disqualification from
suffrage if the duration of the imprisonment exceeds 18
Article 42. – Prision mayor. – Its accessory penalties.
The penalty of prision mayor shall carry with it that of temporary
5. Arresto  (a) suspension of the right to hold public office and
absolute disqualification and that of perpetual special disqualification
the right of suffrage during the term of the sentence
from the right of suffrage which the offender shall suffer although
6. Destierro has no accessory penalty
pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the same shall have been
expressly remitted in the pardon.
— When the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua as a penalty
next higher in degree, the accessory penalty shall be that under
Article 43. – Prision correccional. – Its accessory penalties.
Article 40 but the offender shall not be given the benefit of the
The penalty of prision correccional shall carry with it that of
provision of Article 27 until 40 years have elapsed, otherwise,
suspension from public office, from the right to follow a profession or
there could be no difference at all between reclusion perpetua
calling, and that of perpetual special disqualification from the right of
when imposed as a penalty next higher in degree and when it is
suffrage, if the duration of said imprisonment shall exceed eighteen
imposed as a penalty fixed by law (People v. Bago).
months. The offender shall suffer the disqualification provided in this
article although pardoned as to the principal penalty, unless the same
II. “Unless Expressly Remitted In The Pardon”
shall have been expressly remitted in the pardon.

— The accessory penalties in Article 40-43 must be suffered by tools with which it was committed.
the offender, although pardoned as to the principal penalties.
To be relieved of them, it must be EXPRESSLY REMITTED in Such proceeds and instruments or tools shall be confiscated and
pardon. forfeited in favor of the Government, unless they be the property of a
third person not liable for the offense, but those articles which are
III. Persons Who Served Out The Penalty May Not Have The Right To not subject of lawful commerce shall be destroyed.
Exercise The Right To Suffrage:
— General Rule: POINTS
o Absolute pardon for any crime for which one-year
imprisonment or more was meted out restores the I. Outline Of The Provision Of This Article
prisoner his political rights. 1. Every penalty imposed carries with it the forfeiture of the
o Where the penalty is less than one year, the proceeds of the crime and the instruments or tools used in the
disqualification does not attach, except when the crime commission of the crime
committed is one against property. 2. The proceeds and instruments or tools are confiscated and
 A was prosecuted for physical injuries and forfeited in favor of the government.
condemned to 10 months imprisonment. 3. Property of a third person not liable for the offense is not
Though not pardoned, he is not disqualified. subject to confiscation and forfeiture.
 B was convicted of theft and served 10 months. 4. Property not subject of lawful commerce shall be destroyed.
Unless given an absolute pardon, B can’t vote.
 C was sentenced to 4 years imprisonment for II. No Forfeiture Where There Is No Criminal Case
physical injuries or estafa. Unless pardoned, he — Although seizure may be made, the seized items cannot be
cannot exercise the right to suffrage. disposed or destroyed until after conviction (Philips v.
— Nature of the crime is immaterial when the penalty imposed is Municipal Mayor).
one-year imprisonment or more. o The ruling is based on the phrase “every penalty
imposed.” A penalty cannot be imposed unless there is
IV. Accessory Penalties Are Deemed Imposed a criminal case filed, tried and the accused convicted.
— Accessory penalties are understood to be ALWAYS imposed — Forfeiture cannot be ordered if the accused is acquitted,
upon the offender by the mere fact that the law fixes a certain because no penalty is imposed.
penalty for a given crime (See Article 73). — Courts cannot order the confiscation of property belonging to a
third person if the latter is not indicted.
Article 45. – Confiscation and forfeiture of the proceeds or o Instruments of the crime belonging to innocent third
instruments of the crime. person may be recovered.
Every penalty imposed for the commission of a felony shall carry with — Confiscation can be ordered only if the property is submitted in
it the forfeiture of the proceeds of the crime and the instruments or evidence or placed at the disposal of the court.

o US v. Filart V. Where The Accused Has Appealed, Confiscation And Forfeiture Not
 Facts: The accused planned to sell 450 tickets Ordered By The Trial Court May Be Imposed By The Appellate Court
for an automobile raffle. The court ordered the
confiscation of the automobile and the money VI. Summary of Rules:
obtained from selling the tickets. None of these 1. No forfeiture where there is no criminal case.
were in the possession of the parties or the 2. Courts cannot order the confiscation of property belonging to a
court that the time the order of confiscation third person is the latter is not indicted.
was made. 3. Confiscation can be ordered only if the property is submitted in
 Held: The court had not jurisdiction to order evidence or placed at the disposal of the court.
the confiscation of the property not in the 4. Articles which are forfeited, when the order of forfeiture is
possession of either the court itself or the already final, cannot be returned even in case of an acquittal.
parties involved. 5. Confiscation and forfeiture are additional penalties.
6. Applicable to Special Penal Laws as well.
III. Articles Which Are Forfeited When The Order Of Forfeiture Is
Already Final, Cannot Be Returned Even In Case Of An Acquittal
— Commissioner of Customs v. Encarnacion
o Facts: Article brought by a crew member of PAL were
confiscated by Customs for not having declared it. The
order of forfeiture became final while the crew
member was charged with violation of the RPC. The
crew member was later acquitted, and the court
ordered the return of the articles.
o Held: The court erred in ordering the release of the
articles because such articles already belong to the

IV. Confiscation And Forfeiture Are Additional Penalties

— Where the penalty imposed did not include the confiscation of
the dollars involved, the confiscation and forfeiture sought
would be an additional penalty and would amount to an
increase of the penalty already imposed thereby placing the
accused in double jeopardy. Thus, it cannot be allowed (People
v. Alejandro Paet y Velasco).

CHAPTER 4: APPLICATION OF PENALTIES ● The division of a divisible penalty refers to the proper period of
the penalty which should be imposed when aggravating or
mitigating circumstances attend the commission of the crime.
TO THE PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE AND FOR THE Article 47. – In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed;
GRADUATION OF THE SAME. Automatic review of death penalty cases.
The death penalty shall be imposed in all cases in which it must be
Article 46. – Penalty to be imposed upon principals in general. imposed under existing laws, except when the guilty person is below
The penalty prescribed by law for the commission of a felony shall be 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime or is more
imposed upon the principals in the commission of such felony. than seventy years of age or when upon appeal or automatic review
of the case by the Supreme Court, the required majority vote is not
Whenever the law prescribes a penalty for a felony in general terms it obtained for the imposition of the death penalty, in which cases the
shall be understood as applicable to the consummated felony. penalty shall be reclusion perpetua.

POINTS In all cases where the death penalty is imposed by the Court for
automatic review and judgment by the court en banc, within 20 days
I. Rule but not earlier than 15 days after promulgation of the judgment or
A. General Rule: Penalty Prescribed In General Terms notice of denial of any motion for new trial or reconsideration. The
● The penalty prescribed by law in general terms shall be transcript shall also be forwarded within 10 days after the filing therof
imposed: by the stenographic reporter (As amended by Republic Act No. 2659)
o Upon the principals
o For consummated felony POINTS

B. Exception: When The Law Fixes A Penalty For Frustrated Or I. Duty Of The Courts
Attempted Felony A. Majority Vote Of The Supreme Court Is Required For The
● The exception is when the penalty to be imposed upon the Imposition Of Death
principal in frustrated or attempted felony is fixed by law. ● The vote of 8 members is required (Article VIII, Section4(1),
1987 Constitution).
II. Graduation Of Penalties By Degrees Or By Periods o Republic Act No. 296 can be given retroactive effect.
● The graduation of penalties by degrees refers to stages of This provides that 8 justices must concur in the
execution (consummated, frustrated, attempted) and to the imposition of death penalty. It is procedural and not
degree of the criminal participation of the offender (principal, substantive and applicable to cases pending at the time
accomplice or accessory). of its approval.

● The records of all cases imposing the penalty of death, reclusion ● Where the penalty of reclusion perpetua is imposed, in lieu of
perpetua or life imprisonment shall be forwarded by the Court the death penalty, there is a need to perfect an appeal.
of Appeals to the Supreme Court for review o Perfecting an appeal means doing all the acts necessary
to place the case on the court's calendar.1
B. Court Of Appeals To Review Death Penalty Cases
● People v. Mateo  The Court now deems it wise a n
d III. Imposition Of Death Penalty
compelling to provide in death penalty cases a review by A. Death Penalty Is Not Imposed In The Following Cases:
the Court of Appeals before it is elevated to the Supreme 1. When the guilty person is below 18 years of age at the time of
Court to minimize the possibility of error in judgment the commission of the crime.
(particularly of factual issues). 2. When the guilty person is more than 70 years of age.
o Death penalty shall not be imposed when guilty person
C. The Trial Court Must Require The Prosecution To Present Evidence, is over 70 years. This refers to the time when the final
Despite Plea Of Guilty, When The Crime Charged Is Punished With decision is rendered.
Death o People v. Alcantara: Even if accused was 64 at the start
● The essence of judicial review is that while society allows of trial, he was past 70 when the final decision was
violent retribution for heinous crimes, it always must make rendered. Death cant be imposed.
certain that the blood of the innocent is not spilled or the guilty 3. When upon appeal or automatic review of the case by the
made to suffer more than their just measure of punishment. Supreme Court, the vote of 8 members is not obtained for the
● A sentence of death is valid only if it is susceptible of a fair and imposition of the death penalty.
reasonable examination by the court.
B. Exceptional Cases In Which Death Penalty Was Not Imposed
II. Suspension Of The Imposition Of The Death Penalty ● People v. Dela Cruz  Considering that the
A. The 1987 Constitution Merely Suspended The Imposition Of Death circumstances under which the offense was perpetrated in
Penalty light of the deplorable conditions existing in the national
● Article III, Section 19, 1987 Constitution does not expressly penitentiary.
declare the abolition of the death penalty. ● People v. Marcos  When the facts of the case tend to show
● It merely suspended the imposition of death penalty. that the crime was NOT the result of any deliberate and well-
formed nefarious conspiracy of a criminal group. Appellant
B. Republic Act No. 7659 v. Republic Act No. 9346 obviously did not fully realize the gravity of the crime.
● December 31, 1993  Republic Act No. 7659 restored
thedeath penalty. IV. Justification For Death Penalty
● June 24, 2006  Republic Act No. 9346 prohibited 1. Social defense
the 2. Exemplarity
imposition of death penalty, and in lieu of it, reclusion perpetua
was imposed. 1 SupremeCourt of the State of New York,

V. Death Penalty Not Cruel And Unusual POINTS

● Death penalty is not excessive, unjust or cruel. Punishments are
cruel when they involve torture or lingering death. Cruelty I. At Least Two Crimes Must Be Committed
implies something inhuman and barbarous, that is more than ● The commission of at least two crimes. But two or more grave
the extinguishment of life. or less grave felonies must be the result of a single act, or an
offense must be a necessary means for committing the other.
VI. “Death penalty shall be imposed in all cases in which it must be ● In Complex Crime, When The Offender Executes Various Acts,
imposed under existing law.” He Must Have A Single Purpose
● As long as death penalty remains in the statute books, it is the o People v. Gallardo  to commit estafa, the
duty of the judicial officers to respect and apply the law accusedhad to commit 17 falsifications.
regardless of private opinion (People v. Limaco). o Gonzalez v. City Fiscal  27 vouchers were falsified
not for the single purpose of estafa. One or more
A. Crimes Where Death Penalty Is Imposed offenses not necessary means for committing others.
1. Treason
2. Piracy II. A Complex Crime Is Only One Crime
3. Qualified piracy ● Although two or more crimes are committed, they constitute
4. Qualified bribery only one crime in the eyes of the law  one criminal intent.
5. Parricide ● This is actually for the benefit of the offender since even if two
6. Murder crimes are committed, the law only punished the offender for
7. Infanticide one, although it is in the maximum. In the eyes of the law, the
8. Kidnapping and serious illegal detention two crimes stem from one criminal intent – this is less perverse
9. Robbery with homicide in the crimes of the law compared to punishing him for two
10. Destructive arson crimes. This applies to both compound crimes and complex
11. Rape with homicide crime proper.
12. Plunder o The reason for the single penalty is that the basis of the
13. Certain violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act felony is the singularity of the act.
14. Carnapping ● Only one information must be filed charging the complex
Article 48. – Penalty for complex crimes. o If you want to charge someone with forcible abduction
When a single act constitutes 2 or more grave or less grave felonies, with rape, you have to allege the elements of both
or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other, forcible abduction and rape.
the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to o If one is not proven, then the accused can be convicted
be applied in its maximum period. of the other (Boado).

● An accused should not be harassed with various prosecutions

III. Two Kinds of Complex Crime: based on the same act by splitting it into various charges.
1. Compound Crime  When a single act constitutes two or VI. Article 48 Is Intended To Favor The Culprit
moregrave or less grave felonies. ● It could have no better purpose than to prescribe a penalty
2. Complex Crime Proper  When an offense is a lower than the aggregate of the penalties for each offense, if
necessary means for committing the other. imposed separately.
● When two or more crimes are the result of a single act, the
IV. No Complex Crime: offender is deemed less perverse than when he commits said
● When two or more crimes are committed but (1) not by a single crimes through separate and distinct acts.
act and (2) one is not a necessary means for committing the
other. VII. The Penalty For Complex Crime Is The Penalty For The Most
● When in the definition of a felony one offense is an Serious Crime, The Same Is To Be Applied In Its Maximum Period
indispensable means to commit the other, there is no complex ● The same rule observed when an offense is a necessary means
crime. for committing the other.
o Example: No complex crime when trespass to dwelling ● But when one of the offenses, as a means to commit the other,
is a direct means to commit a grave offense like rape, was committed by one of the accused by reckless imprudence,
homicide or murder. that the accused who committed the offense by reckless
● When one offense is committed to conceal the other imprudence is liable for his act only.
o After committing homicide, the accused set the house ● When the homicide, physical injuries, and the burning of the
where it was perpetrated on fire. house are the result of one single act of negligence, there is
o The amount appropriated to himself was in the only one penalty, but there are three civil liabilities.
possession and at the disposal of the accused and he When two felonies constituting a complex crime are punishable by
could have appropriated it to himself without the imprisonment and fine, respectively, only the penalty of imprisonment
necessity of the falsified document. Two crimes were should be imposed.
committed. The falsification was a means to conceal,
not to commit malversation (US v. Geta). VIII. Article 48 Applies Only To Cases Where The Code Does Not
● In the crime of rebellion with murder, arson, robbery or other Provide A Definite Specific Penalty For A Complex Crime
common crimes. Murder, arson and robbery are ingredients in
the crime of rebellion and are absorbed and inherent in it. COMPOUND CRIME
I. “When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave
V. When Two Crimes Produced By A Single Act Are Respectively felonies”
Within The Exclusive Jurisdiction Of Two Courts Of Different
Jurisdiction, The Court Of Higher Jurisdiction Shall Try The Complex II. Elements Of Compound Crime:
Crime 1. That only a single act is performed by the offender.

2. That the single act produces victims received and there is a possibility that they
a. Two or more grave felonies or were killed by one and the same missile.
b. One or more grave and one or more less grave
c. Two or more less grave felonies B. No Single Act
d. If a light felony likewise resulted, the light felony shall ● Several shots from Thompson sub-machine gun causing several
be treated as a separate offense. A separate deaths, although caused by a single act of pressing the trigger
information must be filed for them. are considered several acts (People v. Desierto)
o It is not the act of pressing the trigger which should be
III. Examples: considered as producing several felonies, but the
A. Single Act number of bullets which actually produced them.
● The single act of throwing a hand grenade producing murder ● Act directed against two different persons even though
and multiple attempted murder (People v. Guillen). resulting from one criminal impulse are distinct crimes (People
● Placing a time bomb in a plane which caused it to explode mid- v. Alfindo).
air killing 13 persons is a complex crime of multiple murder and ● Two victims each received more than one bullet wound. They
destruction of property (People v. Largo). were standing far apart from each other. Accused liable for two
● When in obedience to an order several accused simultaneously separate murders (People v. Basarain).
shot many persons, without evidence how many each killed,
there is only one single offense, there being a single criminal IV. Crimes Not Covered By Article 48
impulse (People v. Lawas) A. “Felonies”
o Note: This rule is applicable only when there is no ● Take note of the word “felonies.” This precludes application to
evidence at all to show the number of persons killed ordinances and Special Penal Laws.
by each of several defendants. The “single criminal ● The felonies resulting from the single act must be felonies in
impulse” has no legal basis but is acceptable when it is the Revised Penal Code.
not certain who among the accused killed or injured o If punishable under the Revised Penal Code and a
each of the several victims. The ruling in People v. Special Penal Law (or an ordinance), Article 48 will not
Lawas is not applicable when there was conspiracy to apply. The offender may be charged and convicted for
perpetuate the killings. both crimes, separately without double jeopardy.
● When it is within the scope of possibility that the two victims
were killed by one and the same missile. Absent showing that B. Examples:
the victims died from more than one bullet, the crime should ● Estafa and illegal recruitment
be classified as a complex crime (People v. Bersamin). ● Estafa and B.P. Blg. 22
o Ruling in the Bersamin case is applicable only when ● Rape and sexual assault (SPL)
there is no evidence as to how many wounds the

● Accused inserted his fingers, and then his penis to victim’s parricide with unintentional abortion (People v.
vagina. NOT complex crime. One count rape, one count sexual Paycana).
assault. Not a complex crime. (People v Nequia).
● Rape with homicide is a special complex crime not covered by V. Light Felonies Produced By The Same Act Should Be Treated And
Article 48. Article 266-B punishes rape with homicide Punished As Separate Offenses Or May Be Absorbed By The Grave
specifically. Felony
● No complex crime of arson with homicide under Article 48. 1. Several light felonies resulting from one single act – not
Article 320 as amended by Republic Act No. No.7659 provides complex
a penalty. o Collision between two automobiles resulting into
● Theft of firearm and illegal possession of same firearm do not damage of property and slight physical injuries.
form a complex crime – they are two distinct crimes. Illegal 2. When the crime is committed by force or violence, slight
possession requires intent to use not just own, which is not the physical injuries are absorbed.
case in every theft (People v. Estoista). o Slight physical injuries absorbed in rape.
● What if only one victim, will Article 48 apply? Yes. Governor
was performing duties and was killed by accused. Complex VI. Applicable To Crimes Through Negligence
crime of direct assault with homicide. ● Article 48 speaks of felonies which make it applicable to Article
● Supposing one wants to kill another with treachery, but there 365 which defines and penalizes criminal negligence (fault).
abberatio ictus or error in personae, can the crime committed ● Municipal mayor who accidentally discharges a gun in a school
by the accused be a complex crime? Yes. Homicide with program killing a girl and injuring a boy is liable for a complex
attempted homicide. crime of homicide with less serious physical injuries through
● Dude stabbed victim with a bolo, the bolo hit both the victim reckless imprudence (People v. Castro).
and the person behind him. Complex crime of murder and
serious physical injuries (People v. Patrolla). COMPOUND COMPLEX CRIME PROPER
● Accused forcibly inserted his penis into the vagina of the I. “When an offense is a necessary means for committing the other”
woman. She sustained less serious physical injuries in her ● Complex crimes do not exist when the two crimes are punished
vagina. Complex crime of rape with less serious physical under different statutes.
injuries. (Ingles: can’t find the citation by J-Call! Let’s trust his
lecture!) II. Elements Of Compound Complex Crime Proper
● What if there was no intent to kill, but two people died because 1. That at least two offenses are committed.
of the acts of the accused, will Article 48 apply? Yes. Article 48 2. That one or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit
applies even to praeter intentionem. the other.
o Example: dude stabbed wife who was 7 months 3. That both or all the offenses must be punished under the same
pregnant. Both wife and baby died. Complex crime of statute.

III. FIRST ELEMENT: That At Least Two Offenses Committed II. Kinds Of Plurality Of Crimes
● People v. Barbas  The falsification of the cedula 1. Formal or Ideal  one criminal liability
certificate which is a crime under Article 171 was necessary to o 3 Groups Of Formal Or Ideal Type
commit the crime of malversation under Article 217, because a. When the offender commits complex crimes (Article
the accused had to falsify the duplicate of the cedulas to 48)
obtain from the taxpayers the money which he later b. Composite Crimes, that is when the law specially fixes a
misappropriated. single penalty for two or more offenses committed.
● People v. Manguiat  The crime of forcible abduction w a
s c. When the offender commits continued (delito
a necessary means for committing the crime of rape. continuado) or continuing crime (transitory crime).
 Ingles: Justice Callejo did not distinguish
IV. SECOND ELEMENT: Necessary To Commit The Other between continued crimes and continuing
● The first crime committed is to insure and facilitate the crimes, he lumped them together as delito
commission of the next crime. continuado. Boado, however, distinguished
o The first is necessary but not indispensable – because if between the two. The distinction it seems is
it is indispensable, then it is an element of the crime. academic, the effect being the same – that only
● The phrase merely signified that, for instance, a crime such as one crime is considered committed.
simple estafa can be and ordinarily is committed in the manner 2. Real or material  there are different crimes in the law as
defined in the Revised Penal Code, but if the estafador resorts welas in the conscience of the offender. In such case, the
to or employs falsification, merely to facilitate and insure his offender will be punished for each and ever offense he
committing estafa, then he is guilty of the complex crime of committed.
estafa through falsification. o Example: A stabbed B with a knife. A also stabbed C.
There are two acts, two crimes.
V. THIRD ELEMENT: Punished Under The Same Statute
● Homicide and illegal possession of firearms are punished under III. Plurality Of Crimes v. Recidivism
different statutes. Recidivism Plurality
● Republic Act No. No. 8294 made the use of unlicensed firearm There must be conviction by final No conviction of any of the crimes
in murder or homicide not as a separate crime but as a special judgment of the first or prior committed
aggravating circumstance. offense


I. Definition I. Definition
● Consists in the successive execution by the same individual of ● Those which in the eyes of the law are treated as single
different criminal acts upon any of which no conviction has yet indivisible offenses although in reality are made up of more
been declared. than one crime.

II. Composite v. Complex Crime concurrence or delictual acts is called a “delito

Composite Crime Complex Crime continuado.”
Combo of offenses is fixed Combo is not specified but generalized. ● The series of acts born of a single criminal impulse may be
by law. perpetrated during a long period of time.
Penalty is specific. Not specific, but for the most serious
offense in the max period. II. A Continued Crime Is Not A Complex Crime
Even if there are more than If more than one count of the crime ● In continued crimes, one offense is not a necessary means for
one count of the forming part of the complex crime, the committing another. As such, penalty imposed not in max.
component crime (like first shall be complexed, while the other ● The principle is applied in connection with two or more crimes
several rapes), still just one counts are treated as separate crimes committed with a single intent.
composite crime to be (forcible abduction with rape, with
charged. subsequent rapes charged separately). III. Continued Crime v. Transitory Crime
If light felony accompanies Light felonies are not absorbed, they ● Transitory crime  “moving crime” like kidnapping a person for
the commission of the have to be filed separately. the purpose of ransom.
composite offence, such is ● When a transitory crime is committed, the criminal action may
absorbed. be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality, city or
province wherein any of the essential ingredients thereof took
CONTINUED CRIME place. The singleness of the crime, committed by executing tow
I. Definition or more acts is not considered.
● A principle wherein a single crime consisting of series of acts
but all arising from one criminal resolution. IV. Continued Crime v. Real Or Material Plurality
o Impelled by a single criminal impulse but committed by Real or material Continued crime
a series of overt acts at about the same time in about Series of acts performed by the offender
the same place and all the overt acts violate one and Each act is a separate crime Different acts constitute only one
the same provision of law. generated by different criminal crime because all the acts arise
o When two acts are deemed distinct from one another impulses. from one criminal impulse.
although proceeding from the same criminal impulse.
● Although there are a series of acts, there is only one crime V. Test: Single Criminal Impulse Test
committed. One penalty should be imposed. A. Applies To:
o When the actor, there being unity of purpose and of ● Theft of 13 cows at same place and time.
right violated, commits diverse acts, each of which, ● Theft of 6 roosters belonging to 2 different owners from the
although of a delictual character, merely constitutes a same coop and at the same time
partial execution of a single particular delict, such ● Also see Mallari v. People, wherein the accused falsified two
documents over two parcels of land as security for loans from

two people. He made it appear that the owners of the land 1. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be higher
mortgaged the property to the two people from whence he got than that corresponding to the offense which the accused
the loan. The Supreme Court considered it as only one crime intended to commit, the penalty corresponding to the latter
because they were done in only one occasion (same date, place shall be imposed in its maximum period.
and time). There was only one deceit practiced by petitioner on 2. If the penalty prescribed for the felony committed be lower
the two victims. than that corresponding to the one which the accused
intended to commit, the penalty for the former shall be
B. Does Not Apply: imposed in its maximum period.
● To formal/instantaneous crimes. Adultery is not a delito 3. The rule established by the next preceding paragraph shall not
continuado. Each sexual act is an offense. It is consummated be applicable if the acts committed by the guilty person shall
and exhausted (like the accused) at the time of carnal union. also constitute an attempt or frustration of another crime, if
the law prescribes a higher penalty for either of the latter
CONTINUING CRIME offenses, in which case the penalty provided for the attempt
I. Definition or the frustrated crime shall be imposed in the maximum
● One where any of the elements of the offense was committed period.
in different localities such that the accused may be indicted in
any of those localities. POINTS

II. Only Considered As One Crime I. Article 14 Has Reference To The Provision Of The 1 st Paragraph Of
● May also refer to any offense which is continuing in time Article 4
o Rebellion ● When the crime actually committed is different from that
o Squatting intended, the penalty to be imposed must be governed by this
o Violation of B.P. Blg. 22 article.
o Abduction, kidnapping, illegal detention
● Applicable to Special Penal Laws? Yes. See Santiago v. II. Article 14 Applies Only When There Is Mistake In Identity Of The
Garchitorena where Court said that Miriam’s signing the order Victim Of The Crime, And The Penalty For The Crime Committed Is
to allow 32 aliens to stay was a continuing crime. She was Different From That For The Crime Intended To Be Committed
charged only once. ● Paragraph 1 of Article 4 covers
1. Aberratio Ictus (Mistake in the Blow)  A fired his gun at
Article 49. – Penalty to be imposed upon the principals when the his father, with intent to kill him, but he missed) and hit C,
crime committed is different from that intended. killing the latter.
In cases in which the felony committed is different from that which 2. Error in Personae (Mistake in Identity)  A, thinking that
the offender intended to commit, the following rules shall be a person was B, fired at the person who turned out to be C,
observed: the father of A.

3. Praeter intentionem (More serious consequence not intended) frustrated felony.

 A, without intent to kill, boxed B, who fell and hit
thepavement. B died due to the fracture of the skull. Article 51. – Penalty to be imposed upon principals of attempted
● The rules stated in paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 49 CANNOT crime.
apply to cases involving (1) aberratio ictus (covered by Article The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
48) and (3) praeter intentionem (covered by Article 13). consummated felony shall be imposed upon the principals in an
● It is only applicable to (2) error in personae  since only attempt to commit a felony.
ecrime is produced by the act of the offender, there could be
no complex crime (Article 38) which presupposes the Article 52. – Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in a
commission of at least two crimes. consummated crime.
The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the
III. Article 49 Is Applicable Only When The Intended Crime And The consummated felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in the
Crime Actually Committed Are Punished With Different Penalties commission of a consummated felony.
● If the intended crime and the crime actually committed are
punished with the same or equal penalties. Article 49 is NOT Article 53. – Penalty to be imposed upon accessories to the
applicable. commission of a consummated felony.
The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
IV. Article 49 v. Article 48 consummated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the
Article 49 Article 48 commission of a consummated felony.
The lesser penalty is to be The penalty for the more or most
imposed serious crime shall be imposed Article 54. – Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in a frustrated
To be applied in the maximum The same to be applied in its crime.
period maximum period The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the
frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the
V. Rule 3 In Article 49 Is Not Necessary commission of a frustrated felony.
 Because the cases contemplated in that paragraph may well be
covered by Article 48, in view of the fact that the same act Article 55. – Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of a frustrated
committed by the guilty person, which gives rise to one crime, crime.
also constitutes an attempt or a frustration of another crime. The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the
frustrated felony shall be imposed upon the accessories to the
Article 50. – Penalty to be imposed upon principals of a frustrated commission of a frustrated felony.
The penalty lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the Article 56. – Penalty to be imposed upon accomplices in an attempted
consummated felony shall be imposed upon the principals in a crime.

The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for an
attempt to commit a felony shall be imposed upon the accomplices in A. Examples:
an attempt to commit the felony. 1. Facts: A convicted of attempted homicide – A shot B with intent
to kill but without inflicting a mortal wound.
Article 57. – Penalty to be imposed upon accessories of an attempted o Penalty for consummated homicide: reclusion
crime. temporal.
The penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the o To find the penalty that is lower by one or more
attempt shall be imposed upon the accessories to the attempt to degrees: look in Scale No. 1 of Article 71.
commit a felony. ● Held: Because A only committed attempted homicide: penalty
to be imposed is that which is lower by two degrees than
POINTS reclusion temporal  which is prision correccional.
o Penalty for frustrated homicide: one degree lower than
I. Diagram Of The Application Of Articles 50 To 57 reclusion temporal  which is prision mayor in the
Consummated Frustrated Attempted same Scale No. 1 of Article 71
Principals 0 1 2
Accomplices 1 2 3 2. Facts: A (principal), B (accomplice), C (accessory) convicted of
Accessories 2 3 4 consummated homicide.
● Held:
● “0”  penalty prescribed by law imposed on the principal
o A’s penalty – reclusion temporal (as principal)
ina consummated offense (according to provisions of Article 46)
o B’s penalty – prision mayor (as accomplice: penalty
● Other figures  degrees to which penalty must be next lower in degree than prescribed for consummated
lowered to meet different situations anticipated by law. homicide)
● For Articles 50, 51, 52, 53  Basis for reduction of o C’s penalty – prision correccional (as accessory: two
penalty by one or two degrees: the penalty prescribed degrees lower than that prescribed for consummated
by law for consummated crime. homicide)
● For Articles 54-55  Basis for reduction: penalty prescribed
by law for frustrated felony. ● In the examples, penalties shall be imposed in the proper
● For Articles 56-57  basic penalty used for reduction by one period and shall be subject to the provisions of the
or two degrees: for attempted felony. Indeterminate Sentence Law.
● In making any reduction by one or two degrees: basis used is
that already prescribed NOT as already reduced. II. Exceptions To The Rules Established In Articles 50 To 57
● Under Article 51: penalty for attempted crime is that for ● Article 60  Articles 50-57 shall not apply to cases where
consummated felony reduced by two degrees NOT penalty for thelaw expressly prescribes the penalty for a frustrated or
the frustrated felony reduced by one degree (De los Angeles v.

attempted felony, or to be imposed upon accomplices or VI. What Is A Period Of Penalty?

accessories. ● PERIOD: one of the three equal portions (either minimum/
● The penalty for frustrated parricide, murder, or homicide, may medium/ maximum) of a divisible penalty (Article 65).
be two degrees lower; and the penalty for attempted parricide, ● A period of a divisible penalty, when prescribed by the Code as
murder, or homicide may be three degrees lower. a penalty for a felony, is in itself a degree.
o Article 250  The courts (in view of facts of case) o Example: In Article 140, the penalty for leader of a
mayimpose upon person guilty of frustrated crime sedition is prision mayor in its minimum period and fine
of parricide, murder, or homicide – penalty lower by o It (minimum period) being a degree – penalty lower
one degree than that which should be imposed than that penalty is prision correcional in its maximum
under Article 50; Courts may reduce by one degree period
penalty under Article 51 imposed for an attempt to
commit any of said crimes. Article 58. – Additional penalty to be imposed upon certain
IV. What Are The Bases For The Determination Of The Extent Of Those accessories falling within the terms of paragraph 3 of Article 19
Penalty To Be Imposed Under The Revised Penal Code? of this Code who should act with abuse of their public functions. Shall
1. Stage reached by the crime in its development suffer the additional penalty of absolute perpetual disqualification if
(attempted/frustrated/consummated). the principal offender shall be guilty of a grave felony, and that of
2. Participations therein of the persons liable. absolute temporary disqualification if he shall be guilty of a less grave
3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which attended the felony.
commission of the crime.
● For 1 (stages of execution) and 2 (participation of persons POINTS
liable)  penalty is graduated by degree.
I. Additional Penalties For Public Officers Who Are Guilty As
V. What Is A Degree In Relation To Penalty? Accessories Under Paragraph 3 Of Article 19
● DEGREE: one entire/whole penalty; one unit of the penalties ● Public officers who help the author of a crime by misusing their
enumerated in the graduates scales found in Article 71. office and duties shall suffer the additional penalties of:
o Each of the penalties of reclusion perpetua, reclusion 1. Absolute perpetual disqualification – if principal offended guilty
remporal, prision mayor etc. IS a degree of grave felony.
● When there is mitigating or aggravating circumstance: penalty 2. Absolute temporary disqualification – if principal offender
is lowered or increased by period only EXCEPT when penalty is guilty of less grave felony.
divisible and there are two ore more mitigating without ● Article 58 limits its provisions to grave or less grave felonies
aggravating circumstances – if this happens, penalty is lowered because it is not possible to have accessories liable for light
by a degree. felonies (Article 16).

II. This Article Applies Only To Public Officers Who Abused Their Public ● According to Positivist theory: such person should not be
Functions punished – there is neither “social danger” nor “degree of
● Accessories referred to in Article 58 – those falling within the criminality” shown by him; act is absolutely harmless; “no”
term of paragraph 3 of Article 19 (recall: harboring, concealing, common sense.
or assisting in the escape…). ● But one who discharged shotgun at another from 200 yards
● Additional penalty in Article 58 imposed only on accessories away – guilty of discharge of firearm (Article 254) not of
that misused his public office or authority in participating in impossible crime – no proof of intent to kill on part of offender
crime (“who should act with abuse of their public functions”). and it was possible of accomplishing the evil intent of offender
(to frighten offended party) (People v. Agbuya).
Article 59. – Penalty to be imposed in case of failure to commit the
crime because the means employed or the aims sought are III. Is The Penalty For Impossible Crime Proper?
impossible. ● Penalty of arresto mayor or fine of P200-500 – subject to
When the person intending to commit an offense has already criticism because article uses words “offense” and “crime”
performed the acts for the execution of the same but nevertheless the which include light felony.
crime was not produced by reason of the fact that the act intended ● One who attempt to commit light felony of impossible
was by its nature one of impossible accomplishment or because the materialization may be punished by penalty of arresto mayor
means employed by such person are essentially inadequate to (higher than the prescribed for consummated light felony or
produce the result desired by him, the court, having in mind the social arresto menor).
danger and the degree of criminality shown by the offender, shall ● Provision of Article 59 limited to cases where act performed
imposed upon him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine ranging from would be grave felonies or less grave felonies.
200-500 pesos.
Article 60. – Exceptions to the rules established in Articles 50 to 57.
POINTS The provisions contained in Articles 50 to 57, inclusive, of this Code
shall not be applicable to cases in which the law expressly prescribes
I. Penalty For Impossible Crime the penalty provided for a frustrated or attempted felony, or to be
● Penalty for impossible crime is arresto mayor or a fine ranging imposed upon accomplices or accessories.
from 200 to 500 pesos.
II. Basis For Imposition Of Proper Penalty: (1) Social Danger; And (2)
Degree Of Criminality Shown By The Offender I. Articles 50 To 57 Do Not Apply When The Law Expressly Prescribes
● Court must take into consideration the social danger and the The Penalty For A Frustrated Or Attempted Felony Or To Be Imposed
degree of criminality shown by the offender (Article 59). Upon Accomplices Or Accessories
o Example: Person fired revolver upon enemy 1 kilometer ● On the occasion or in consequence of an attempted or
away shows stupidity rather than dangerousness. frustrated robbery, the offender commits a homicide – law

provides in Article 297: the special penalty of reclusion ● Article 162  Knowingly using counterfeited seal or
temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua shall be forgedsignature or stamp of the President.
imposed upon the offender. ● Article 168  Illegal possession and use of a false treasury
● If not for this provision in Article 60, the penalty to be imposed noteor bank note.
is reclusion temporal: penalty next lower in degree than ● Article 173(3)  Using a falsified document.
reclusion perpetua to death – which is the penalty for ● Article 173(2)  Using a falsified dispatch.
consummated offense of robbery with homicide.
● Reason: enormity of the offense of attempted or frustrated Article 61. – Rules for graduating penalties.
robbery with homicide; law provides special penalty therefore. For the purpose of graduating the penalties which, according to the
provisions of Articles 50 to 57, inclusive, of this Code, are to be
II. Accomplice, Punished As Principal imposed upon persons guilty as principals of any frustrated or
● General Rule: Accomplice punished by penalty one degree attempted felony, or as accomplices or accessories, the following
lower than penalty imposed upon principal. rules shall be observed:
● Exception: 2 CASES that the Code punishes accomplice with 1. When the penalty prescribed for the felony is single and
same penalty upon principal are: indivisible, the penalty next lower in degrees shall be that
o Article 346  Ascendants, guardians, immediately following that indivisible penalty in the
curators, teachers, and any person who by abuse of respective graduated scale prescribed in Article 71 of this
authority or confidential relationship, shall Code.
cooperate as accomplices in the crimes of rape, acts 2. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of
of lasciviousness seduction, corruption of minors, two indivisible penalties, or of one or more divisible penalties
white slave trade or abduction. to be impose to their full extent, the penalty next lower in
o Article 268  One who furnished the place for degree shall be that immediately following the lesser of the
theperpetration of the crime of slight illegal detention. penalties prescribed in the respective graduated scale.
 Furnishing the place for the perpetration of the 3. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of one
crime is ordinarily the act of an accomplice. or two indivisible penalties and the maximum period of
another divisible penalty, the penalty next lower in degree
III. Accessory Punished As Principal shall be composed of the medium and minimum periods of
● Article 142  knowingly concealing certain evil acts are usualy the proper divisible penalty and the maximum periods of the
acts of the accessory but under this article is punished as act of proper divisible penalty and the maximum period of that
the principal. immediately following in said respective graduated scale.
4. When the penalty prescribed for the crime is composed of
A. Certain Accessories Are Punished With A Penalty One Degree several periods, corresponding to different divisible penalties,
Lower Instead Of Two Degrees the penalty next lower in degree shall be composed of the
period immediately following the minimum prescribed and of

the two next following, which shall be taken from the penalty
prescribed, if possible; otherwise from the penalty II. The Lower Penalty Shall Be Taken From The Graduated Scale In
immediately following in the above mentioned respective Article 71.
graduated scale. ● Scale No. 1 in Article 71 (penalties in order):
5. When the law prescribes a penalty for a crime in some a. Death
manner not especially provided for in the four preceding b. Reclusion perpetua,
rules, the courts, proceeding by analogy, shall impose c. Reclusion temporal,
corresponding penalties upon those guilty as principals of the d. Prision mayor,
frustrated felony, or of attempt to commit the same, and e. Prision correccional,
upon accomplices and accessories. f. Arresto mayor,
g. Destierro,
POINTS h. Arresto menor,
i. Public censure,
I. Article 61 provides for the rules to be observed in lowering the j. Fine.
penalty by one or two degrees ● Indivisible penalties: (1) death, (2) reclusion perpetua, (3) public
● Article 46 provides that penalty prescribed by law in general censure
terms shall be imposed upon principal in consummated felony ● Divisible penalties: reclusion temporal down to arresto menor
● Articles 50-57 provides that penalty prescribed by law for the ● Divisible penalties divided into 3 periods: (1) minimum, (2)
felony shall be lowered one or two degrees: medium, (3) maximum
a. Principal in frustrated felony – one degree lower;
b. Principal in attempted felony – two degrees lower; ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE RULES
c. Accomplice in consummated felony – one degree I. FIRST RULE: When the penalty is single and indivisible.
lower; and ● Ex. Reclusion perpetua – penalty for kidnapping and failing to
d. Accessory in consummated felony – two degrees lower. return a minor (Article 270)
● Rules in Article 61 also applies in determining minimum of the ● In Scale No. 1 of Article 71 – penalty immediately following
indeterminate penalty under the Indeterminate Sentence Law reclusion perpetua is reclusion temporal (therefore it is the
o Minimum of the indeterminate penalty is within the penalty next lower in degree).
range of penalty next lower than prescribed by Revised
Penal Code for the offense II. SECOND RULE:
● Rules also apply in lowering penalty by one or two degrees by A. Penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties.
reason of presence of privileged mitigating circumstance ● Indivisible penalties: reclusion perpetua to death
(Article 68 & 69), or when the penalty is divisible and there are ● They are the penalties for parricide (Article 246)
2 or more generic mitigating circumstances and NO ● Penalty immediately following lesser of the penalties (or
aggravating circumstance (Article 64). reclusion perpetua)  reclusion temporal

B. When the penalty is composed of one or more divisible penalties to 3. Minimum accomplice; or
be imposed to their full extent. Prision Mayor 1. Maximum penalty for the
● Divisible penalty imposed to full extent  reclusion temporal principal in frustrated
o Penalty immediately following divisible penalty of felony.
reclusion temporal  prision mayor 2. Medium
● Two divisible penalties imposed to full extent  3. Minimum
prisioncorreccional to prision mayor.
o Penalty immediately following the lesser penalty B. When the penalty is composed of one indivisible penalty and the
between prision correccional to prision mayor  maximum period of a divisible penalty.
arresto mayor (Scale No. 1 Article 71) ● Ex: Reclusion temporal in max period to reclusion perpetua
● Same rule observed in lowering penalty by 1-2 degrees
A. When the penalty is composed of two indivisible penalties and the IV. FOURTH RULE: When the penalty is composed of several periods.
maximum period of a divisible penalty. ● “Several” mean ‘consisting in more than 2 periods’
● Penalty for murder (Article 248)  reclusion ● Fourth rule: contemplates penalty composed of at least 3
temporal in maximum period to death. periods.
● Relcusion perpetua (= in between reclusion temporal & death) ● Several periods MUST correspond to different divisible
 included in penalty penalties
● Penalty for murder has: 2 indivisible penalties (reclusion ● Penalty composed of several periods corresponding to different
perpetua – death) and 1 divisible penalty (reclusion temporal in divisible penalties  prision mayor (medium period)
max period) T
Oreclusion temporal (minimum period)
● Proper divisible penalty: reclusion temporal – penalty ● Period immediately following minimum (= prision mayor in
immediately following it: prision mayor medium period)  is prision mayor in minimum period
● Under third rule: penalty next lower  composed of medium ● Two periods next following are: max and med periods of prision
& minimum periods of reclusion temporal and max period correccional (=penalty next following scale in Article 71 since it
of prision mayor cannot be taken from penalty prescribed)
● (This the same penalty computed in People v. Ong Ta)
Illustration: 1. Maximum
DEATH Reclusion temporal 2. Medium
Reclusion Perpetua (1) Penalty for the 3. Minimum (1) Penalty for the
1. Maximum principal in principal in
1. Maximum
Reclusion Temporal consummated felony. consummated felony.
Prision mayor 2. Medium
2. Medium (2) Penalty for
3. Minimum (2) Penalty for

1. Maximum accomplice; or Arresto mayor Medium

Prision correccional 2. Medium penalty for the Minimum
principal in frustrated
felony. B. When the penalty has one period.
3. Minimum ● If penalty is any one of the 3 periods of a divisible penalty –
penalty next lower in degree = is the period next following the
V. FIFTH RULE: By analogy, because “not specifically provided for in given penalty.
the four preceding rules” ● Ex. Penalty immediately inferior to prision mayor in maximum
A. When the penalty has two periods. period is prision mayor in medium period
● Certain offenses in Revised Penal Code: punished with penalty ● If penalty is reclusion temporal in medium period – penalty
composed of two periods: next lower in degree = reclusion temporal in minimum period
o Either of same penalty: For abduction (Article 343) – ● Penalty prescribed by Code for a felony is a degree
prision correccional in its minimum and medium ● If penalty prescribed for felony is 1 of 3 periods of divisible
periods. penalty  that period becomes a degree & the
o Or of different penalties: For physical injuries (Article periodimmediately below is the penalty next lower in degree
263, subsec. 4) – arresto mayor in max period to
prision correccional in minimum period VI. Simplified Rules: (for rules in Par. 4 and 5 of Article 61)
● In these cases: penalty lower by one degree  is formed by 1. If penalty prescribed by Code consists in 3 periods
2 periods taken from the same penalty prescribed (if possible) (corresponding to different divisible penalties)  penalty
OR from periods of penalty numerically following the lesser of nextlower in degree is penalty consisting in 3 periods down
the penalties prescribed the scale
● These cases – not covered by fourth rule (cause penalty 2. If penalty prescribed by Code consists in 2 periods 
contemplated in 4th rule must contain at least 3 periods) penaltynext lower in degree is the penalty consisting in 2 periods
● Penalty under fifth rule (by analogy) – contains 1 or 2 periods down the scale
only 3. If penalty prescribed by Code consists in only 1 period 
penalty next lower in degree is the next period down in the
Example: ● If the given penalty is composed of 1/2/3 periods 
● Penalty next lower than prision correccional in its min and med penalty next lower in degree should begin where the given
periods  is arresto mayor in its med and max periods penalty ends (because otherwise if it were to skip over
Maximum intermediate ones it would be lower but not NEXT lower in
Prision correccional Medium Penalty prescribed for degree (People v. Haloot)
Minimum the felony
Maximum Penalty next lower

Original Material from TABLE TURNERS (2012-2013). Edited by Rachelle Anne Gutierrez (2015-2016)

● U.S. v. Fuentes  Held: Penalty next lower in degree to

prisioncorreccional in medium period = is arresto mayor in
medium period.
Reason for ruling: a degree consists in 1 whole or 1 unit of the
penalties enumerated in the graduated scales in Article 71. To
lower a penalty by 1 degree – its necessary to keep a distance
of one whole penalty or one unit of penalties in Article 71
between one degree and another
● People v. Co Pao & People v. Gayrama  there is a
distance of only 1/3 of a degree (ruling in Fuentes case was
superseded by the rulings in these cases).

VII. Mitigating And Aggravating Circumstances Are Disregarded In The

Application Of The Rules For Graduating Penalties
● NOTE: Each paragraph of Article 61 begins with “When the
penalty prescribed for the felony” or “crime”.
● In lowering the penalty – penalty prescribed by the Revised
Penal Code for the crime is the basis (w/o regard to the
mitigating or aggravating circumstances w/c attended the
commission of the crime)
● It is only after the penalty next lower in degree is already
determined that the mitigating and/or aggravating
circumstances should be considered.

SECTION 2 – RULES FOR THE APPLICATION OF PENALTIES 4. The circumstances which consist in the material execution
WITH REGARD TO MITIGATING AND AGGRAVATING of the act, or in the means employed to accomplish it, shall
serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of those persons
only who had knowledge of them at the time of the execution
of the act or their cooperation therein.
Article 62. – Effects of the attendance of mitigating or aggravating
5. Habitual delinquency shall have the following effects:
circumstances and of habitual delinquency.
(a) Upon a third conviction, the culprit shall be sentenced to
Mitigating or aggravating circumstances and habitual delinquency
the penalty provided by law for the last crime of which he
shall be taken into account for the purpose of diminishing or
be found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision
increasing the penalty in conformity with the following rules:
correccional in its medium and maximum periods;
1. Aggravating circumstances which in themselves constitute a
(b) Upon a fourth conviction, the culprit shall be sentenced to
crime specially punishable by law or which are included by the
the penalty provided for the last crime of which he be
law in defining a crime and prescribing the penalty therefor
found guilty and to the additional penalty of prision mayor
shall not be taken into account for the purpose of increasing
in its minimum and medium periods; and
the penalty.
(c) Upon a fifth or additional conviction, the culprit shall be
1(a). When in the commission of the crime, advantage was
sentenced to the penalty provided for the last crime of
taken by the offender of his public position, the penalty to be
which he be found guilty and to the additional penalty of
imposed shall be in its maximum regardless of mitigating
prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal
in its minimum period.
The maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was
committed by any person who belongs to an
Notwithstanding the provisions of this article, the total of the two
organized/syndicated crime group.
penalties to be imposed upon the offender, in conformity herewith,
An organized/syndicated crime group means a group of two or
shall in no case exceed 30 years.
more persons collaborating, confederating or mutually helping
one another for purposes of gain in the commission of the
For the purposes of this article, a person shall be deemed to be
habitual delinquent, if within a period of ten years from the date of his
2. The same rule shall apply with respect to any aggravating
release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious
circumstances inherent in the crime to such a degree that it
physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa, or falsification, he is found guilty
must of necessity accompany the commission thereof.
of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. (As amended by Republic
3. Aggravating or mitigating circumstances which arise from the
Act No. 7659.)
moral attributes of the offender, or from his private relations
with the offended party, or from any other personal cause,
shall only serve to aggravate or mitigate the liability of the
principals, accomplices, and accessories as to whom such
circumstances are attendant.

I. Effects Of The Attendance Of Aggravating Or Mitigating ● That crime was committed by means of poison (Article 14,
Circumstances Or Of Habitual Delinquency paragraph 12)  Not aggravating in crime of murder by means
1. Aggravating circumstances (generic and specific) have effect of of poison (since using poison to kill victim included by law in
 increasing penalty (w/o exceeding the max provided by law). defining the crime of murder Article 248, paragraph 3).
2. Mitigating circumstances have effect of  diminishing
thepenalty. III. When Maximum Of The Penalty Shall Be Imposed (Special
3. Habitual delinquency has effect  increasing penalty (cause Aggravating Circumstance That Can’t Be Offset By A Generic Mitigating
of recidivism that is implied in habitual delinquency) Circumstance)
PLUS imposing an additional penalty. 1. When in the commission of the crime, advantage was taken by
the offender of his public position;
PARAGRAPH 1: 2. If the offense was committed by any person who belongs to an
I. When Aggravating Circumstances Are Not To Be Taken Account In organized/syndicated crime group.
Increasing The Penalty To Be Imposed
1. (Inherent in the crime) If the circumstance constitutes a crime IV. What Is An Organized/Syndicated Crime Group?
especially punished by law; or ● Means a group of 2 or more persons collaborating
2. (Element of the crime) If it is included by the law in defining a confederating or mutually helping one another for purposes of
crime and prescribing the penalty therefor. gain in the commission of any crime

II. Examples: PARAGRAPH 2:

A. Which In Themselves Constitute A Crime: ● The same rule applies with respect to aggravating circumstances
● That crime be committed “by means of fire” (Article 14, which are inherent in the crime.
paragraph 2)  NOT considered as aggravating in arson. o Example: Evident premeditation is inherent in robbery
● That crime be committed by means of “derailment of a and theft (U.S. Castroverde)
locomotive” (Article 14, paragraph 12)  NOT
considered as aggravating in crime known as “Damages and PARAGRAPH 3:
obstruction to means of communication” (Article 330 – which I. Aggravating Or Mitigating Which Arise From:
punishes the act of damaging any railway resulting in 1. Moral attributes of offender
derailment of cars). 2. From his private relations with offended party
3. From any other personal cause
B. Which Are Included By Law In Defining A Crime: ● These serve to aggravate or mitigate liability of: principals,
● That crime was committed in the dwelling of offended accomplices, accessories  as to whom such circumstances
party 
 are attendant.
NOT aggravating in robbery with force upon things (Article 299).
● Abuse of confidence is not aggravating in qualified theft II. Examples
committed with grave abuse of confidence (Article 310).

A. Moral Attributes Of Offender: ● A induced B and C to kill D. B and C killed D using treachery not
● A + B killed C. A acted w/ evident premeditation; B w/ passion previously agreed with A.
and obfuscation. ● A’s liability is not aggravated by treachery.
● Circumstances of evident premeditation + passion & ● BUT if A was present or had knowledge of the treachery used,
obfuscation  arises from moral attributes of offenders. then A is also liable for murder qualified by treachery.
● Evident premeditation should only affect and aggravate only
penalty for A & passion and obfuscation mitigates only B’s B. Means To Accomplish The Crime
liability. ● A ordered B to kill C. B used poison without knowledge of A.
● Only B will suffer the aggravating circumstance.
B. From His Private Relations With The Offended Party:
● A and C inflicted slight physical injuries on B. II. There Is No Mitigating Circumstance Relating To The Means
o A  son of B. Employed In The Execution Of The Crime
o C  father of B. ● It is impossible to conceive of any mitigating circumstance
● Alternative circumstance of relationship as aggravating will only which can properly be considered as to one of the defendants,
be against A (lower degree relative of B). but is not equally applicable to the rest, EVEN to those who had
● Alternative circumstance of relationship as mitigating will only no knowledge of the same at the time of the commission of the
be for C (higher degree relative of B). crime, or their cooperation therein.
● This ruling holds true even if there was conspiracy.
o The rule that in conspiracy the act of one is the act of all III. Difference Between (1) Circumstances Relating To Persons
does not mean that the crime of one is the crime of all Participation In The Same And (2) Circumstances Consisting In The
Material Execution Of The Means Employed
C. From Any Other Personal Cause: Persons Participation Material Execution / Means Employed
● A and B committed a crime. Do not affect all the Have a direct bearing upon the criminal
o A was 16 i.e. minor participants in the crime but liability of all the defendants who had
o B was a recidivist only those to whom they knowledge thereof at the time of the
● Each will carry the corresponding additional/mitigated penalty particularly apply. commission of the crime, or of their
cooperation therein.
PARAGRAPH 4: Example: People v. Villanueva
● The circumstances which consist of (1) and (2) shall serve only ● Defendants though forming of the conspiracy of kidnapping,
to aggravate or mitigate the liability of those persons only who were not the ones who actually kidnapped the victim.
had KNOWLEDGE of them AT THE TIME of the execution. ● Thus, they are not bound or affected by the aggravating
circumstance of nighttime UNLESS THEY KNEW about it prior.
I. Examples:
A. Material Execution Of The Crime

IV. Is It Necessary That There Be Proof Of Cooperation Or Participation prior conviction, he was again convicted of any of the said
With Regard To The Act Of Cruelty? crimes for the second time.
● Two views: 3. That after his conviction or after serving sentence, for the
o People v. Vocales  Although it may be second offense, he again committed, and within 10 years from
considered as aggravating against one accused, it his last release or last conviction, he was again convicted of said
may not be so against another UNLESS there is offenses, the third time or oftener.
proof of conspiracy in the commission of the main
act, or there is proof of cooperation or participation III. Computation Of The 10-Year Period
on the part of the latter. NOTE: Defendant’s last conviction OR last release should be the starting
o In accordance with Article 62(4)  if cruelty is a means point from which the 10-year period is to be counted.
employed to accomplish the act, only knowledge is ● Rational: If the starting point is only the date of last conviction,
required for one to be liable for it. there will be a case where the offender cannot be considered a
● Note: Article 14 states that cruelty is that which is not necessary habitual delinquent.
for the commission of the crime.
o If so, it cannot be part of the “material execution” nor Crimes Committed Date of Conviction Date of Release
“means employed to accomplish it”. Theft June 1915 July 1916
o Therefore, People v. Vocales would be ruling. Swindling May 1920 October 1922
Attempted Robbery July 1928 August 1930
Theft August 1937 September 1940
I. Habitual Delinquent
Crime charged October 1946
● A person who within a period of 10 years from the date of his
(last) release or last conviction of the crimes of
1. Serious or less serious physical injuries (Article263 & 265) Explanation:
2. Robbery (Article 193-303) ● The 10-year period should be counted from the date of LAST
3. Theft (Article 308-311) conviction or release from the crime charged, which is August
4. Estafa (Article 315-318) 1937 (conviction) or September 1940 (release).
5. Falsification (Article 170-174) o Note: Regardless of the gap between the first and
second crimes, the accused will be considered a
● He is found guilty of any of said crimes a 3rd time or oftener.
habitual delinquent if between the second and third
crimes, there is a gap or 10 years or below.
II. Elements
● In the accusation of theft, only attempted robbery (conviction:
1. That the offender had been convicted of any of the above-
July 1928, release: August 1930) can be taken into consideration
mentioned crimes.
for the determination of habitual delinquency since it is the last
2. That after the conviction or after serving his sentence, he
crime for which he was convicted for.
against committed, and within 10 years, from his release or

o A would not be a habitual delinquent since swindling is VI. Total Penalties Should Not Exceed 30 Years
not one of the crimes listed. ● Total  (1) the penalty for the last crime which is found
guiltyand (2) the additional penalty for being a habitual
IV. Subsequence Crime Must Be Committed AFTER CONVICTION Of delinquent.
Former Crime
● If (1) the second crime was committed before his first conviction VII. What Must Be Alleged In The Information
and (2) the fourth before his third conviction, and (3) the fifth 1. The dates of the commission of the previous crimes.
and sixth were committed on the same day, the six convictions 2. The dates of the last conviction or release
(although different in dates) are equivalent to only three. 3. The dates of the other previous conviction or releases.

V. “The culprit shall be sentenced to the penalty provided by law for A. Effect Of Plea Of Guilty When Allegations Are Insufficient
the last crime of which he be found guilty” ● A plea of guilty to an information which fails to allege the dates
● If the accused is tried for robbery and previously convicted of of commission of previous offenses, of convictions and of
theft and estafa, robbery is the last crime and if found guilty the releases is not an admission that the offender is a habitual
penalty for robbery shall be imposed, while also be declared a delinquent but only a recidivist (People v. Masonson).
habitual delinquent.
B. Date Of Release Not Absolutely Necessary
A. Additional Penalty For Habitual Delinquency ● If preceding conviction is less than 10 years from date of
1. Upon 3rd conviction  additional penalty of prision correctional conviction of the offense complained of (People v. Tolentino).
in its medium and maximum periods.
2. Upon 4th conviction  additional penalty of prision mayor in VIII. See “Rulings on Habitual Delinquency” (p.739-744, Reyes Book)
its minimum and medium periods.
3. Upon 5th conviction  additional penalty of prision mayor in IX. Habitual Delinquency v. Recidivism
is maximum period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period. Habitual Delinquency Recidivism
As to crimes The crimes are Sufficient that on date of trial,
B. Rational: committed specified. accused shall have been
● If after undergoing punishment for his previous crimes, he previously convicted of
continuous to commit said crimes, he is deemed to have shown another crime in the same
a dangerous propensity to crimes. Hence, he is punished with a title.
severer penalty for committing any of those crimes the third As to period Conviction must be 10 No period of time necessary
time or oftener. of commission years from each other.
● Purpose of the law: to render more effective social defense and As to number Conviction must be 3 rd That subsequent crime is
the reformation of multi-recidivists. of crimes time or oftener. embraced in the same title is
committed sufficient.
As to their Additional penalty If not offset by mitigating, will

effects prescribed by law is increase penalty to maximum POINTS

imposed. only.
I. Inoperative Because Of Republic Act No. 9346
● A convict can be a habitual delinquent without being a recidivist  In light of this only reclusion perpetua is indivisible.
if no two of the crimes committed are embraced in the same  Cannot be affected by generic mitigating circumstances BUT it
title. can be affected by privileged mitigating circumstances (like
● The imposition of additional penalty is constitutional as it is Article 68 & 69).
simply punishment for future crimes, the penalty enhanced on o Privileged mitigating always considered whether
account of criminal propensities of the accused. divisible or indivisible penalty.

Article 63. – Rules for the application of indivisible penalties. II. Outline Of The Rules
In all cases in which the law prescribes a single indivisible penalty, it 1. When penalty consists of 1 indivisible: applied regardless of any
shall be applied by the courts regardless of any mitigating or mitigating or aggravating circumstances
aggravating circumstances that may have attended the commission of 2. When penalty is composed of 2 indivisible penalties:
the deed. a. Only 1 aggravating  greater penalty shall be imposed
b. No aggravating nor mitigating  lesser penalty imposed
In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of two c. A mitigating and no aggravating  lesser penalty
indivisible penalties the following rules shall be observed in the imposed.
application thereof: d. Both mitigating and aggravating  court will
1. When in the commission of the deed there is present only one alowthem to offset one another.
aggravating circumstance, the greater penalty shall be applied.
2. When there are neither mitigating nor aggravating III. Article 63 Applies Only When The Penalty Prescribed By The Code Is
circumstances in the commission of the deed, the lesser Either One Indivisible Penalty Or Two Indivisible Penalties
penalty shall be applied. ● Article 63 does NOT apply if penalty prescribed: reclusion
3. When the commission of the act is attended by some temporal in max period to death (Because even if it includes 2
mitigating circumstance and there is no aggravating indivisible penalties = it has 3 periods of reclusion temporal
circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be applied. max-min, reclusion perpetua-med, Death-max)  Article
4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances attended 64 shall apply in this case)
the commission of the act, the courts shall reasonably allow
them to offset one another in consideration of their number A. Example Of Single And Indivisible Penalty
and importance, for the purpose of applying the penalty in ● Reclusion Perpetua for:
accordance with the preceding rules, according to the result of o Kidnapping and failure to return a minor (Article 270)
such compensation. o Rape (Article 266-B)
● Death for:

o Kidnapping and serious illegal detention when purpose ● Woman boxed by her husband stabbed him with knife in chest
of offender is to extort ransom (Article 267 as amended  entitled to penalty one degree lower from RP to Death = RT
by Republic Act No. 7659). ● People v. Galang: Imposable penalty for rape: RP. Accused had
o Rape with homicide (Article 266-B) privileged mitigating circumstance of minority – imposable
penalty = RT in medium period (absent other mitigating or
B. Example Of Two Indivisible Penalties aggravating circumstance)
● Reclusion perpetua to Death for:
o Parricide (Article 246) V. Moral value, not numerical weight of circumstances should prevail.
o Robbery with homicide (Article 294, paragraph 1) ● This is as regards paragraph 4 of Article 63
o Kidnapping and serious illegal detention without
intention to extort ransom (Article 267) VI. Mitigating Circumstance Is Not Necessary To Impose Reclusion
o Rape committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by Perpetua When The Crime Is Punishable With Two Indivisible Penalties
two or more persons (Article 266-B) Of Reclusion Perpetua To Death.
● Reason: under Article 63 when crime is penalized with 2
IV. When The Penalty Is Composed Of Two Indivisible Penalties, The indivisible penalties (reclusion perpetua to death) – lesser
Penalty Cannot Be Lowered By One Degree, No Matter How Many penalty should be imposed even when there is no mitigating
Mitigating Circumstances Are Present circumstance present.
A. General Rule:
● When there are 2 or more mitigating and NO aggravating  Article 64. – Rules for the application of penalties which contain three
court cannot proceed by analogy to provisions of subsection 5 periods.
Article 64 (imposition of one degree lower penalty) In cases in which the penalties prescribed by law contain three
● US v. Relador: Commission of crime of parricide punishable of periods, whether it be a single divisible enalty or composed of three
RP to Death but attended by two mitigating (illiteracy and lack different penalties, each one of which forms a period in accordance
of intention to commit so grave a wrong) and NO aggravating – with the provisions of Articles 76 and 77, the courts shall observe for
court imposed one degree lower penalty (Article 64 subsection the application of the penalty the following rules, according to
5) whether there are or are no mitigating or aggravating circumstances:
HELD: Wrong penalty imposed – it should be Article 63 applied 1. When there are neither aggravating nor mitigating
circumstances, they shall impose the penalty prescribed by law
B. Exception: When a privileged mitigating circumstance under Article in its medium period.
68 or Article 69 is present. 2. When only a mitigating circumstance is present in the
● If circumstance present is a privileged mitigating circumstance commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its
under Article 68 or Article 69 – offender may get a penalty one minimum period.
or two degrees lower 3. When only an aggravating circumstance is present in the
commission of the act, they shall impose the penalty in its

maximum period. II. Outline Of The Rules:

4. When both mitigating and aggravating circumstances are 1. No aggravating and no mitigating – medium period
present, the court shall reasonably offset those of one class
against the other according to their relative weight. 2. Only a mitigating – minimum period
5. When there are two or more mitigating circumstances and no
aggravating circumstances are present, the court shall impose 3. Only an aggravating – maximum period
the penalty next lower to that prescribed by law, in the period ● People v. Toling: No generic aggravating nor mitigating
that it may deem applicable, according to the number and circumstances were proven = penalty for murder imposed in
nature of such circumstances. medium period or RP. Death penalty imposed by trial court was
6. Whatever may be the number and nature of the aggravating not warranted.
circumstances, the courts shall not impose a greater penalty ● Illustrations of Nos. 2 and 3: A is convicted of homicide
than that prescribed by law, in its maximum period. punishable by reclusion temporal (min, med, max).
7. Within the limits of each period, the courts shall determine the o No mitigating nor aggravating  medium
extent of the penalty according to the number and nature of o A pleaded guilty, no aggravating  minimum
the aggravating and mitigating circumstances and the greater o Committed the crime in the dwelling, no mitigating 
or lesser extent of the evil produced by the crime. maximum
o 2 aggravating, no mitigating  still only maximum.
4. When there are aggravating and mitigating – offset those of
I. Article 64 applies only when the penalty has 3 periods. one class against the other according to relative weight.
● Article 64 applies when penalty prescribed by law for offense  ● Note: The mitigating circumstances must be ordinary not
RT, PM, PC, AM, Am, PC to RT, etc. = because they’re divisible privileged. The aggravating circumstances must be generic or
into 3 periods (minimum, medium, maximum). specific and not qualifying or inherent.
● When law prescribes single divisible penalty (ex. RT for ● Illustration of No. 4: A committed homicide in nighttime on
homicide) as in Article 76 – is distributed in 3 equal parts – each purpose. He surrendered to the mayor of the town and pleaded
part forms a period called min, med and max. guilty.
● If penalty made up of 3 diff penalties: PC to RT o Held:
Each forms a period according to Article 77 o One mitigating circumstance (surrender or guilty plead)
PC = min will offset aggravating circumstance of nighttime.
PM = med o Remaining mitigating will result in imposition of
RT = max minimum period.
PM is included bec. It’s between PC and RT in Scale No. 1 Article

5. Two or more mitigating and no aggravating – penalty next for the court to impose the maximum of the medium
lower, in the period applicable, according to the number and degree of the penalty (People v. Velazco).
nature of such circumstances.
● Penalty by law: reclusion temporal max to reclusion perpetua III. Cases Where Mitigating And Aggravating Circumstances Are Not
● Max of ISL: prision mayor max to reclusion tempora med. Considered In The Imposition Of The Penalty
● Min of ISL: prisio correctional max to prisio mayor med. 1. When the penalty is single and indivisible (Article 63)
● In determining the proper “period applicable”, the mitigating 2. In felonies through negligence such as reckless imprudence
circumstance can no longer be considered since it already (Article365).
lowered the degree of the penalty. 3. Penalty to be imposed upon a Moro or other non-Christian
inhabitant (Section 6, Administrative Code of Mindanao and
6. No penalty greater than the maximum period of the penalty Sulu)
prescribed by law shall be imposed, no matter how many 4. When the penalty is only a fine impose by an ordinance.
aggravating circumstances are present. 5. When the penalties are prescribed by special laws.
● Thus, even if there are 4 generic aggravating circumstances, the
maximum penalty for homicide is still reclusion temporal. ● If there are a lot of aggravating but no mitigating, can the courts
increase the penalty to one greater than that prescribed by law?
7. The court can determine the extent of the penalty “within the NO.
limits of each period, according to the number” and “nature” ● If after offsetting (meaning there was aggravating and
of the aggravating and mitigating circumstances and the mitigating), there are 2 mitigating left, can the penalty be
greater or lesser “extent of the evil” produced by the crime. lowered by one degree? NO. As long as there was aggravating,
● A committed a crime punished by arresto mayor with two can’t lower penalty by degree.
aggravating and one mitigating circumstance. ● If there are four mitigating circumstances, you use two to lower
● Steps: the penalty by one degree. The remaining two are used to find
o Apply “Rule 4” and offset = 1 aggravating left the period. You can’t use the remaining two to lower the
o Remaining aggravating will make the imposed penalty penalty by another degree.
arresto mayor in its maximum period (4 months and 1 ● Imposed by law: RT. 4 mitigating.
day to 6 months). ● Lower to prision mayor. Then use the 2 remaining mitigating to
● Rule 7: the court can impose any length from 4 months and 1 find the period. So prision mayor minimum.
day, 5 months or 6 months. ● Article 64 is important in the ISL because the modifying
● “Extent of the evil produced” circumstances are first considered in the determination of the
o Court has the discretion to impose the penalty within maximum penalty in the ISL. (sir won’t ask to compute ISL)
the limits fixed by law. ● Article 64 is not considered in the determination of the
o Taking into consideration the amount of damage caused minimum penalty in the ISL. The minimum penalty in the ISL
on the economic life of a banking institution, it is proper

must be within the whole range of the penalty next lower in 4. Quotient added to minimum prescribed (eliminate 1 day) = total
degree. represents max of minimum period.
● If the accused is sentenced to reclusion perpetua and has two
generic mitigating circumstances (and no aggravating II. Illustration: (See p.756-757 Reyes Book For Detailed Computation)
circumstances), penalty CANNOT be lowered by one degree
since it’s an indivisible penalty. (Only a privileged mitigating can (1) Duration is 6 months and 1 day to 6 years
give a penalty lower for an indivisible penalty)
● This article doesn’t apply to Article 365 because modifying (2) Subtract minimum (disregarding 1 day) from the maximum
circumstances don’t apply to quasi-offenses. 6 years – 6 months = 5 years and 6 months

Article 65. – Rules in cases in which the penalty is not composed of (3) Divide difference by 3
three periods. 5 years and 6 months = 1 year and 10 months
In cases in which the penalty prescribed by law is not composed of 3
three periods, the courts shall apply the rules contained in the
foregoing articles, dividing into three equal portions the time included (4) Minimum added with quotient = minimum period
in the penalty prescribed, and forming one period of each of the three 6 months (+) 1 year and 10 months = 2 years and 4 months
(5) Maximum of minimum added with quotient = medium period
POINTS 2 years and 4 months (+) 1 year and 10 months = 4 years and 2 months

I. Purpose Of The Rule (6) Maximum of medium added with quotient = maximum period
● This is applied when the law prescribes a penalty not composed 4 years and 2 months (+) 1 year and 10 months = 6 years
of three periods (like robbery in an uninhabited place whose
penalty is PC in medium to maximum.) Final:
● Just divide the period given by 3 to get the min, med and max. ● Minimum: 6 months and 1 day to 2 years and 4 months
● Medium: 2 years, 4 months and 1 day to 4 years and 2 months
II. Meaning Of The Rule ● Maximum: 4 years, 2 months and 1 day to 6 years.
1. Compute and determine first the 3 periods of the entire
penalty. Article 66. – Imposition of fines.
2. Time included in penalty prescribed – divided into 3 equal In imposing fines the courts may fix any amount within the limits
portions after subtracting minimum (eliminate 1 day) from established by law; in fixing the amount in each case attention shall be
maximum of penalty given, not only to the mitigating and aggravating circumstances, but
3. Min or minimum period should be the minimum of the given more particularly to the wealth or means of the culprit.
penalty (including 1 day)

POINTS ● When the law does not fix minimum of the fine 
determination of amount of fine to be imposed: left to the
I. Outline Of This Provision: sound discretion of the court (provided it shall not exceed
1. The court can fix any amount of the fine within the limits maximum authorized by law) (People v. Quinto).
established by law.
2. The court must consider – IV. Fines Are Not Divided Into Three Equal Portions
a. The mitigating and aggravating circumstances; and ● The courts are not bound to divide the amount of fine
b. More particularly, the wealth or means of the culprit. prescribed by law into 3 equal portions (as in case of
imprisonment imposed in relation to a divisible penalty).
II. General Points
● Study with Article 75. V. Considerations In Imposing Fines
● The LAW can prescribe the following: A. Wealth Or Means Of Culprit Is Main Consideration In Fine
o Fine only ● Wealth or means of culprit is emphasized because fixed amount
o Fine AND imprisonment o Fine OR imprisonment o of fine for ALL offenders of particular crime  result to
You’re so FINE inequality (ex. P100 for rich versus poor man)
o The court can’t give the accused a penalty of fine OR o Example: Laborer earning P208/month who has to pay
imprisonment. The court has to make a choice, it can’t P20 versus Office worker with P800/month who has to
leave to the accused the choice on what penalty he pay P50 – fine for laborer more severe if ever.
wants to serve. ● To impose same amount of fine for same offense upon persons
● If the law states “fine of P50k to 150k”, the court can choose differently circumstances  penalty of unequal severity =
between those bounds. unjustly discriminatory (People v. Ching Kuan).
● If the law states “fine of P15k”, that’s it, court must impose the
definite fine. B. But Mitigating And Aggravating Circumstances Are Not Entirely
● If the law states “fine not less than P15k”, court must be Disregarded. Factors Other Than Financial Condition Of Accused May
judicious. They can’t just fine the accused for P1 million. Be Considered By Court.
● Increase or reduction in the degree of the fine. (See Article 75) ● Article 66 says mitigating and aggravating circumstances may
● Fine cannot be used as substitute penalty to imprisonment. also be considered by court.
Penalty of fine is independent from penalty of imprisonment. ● Also other factors such as:
● If the accused drew and issued a check but it bounced, and o Gravity or seriousness of crime committed
during trial he pays the value of the check, should he still be o Heinousness of its perpetration
convicted for a fine? Yes. Penalty of the fine goes to the State, o Magnitude of its effects on victim(s) (People v. Manuel)
not the offended party. o Position and standing of accused considered
aggravating in gambling.
III. When The Minimum Of The Fine Is Not Fixed

 U.S. v. Salaveria  Person found guilty ● (Act considered as) reckless imprudence if act is executed
of violating Gambling Law with high without taking precautions or measure that most common
standing in community = maximum penalty prudence would requires
imposed ● (Act considered as) simple imprudence if it’s a mere lack of
 U.S. v. Mercader  Accused in gambling case precaution where either the threatened harm is not imminent
was municipal treasurer = Court imposed fine of or danger is not openly visible  this case will fall under Article
P500 and 1 year imprisonment (max penalty 365, paragraph 1.
provided by law) ● Penalty provided in Article 67, same as in Article 365.
Article 67. – Penalty to be imposed when not all the requisites of
exemption of the fourth circumstance of Article 12 are present. Article 68. – Penalty to be imposed upon a person under eighteen
When all the conditions required in the circumstance number 4 of years of age.
Article 12 of this Code to exempt from criminal liability are not When the offender is a minor under eighteen years and his case is one
present, the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision coming under the provisions of the paragraph next to the last of
correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon the culprit, Article 80 of this Code, the following rules shall be observed:
if he shall have been guilty of a grave felony, and arresto mayor in its 1. Upon a person under fifteen but over nine years of age, who is
minimum and medium periods, if of a less grave felony. not exempted from liability by reason of the court having
declared that he acted with discernment, a discretionary
POINTS penalty shall be imposed, but always lower by two degrees at
least than that prescribed by law for the crime which he
I. Article 67 Applies Only When All The Requisites Of The Exempting committed.
Circumstance Of Accident Are Not Present 2. Upon a person over fifteen and under eighteen years of age
● Article 12(4)  Exempting circumstance of accident. the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law shall be
● Four conditions necessary to exempt from liability under imposed, but always in the proper period.
Subsection 4 of Article 12:
a. Act causing the injury be lawful; permitted not only by POINTS
law but also by regulations.
b. Performed with due care. I. Article 68 Has Been Partly Repealed By Juvenile Justice Act
c. Injury is caused by mere accident (example: by an ● Article 68 of the Revised Penal Code (penalty for person under
unforeseen event) 18 years old) is partly repealed by Republic Act 9344, which
d. There be no fault or intention to cause the injury. provides that:
● Lack of requisites in performance of lawful act – AM max to PC a. Child 15 years and below  exempt from
minimum (if grave), AM min to med (if less grave) criminalresponsibility (paragraph 1 repealed).
b. Child 15-18 years old  exempt from criminal
II. If All These Conditions Are Not Present: liabilityUNLESS acted with discernment (paragraph 2

c. A child above 12 up to 15 who commits a serious crime Article 68 but shall nevertheless be entitled to suspension of
(Parricide, Murder, Infanticide, Kidnapping, Serious sentence whether or not he is no longer a minor.
illegal detention where the victim is killed or raped, o Penalty imposed on child in conflict with the law is
robbery with homicide or rape, destructive arson, Rape, provided in paragraph 2 of Article 68 (or penalty next
carnapping where the driver or occupant is killed or lower than prescribed by law)
raped, or offenses under the DDA punishable by more
than 12 years), or an offense for the second time or II. Suspension Of Sentence
oftener: ● As long as child was under 18 when he did the crime,
i. Shall be deemed a neglected child under suspension of sentence will apply.
Presidential Decree 603, and o Suspension can apply until he reaches 21, upon
ii. Shall be mandatorily placed in a special facility discretion of court.
for the youth (Republic Act No. 10630). o Even if minor is charged with a heinous crime, he is still
entitled to suspension of conviction. Republic Act No.
Under Article 68 Under Republic Act 9344 9344 does not distinguish.
Offender over 9 yrs. but under 15 9-15 year olds = exempt from ● What if Special Penal Law which does not follow nomenclature
yrs. acting with discernment = NOT criminal liability  No of Revised Penal Code? Minor will not be entitled to privileged
exempt from criminal liability penalty imposed mitigating circumstance.
(discretionary penalty shall be o Example: Penalty of life imprisonment in illegal
imposed – 2 degrees lower than recruitment cannot be lowered by 1 or 2 degrees.
prescribed by law for crime ● Recommendation of social worker not binding on the court.
committed) (People v. Candelario).
Offender over 15 but under 18 – 15-18 year olds = exempt from
III. Probation As An Alternative To Imprisonment
penalty next lower than prescribed criminal liability UNLESS acted
by law imposed with discernment  will ● The court may place a child in conflict with the law on probation
in lieu of service of a sentence taking into consideration the best
undergo diversion programs under
Chap 2 interest of the child.
of Republic Act 9344 ● After the suspension, child may serve his sentence in
agricultural camps or other training facilities.
● If court sees that objective of disposition measures imposed o After the suspension, he can also be granted probation.
upon child in conflict with the law was NOT fulfilled or child in ● Remember: even if minor criminally exempt, he is still civilly
conflict with the law willfully failed to comply with conditions of liable.
his/her disposition or rehab program  child in conflict with
the law will be brought to court for execution of judgment. Article 69. – Penalty to be imposed when the crime committed is not
The child shall enjoy the privileged mitigating circumstance wholly excusable.

A penalty lower by one or two degrees than that prescribed by law part BUT means employed by accused was not reasonable and
shall be imposed if the deed is not wholly excusable by reason of the accused provoked aggression.
lack of some of the conditions required to justify the same or to ● Homicide case where provocation and unlawful aggression
exempt from criminal liability in the several cases mentioned in came from deceased + means employed by offender = not
Articles 11 and 12, provided that the majority of such conditions be reasonable:
present. The courts shall impose the penalty in the period which may o More than one of the requisites of self-defense are
be deemed proper, in view of the number and nature of the conditions present
of exemption present or lacking. o When 2 of the essential requisites for justification are
present  penalty lower by 2 degrees may be
POINTS imposed(People v. Dorado)
o Only unlawful aggression  1 penalty lower
I. Unlawful Aggression Is Indispensable In Self-Defense, Defense Of imposed (People v. Cabellon) BUT this decision is
Relatives And Defense Of Stranger contrary to Article 69 that provides that majority of
● Unlawful aggression must be present (first circumstance in self- conditions must be present.
defense under Subsections 1, 2, 3 of Article11) ● What if not majority of requisites, just one? Ordinary mitigating
● Example: B was challenged by A to a fight. B attacked first with a only; lower to minimum period.
knife and A retaliated by stabbing B. In the struggle, B killed A.
Can B be given one or two degrees lower penalty than C. “A penalty lower by one or two degrees than that prescribed by law
prescribed for homicide? shall be imposed x x x in the period which may be deemed proper, in
Even though conditions to justify the deed is present view of the number and nature of the conditions of exemption present
(Reasonableness of means employed and Lack of sufficient or lacking.”
provocation), the essential element of unlawful aggression was ● Court has discretion to impose 1 or 2 degrees lower than
absent because there was agreement to fight. As such, NOT prescribed by law for offense.
entitled to reduction (U.S. v. Navarro). o In determining proper period of penalty that is 1 or 2
degrees lower, the court must consider number and
II. Important Words And Phrases nature of conditions of exemption or justification
A. “In the several cases mentioned in Article 11 and 12.” present or lacking.
● Privileged mitigating circumstances in Article 69 include: ● Article 69 makes it privileged mitigating because the penalty is
incomplete justifying and incomplete exempting circumstances lowered by one or two degrees.
BUT majority of the conditions must be present o Hence, incomplete self-defense (for example) cannot be
offset by any aggravating circumstances.
B. “Provided the majority of such conditions be present.”
● People v. Alvarez: Court of Appeals refused to apply Article 69
because only unlawful aggression was present on the victim’s

V. When The Majority Of The Requisites Of Self-Defense And Two 11. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted
Mitigating Without Aggravating Circumstances Are Present, The for, the right to follow profession or calling, and
Penalty Is Three Degrees Lower. 12. Public censure.
● If accused charged with homicide (punishable by reclusion
temporal) proved unlawful aggression by the deceased and Notwithstanding the provisions of the rule next preceding, the
another requisite of self-defense PLUS 2 mitigating maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be more than
circumstances (surrender and obfuscation) with NO aggravating, threefold the length of time corresponding to the most severe of the
the proper penalty is arresto mayor medium (2 months, 1 day to penalties imposed upon him. No other penalty to which he may be
4 months). liable shall be inflicted after the sum of those imposed equals the said
maximum period.
Article 70. – Successive service of sentences. Such maximum period shall in no case exceed forty years.
When the culprit has to serve two or more penalties, he shall serve
them simultaneously if the nature of the penalties will so permit; In applying the provisions of this rule the duration of perpetual
otherwise, the following rules shall be observed: penalties (pena perpetua) shall be computed at thirty years. (As
amended by Com. Act No. 217.)
In the imposition of the penalties, the order of their respective
severity shall be followed so that they may be executed successively or POINTS
as nearly as may be possible, should a pardon have been granted as to
the penalty of penalties first imposed, or should they have been I. Outline Of The Provisions Of This Article:
served out. 1. When culprit has to serve 2 or more penalties  serve
themsimultaneously (if nature of penalties permit).
For the purpose of applying the provisions of the next preceding 2. Otherwise, order of their respective severity shall be followed.
paragraph the respective severity of the penalties shall be determined 3. Respective severity of penalties is as follows:
in accordance with the following scale: a. Death
1. Death, b. Reclusion Perpetua
2. Reclusion perpetua, c. Reclusion Temporal
3. Reclusion temporal, d. Prision Mayor
4. Prision mayor, e. Prision Correccional
5. Prision correccional, f. Arresto Mayor
6. Arresto mayor, g. Arresto menor
7. Arresto menor, h. Destierro
8. Destierro, i. Perpetual absolute disqualification
9. Perpetual absolute disqualification, j. Temporary absolute disqualification
10. Temporary absolute disqualification,

k. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be ● The maximum penalty is three times the most severe or the
voted for, the right to follow profession or calling, and total of the penalties imposed, whichever is lower.
l. Public censure. o Such max period shall not exceed 40 years. Whatever is
lower between the total penalties and 3x the most
A. The Penalties Which Can Be Simultaneously Served Are: sever, it shall not be more than 40 years.
1. PAD ● The three-fold rule applies even if different courts rendered the
2. PSD penalties at different times.
3. TAD o The Rules of Court provide that an information must not
4. TSD charge more than one offense. Necessarily, the various
5. Suspension offenses punished with different penalties must be
6. Destierro charged under different information which may be filed
7. Public censure in the same court or in different courts at the same time
8. Fine and bond to keep the peace or at different times.
9. Civil Interdiction, and ● The three-fold rule applies only when the convict has to serve at
10. Confiscation and payment of costs. least 4 sentences.
● Above penalties (except destierro) can be served simultaneously ● If the penalty is complex, the three-fold penalty is three times
with imprisonment. the indeterminate sentence also (see Boado for example).
● Penalties consisting in deprivation of liberty cannot be served o If an indeterminate sentence is imposed, use the
simultaneously by reason of the nature of such penalties. maximum period in computing because the max period
is the most severe.
II. The Order Of The Respective Severity Of The Penalties Shall Be o
Followed So That They May Be Executed Successively
● Time of the second sentence does not commence to run until A. Computation
the expiration of the first (Gordon v. Wolfe). ● Step 1: get the most severe penalty meted out as listed in
● Imprisonment must be served before destierro. Thus, arresto Article 70
menor must be served before destierro (People v. Misa). ● Step 2: Multiply the duration of that by 3
● Step 3: Add the duration of all the different sentences
III. Limitation On Service Of Sentence: Three-Fold Rule ● Step 4: Compare the results of 2 and 3
● The maximum duration of the convict’s sentence shall not be ● Step 5: Accused to serve the lesser period, unless it is in excess
more than three times the length of time corresponding to the of 40 years in which case the culprit shall serve only 40 years.
most severe of the penalties imposed upon him.
o If the sum of the penalties does not exceed the most B. The Phrase “The Most Severe Of Penalties” Includes Equal Penalties
severe multiplied by 3, three-fold rule doesn’t apply. ● Fact: Sentenced for 6 cases of estafa. Each of which is 3 months
and 11 days of arresto mayor.

● Held: Accused cannot be made to suffer more than 9 months  Three-fold rule: 18 months and 3 days max.
and 33 days. o Held: If the petitioner would not be able to pay the
finem the maximum duration of his imprisonment shall
IV. The judge should NOT refrain from imposing the correct penalties be 18 months and 3 days of the principal penalty PLUS 6
even if these would exceed the limitation of penalties in this article. months and 1 day subsidiary imprisonment.
● This article deals with SERVICE of sentence, not with imposition. ● Exception: Do not include subsidiary imprisonment penalty in
● The court should impose the correct penalties even if these will the computation of the 40 years because subsidiary liability is
amount to more than the lifetime of the prisoner. uncertain if it will even happen (Bagtas v. Director of Prisons).
● Why? Because when the convict is pardoned, he should still
serve the other sentences meted on him. VII. Different Systems Of Penalty
● Material accumulation system  no limitation; all penalties
V. Duration Of The Convict’s Sentence Refers To Several Penalties For for all violations were imposed even if they reached beyond
Different Offenses, Not Yet Served Out. the natural span of human life.
● If the convict already served sentence for one offense prior to o Article 70, Par. 1,2,3 follow this.
the commission and/or conviction for another offense, the ● Juridical accumulation system  Service of several penalties
former will not be considered in the three-fold rule. is limited to not more than three-fold the max and will not
● The second sentence should only commence after the 1st. exceed 40 years.
Successive nga eh. o Article 70, Par. 4,5,6 follow this.
● Accused is convicted for 10 counts of rape, all reclusion ● Absorption system  Observed in the imposition of the
perpetua. How long should he remain in jail? 40 years. penaltyin complex crimes (Article 48), continuing crimes, and
o What sentence should accuse serve first? Parepareho specific crimes like robbery with homicide, etc.
lang naman eh. Justice Callejo: Follow order of docket
numbers. Article 70 doesn’t strictly apply (People v. Article 71. – Graduated Scales.
Conte). In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty lower or higher by one
or more degrees than another given penalty, the rules prescribed in
VI. Subsidiary Imprisonment Forms Part Of The Penalty Article 61 shall be observed in graduating such penalty.
● The result from the three-fold rule will be the aggregate
principal penalty which the principal has to serve. IN ADDITION, The lower or higher penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale in
he will have to pay all indemnities with or without subsidiary which is comprised of the given penalty.
imprisonment PROVIDED the principal penalty does not
exceed/is not higher than 6 years. The courts, in applying such lower or higher penalty shall observe the
● Bagtas v. Director of Prisons following graduated scales:
o Facts: A guilty of 17 crimes. Most severe is 6 months
and 1 day PLUS a fine of P1,000. SCALE NO. 1 (Scale for personal penalties)

1. Death penalties attached to death by reason of graduated

2. Reclusion perpetua scale under Article 71.
3. Reclusion temporal
4. Prision mayor II. Position of Destierro in Article 70 v. Article 71
5. Prision correccional ● Note that in Art 71, the penalty next lower than arresto mayor is
6. Arresto mayor destierro, not arresto menor. But in Art 70, destierro follows
7. Destierro arresto menor in the degree of severity. Why?
8. Arresto menor o Arresto mayor is imprisonment or complete deprivation
9. Public censure of liberty. Destierro means banishment for a specified
10. Fine length of time. They must not be judged by the duration
of each of these penalties, but by degree of deprivation
SCALE NO. 2 (Scale for penalties depriving political rights) of liberty involved. Destierro is considered lighter than
1. Perpetual absolute disqualification arresto mayor.
2. Temporary absolute disqualification
3. Suspension from public office, the right to vote and be voted A. Destierro  Next Lower In Degree From Arresto Mayor
for, and the right to follow a profession or calling ● The scale, which places destierro below arresto mayor, cannot
4. Public censure be disregarded.
5. Fine ● Their respective severities is judged not by duration but by the
degree of deprivation of liberty
B. Who May Impose Destierro?
I. Death Shall No Longer Form Part Of The Equation In Article 71  The metropolitan and municipal trial courts shall exercise
● Pursuant to Republic Act No. 9346 exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with
o This has the effect of appropriately downgrading the imprisonment not exceeding 6 years.
proper penalties attaching to accomplices, accessories,
frustrated and attempted felonies to the level C. Must Destierro Be Applied Only When It Is Specifically Imposed By
consistent with the rest of the penal laws. Law?
● Since this law bars the application of the death penalty, such  No. It may be imposed when it is the penalty next lower.
effect necessarily extends to its relevance to the graduated
scale of penalties under Article 71. III. Articles 25, 70, 71 Compared:
o There can be no harmony between Republic Act No. Article 25 Article 70 Article 71
9346 and the Revised Penal Code unless the later Classification classifies classifies penalties provides for the
statute is construed as having downgraded those of penalties penalties into according to scales which
principal and severity. (For the should be

accessory purpose of the

observed in
successive service
of sentences)
penalties in Article
Location of Destierro is Destierro is below Destierro is above
Destierro above arresto arresto menor arresto menor

Article 72. – Preference in the payment of the civil liabilities.

The civil liabilities of a person found guilty of 2 or more offenses shall
be satisfied by following the chronological order of the dates of the
final judgments rendered against him, beginning with the first in order
of time.


I. Applicability
● This article applies when the offender who is found guilty of 2 or
more offenses is required to pay civil liabilities resulting from
the same.

II. Order Of Payment Of Civil Liabilities

● The order is not based on the dates of the commission.
● It is based on the dates of the final judgment.

● Is it possible for the payment of civil liabilities to differ from how
the criminal liabilities are served?
● Is civil liability imposed/specified or considered as an attached
like accessory penalties? Or must it be expressly imposed?

SECTION 3 – PROVISION COMMON TO THE LAST TWO ● The given penalty and the accessory penalties of death (Article
PRECEDING SECTIONS 40) shall be imposed.
● Death must be specifically imposed by law.
Article 73. – Presumption in regard to the imposition of accessory
penalties. II. Application Of This Article
Whenever the courts shall impose a penalty which by provision of ● What is meant to here is that the judgment should not provide
law, carries with it other penalties, according to Article 40, 41, 42, 43, that the convict should not be given the benefit of Article 27
44, and 45 of this Code, it must be understood that the accessory (that he should be pardoned after undergoing the penalty for
30 years) until 40 years have elapsed; otherwise there would be
penalties are also imposed upon the convict.
no difference at all between reclusion perpetua when imposed
as a penalty next higher in degree and when it is imposed as
the penalty fixed by law.
I. Accessory Penalties Are Deemed Imposed
Article 75. – Increasing or reducing the penalty of fine by one or more
● Means that a judgment need not make an express
pronouncement of the imposition of accessory penalties. degrees. Whenever it may be necessary to increase or reduce the
penalty of fine by one or more degrees, it shall be increased or
II. Subsidiary Imprisonment, Not An Accessory Penalty reduced, respectively, for each degree, by one-fourth of the maximum
amount prescribed by law, without however, changing the minimum.
● Means that the judgment of conviction must expressly state
that subsidiary penalty would be imposed.
The same rules shall be observed with regard to fines that do not
Article 74. – Penalty higher than reclusion perpetua in certain cases. consist of a fixed amount, but are made proportional.
In cases in which the law prescribes a penalty higher than another
given penalty, without specifically designating the name of the POINTS
former, if such higher penalty should be that of death, the same
penalty and the accessory penalties of Article 40, shall be considered I. Fines Are Graduated Into Degrees
● For the accomplices and accessories
as the next higher penalty.
● For principals in frustrated and attempted felonies
II. To Get The Lower Degree:
● MAXIMUM prescribed by law  reduce by 1/4 for each degree.
I. Death Cannot Be The Penalty Next Higher In Degree When Not
● MINIMUM  remains the same.
Provided By Law
● When a given penalty has to be raised and the resulting penalty
A. Illustration
is death, it cannot be imposed.
● Fine is from P200 to P2,000

● To lower by one degree: o Facts: Bribe was P2,300.

o 2,000 / 4 = 500 o Maximum: 2,300 x 3 = P6,900
o 2,000 – 500 = 1,500 o P6,900 should be the basis for lowering the penalty by
two degrees (penalty for attempted bribery).
III. “Without Changing The Minimum”
● The fine must have a minimum and a maximum fixed by law Article 76. – Legal period of duration of divisible penalties. The legal
● This article does NOT apply when the law does not fix the period of duration of divisible penalties shall be considered as divided
minimum of fine. into three parts, forming 3 periods, the minimum, the medium and
the maximum in the manner shown in the following table.
IV. When The Minimum Is Not Fixed By Law
● When only the maximum is fixed, the determination of the Table 1. Duration of divisible penalties and the time included in each
minimum is left to the sound discretion of the courts, without period.
exceeding the maximum authorized by law. Penalties Whole Min Med Max
V. Distinctions Between Fine With A Minimum And Fine Without A Reclusion 12 years + 12 years + 1 14 years, 8 17 years
Minimum. Temporal 1 day to day to months and and 4
● In both, the law fixes the maximum. 20 years 14 years + 8 1 day to months and
● When the law fixes the minimum, the court cannot change that months 17 years 1 day to
minimum; when the law does not state the minimum, the court and 4 20 years
can impose any amount not exceeding the maximum. months
● When the law fixes both minimum and maximum, the court can (1) PM 6 years + 1 6 years + 1 8 years + 1 10 years + 1
impose an amount higher than the maximum; when only the (2)Ab. Disq. day to day to day to day to
maximum is fixed, it cannot impose an amount higher than the (3)S. Temp. 12 years 8 years 10 years 12 years
maximum. Disq.
(1) PC, 6 months + 6 months + 2 years + 4 4 years, 2
VI. As To “Fines That Do Not Consist Of A Fixed Amount, But Are (2)Suspension 1 day to 1 day to months + 1 months + 1
Made Proportional” (3) Destierro 6 years 2 years + 4 day to day to
● This clause speaks of fines which are not of fixed amount but months. 4 years + 6 years
are made proportional 2mos
o Example: (Article 365, negligence causing damage) Arresto Mayor 1 mo. + 1 1 to 2 2 months + 4 months +
Where the fine shall be from an amount equal to the day to months. 1 day to 1 day to
value of the damage up to 3 times such value, but shall 6 months 4 months. 6 months.
in no case be less than 25 pesos. Arresto Menor 1 to 1 to 11 to 21 to
● Article 210  Direct Bribery 30 days 10 days 20 days 30 days

lightest of them shall be the minimum, the next the medium, and the
POINTS most severe the maximum period.

I. Article 76 Shows The Manner Divisible Penalties Are Divided Into 3 Whenever the penalty prescribed does not have one of the forms
Periods specially provided for in this Code, the periods shall be distributed,
● Refer to Article 65 supra for the process applying by analogy the prescribed rules

II. When The Penalty Is Composed Of 3 Periods Corresponding To POINTS

Different Divisible Penalties
● It is clear that the duration of each of the periods of the I. Complex Penalty
divisible penalties as fixed in the table is NOT controlling when ● Penalty composed of 3 distinct penalties, each forming a
the penalty prescribed is composed of 3 periods corresponding period.
to different divisible penalties. ● Example:
● Article 76 provides that “divisible penalties shall be considered o Reclusion temporal to death (Article 114)
as divided into three parts, forming three periods,” without  Maximum - Death
stating that the three parts must be three equal portions of  Medium - Reclusion Perpetua
time included in the divisible penalties, but the time included in  Minimum - Reclusion Temporal
each of the divisible penalties mentioned in the table in that
article, except that of arresto mayor, is divided into three equal II. Application By Analogy Of Rules
portions. 1. Article 114(3), provides a penalty of prision mayor to death.
a. Max  death (because it’s indivisible)
III. Distinction Between “Period” And “Degree” b. Medium  reclusion perpetua (because it’s indivisible)
● Period  3 equal parts of a divisible penalty. c. Minimum  prision mayor to reclusion temporal
If you forget the periods, just follow the steps: 2. Article 294(2), provides penalty of reclusion temporal in its
o Step 1: get the duration of each period medium period to reclusion perpetua.
o Step 2: divide that by 3 a. Max  reclusion perpetua (being indivisible)
o Step 3: add the quotient to the beginning of each b. Medium  reclusion temporal in its maximum period
period starting with the minimum c. Minimum  reclusion temporal in its medium period.
● Degree  diverse penalties mentioned by name in the
RevisedPenal Code.

Article 77. – When the penalty is a complex one composed of

three distinct penalties. In cases in which the law prescribes a
penalty composed of 3 distinct penalties, each one shall form a
period; the

CHAPTER 5: EXECUTION AND SERVICE OF PENALTIES ● If the person is acquitted, he can’t be subjected to public
censure (People v. Abellera).
● If the judge sentence accused to 25 years of reclusion perpetua,
he cannot be compelled to serve sentence because there is no
such thing. Remedy is writ of habeas corpus.
Article 78. – When and how a penalty is to be executed.
No penalty shall be executed except by virtue of a final judgment.
Article 79. – Suspension of the execution and service of the penalties
in case of insanity.
A penalty shall not be executed in any other form than that
When a convict shall become insane or an imbecile after final
prescribed by law, nor with any other circumstances or incidents than
sentence has been pronounced, the execution of said sentence shall
those expressly authorized thereby.
be suspended only with regard to the personal penalty, the provisions
of the second paragraph of circumstance number 1 of article 12 being
In addition to the provisions of the law, the special regulations
observed in the corresponding cases.
prescribed for the government of the institutions in which the
penalties are to be suffered shall be observed with regard to the
If at any time the convict shall recover his reason, his sentence shall
character of the work to be performed, the time of its performance,
be executed, unless the penalty shall have prescribed in accordance
and other incidents connected therewith, the relations of the convicts
with the provisions of this Code.
among themselves and other persons, the relief which they may
receive, and their diet.
The respective provisions of this section shall also be observed if the
insanity or imbecility occurs while the convict is serving his sentence.
The regulations shall make provision for the separation of the sexes in
different institutions, or at least into different departments, and also
for the correction and reform of the convicts.
I. Rules Regarding The Execution Of Penalties In Case Of Insanity
1. Convict becomes insane/imbecile after final judgment 
sentence is suspended only as regards the personal penalty.
I. Only Penalty By Final Judgment Can Be Executed
2. If he recovers his reason  sentence shall be executed unless
● The judgment must be final before it can be executed, because
it has prescribed.
the accused may still appeal within 15 days from its
3. Even while serving sentence, the convict becomes insane/an
promulgation, but if he waives by writing his right to appeal,
imbecile, Article 79 shall be observed.
the judgment becomes immediately final.
4. Civil or pecuniary liabilities shall not be suspended.
● If the judgment does not confer subsidiary imprisonment in
case of insolvency, the accused cannot be required to suffer the
same in case of inability to pay the fine imposed on him.

II. Only Execution Of Personal Penalty Is Suspended In Case Of The court, in committing said minor as provided above, shall take into
Insanity; Civil Liability May Be Executed Even In Case Of Insanity Of consideration the religion of such minor, his parents or next of kin, in
Convict. order to avoid his commitment to any private institution not under
● Guardian can be appointed to administer the property, so civil the control and supervision of the religious sect or denomination to
liability can be imposed. which they belong.

III. An Accused Person May Become Insane (With Effects): The Director of Public Welfare or his duly authorized representatives
1. At the time of the commission of the offense or agents, the superintendent of public schools or his representatives,
o Exempted from criminal liability (Article 12.1) or the person to whose custody or care the minor has been
2. At the time of trial committed, shall submit to the court every four months and as often
o Trial suspended until he recovers reason (Article 12.1) as required in special cases, a written report on the good or bad
3. At the time of final judgment conduct of said minor and the moral and intellectual progress made
o Personal penalty is suspended. by him.
4. While serving sentence The suspension of the proceedings against a minor may be extended
o Personal penalty is suspended. or shortened by the court on the recommendation of the Director of
Public Welfare or his authorized representatives or agents, or the
Article 80. – Suspension of sentence of minor delinquents. superintendent of public schools or his representatives, according as
Whenever a minor of either sex, under sixteen years of age at the to whether the conduct of such minor has been good or not and
date of the commission of a grave or less grave felony, is accused whether he has complied with the conditions imposed upon him, or
thereof, the court, after hearing the evidence in the proper not. The provisions of the first paragraph of this article shall not,
proceedings, instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction, shall however, be affected by those contained herein.
suspend all further proceedings and shall commit such minor to the
custody or care of a public or private, benevolent or charitable If the minor has been committed to the custody or care of any of the
institution, established under the law for the care, correction or institutions mentioned in the first paragraph of this article, with the
education of orphaned, homeless, defective, and delinquent children, approval of the Director of Public Welfare and subject to such
or to the custody or care of any other responsible person in any other conditions as this official in accordance with law may deem proper to
place subject to visitation and supervision by the Director of Public impose, such minor may be allowed to stay elsewhere under the care
Welfare or any of his agents or representatives, if there be any, or of a responsible person.
otherwise by the superintendent of public schools or his
representatives, subject to such conditions as are prescribed If the minor has behaved properly and has complied with the
hereinbelow until such minor shall have reached his majority or for conditions imposed upon him during his confinement, in accordance
such less period as the court may deem proper.(As amended by with the provisions of this article, he shall be returned to the court in
Republic Act No. 47.) order that the same may order his final release.

In case the minor fails to behave properly or to comply with the o “Child”  below 18
regulations of the institution to which he has been committed or with o “Child in Conflict with the Law”  alleged/accused
the conditions imposed upon him when he was committed to the care of/adjudged as having committed an offense under
of a responsible person, or in case he should be found incorrigible or Philippine Laws.
his continued stay in such institution should be inadvisable, he shall ● Presidential Decree No. 603
be returned to the court in order that the same may render the o “Youthful Offender”  child/minor/youth, above 9
judgment corresponding to the crime committed by him. butbelow 18, at the time of the commission of the
The expenses for the maintenance of a minor delinquent confined in
the institution to which he has been committed, shall be borne totally II. Minimum Age Of Criminal Responsibility
or partially by his parents or relatives or those persons liable to ● 15 years old and below  exempt from criminal liability.
support him, if they are able to do so, in the discretion of the court: ● Above 15, below 18  exempt from criminal liability but
Provided, That in case his parents or relatives or those persons liable withintervention program (but if acted with discernment, he will
to support him have not been ordered to pay said expenses or are be subjected to a diversion program).
found indigent and cannot pay said expenses, the municipality in
which the offense was committed shall pay one-third of said III. Intervention Program (Presidential Decree No. 603)
expenses; the province to which the municipality belongs shall pay ● Custody  child must be released to parents, guardian
one-third; and the remaining one-third shall be borne by the National or nearest relative. Absence thereof, duly
Government: Provided, however, That whenever the Secretary of registered nongovernmental or religious organizations,
Finance certifies that a municipality is not able to pay its share in the barangay official or a member of the Barangay Council for
expenses above mentioned, such share which is not paid by said the Protection of Children, Department of Social Welfare and
municipality shall be borne by the National Government. Chartered Development.
cities shall pay two-thirds of said expenses; and in case a chartered ● Appropriate programs  Created in cooperation with the
city cannot pay said expenses, the internal revenue allotments which local social and welfare development officer.
may be due to said city shall be withheld and applied in settlement of ● Involuntary commitment  if the child is
said indebtedness in accordance with section five hundred and eighty- abandoned,neglected or abused.
eight of the Administrative Code. (As amended by Com. Act No. 99)
IV. Diversion Programs For Children Above 15 And Below 18 Who
Acted With Discernment (Article 13.2)
 The child will undergo trial pursuant to the provisions of the
POINTS Rules of Court.

I. The Provisions Of Article 80 Have Been Repealed By Chapter 3 Of A. Automatic Suspension Of Sentence Under Republic Act No. 9344
Presidential Decree No. 603, As Amended By The Provisions Of ● When a child under 18 at the time of the commission of the
Republic Act No. 9344 crime is found guilty of the offense, the court will determine
● Republic Act No. 9344: any civil liability, which may have resulted from the offense.

● However, instead of pronouncing judgment of conviction, the o Youth detention home if detention is necessary 
court will place the child under a suspended sentence, without absent, Department of Social Welfare and
need of application. Development or local rehabilitation center within court
● Provided that suspension of sentence shall be applied even if jurisdiction.
the juvenile is already 18 or more at the time of the 4. Diversion Measures
promulgation of the sentence. o If max is imprisonment of not more than 12 years
● Even if minor is charged with a heinous crime, he is still entitled (regardless of fine if any)  court will determine
to suspension of conviction. Republic Act No. 9344 does not whether or not diversion is appropriate even before
distinguish. arraignment. This usually applies when the child has
committed a heinous crime.
B. Suspension Of Sentence Lasts Only Until The Child In Conflict With o If the parents cannot afford to pay for a diversion
The Law Reaches 21 Years Old program, the government will shoulder the expenses
● Max age  21 years old. (1/3 each for the local or municipal, provincial, and
● Involves Restoration, Rehabilitation, Reintegration national government).
● What matters is that the offender committed the offense when 5. Discharge of the Child in Conflict with the Law
he/she was still of tender age, not his/her age during o Upon recommendation of social worker, the court shall
conviction. Thus, a 25-year-old man may still be sentenced to a dismiss the case against the child.
diversion program if he acted with discernment when he o Final discharge of the child ordered if the objective of
committed the crime when he was 17 years old. the disposition measures have been fulfilled.
o These will not affect the civil liability of the child.
V. COURT PROCEEDINGS 6. Return of the Child in Conflict with the Law to Court
1. Bail o If disposition measures not fulfilled or child didn’t want
o Consider the privileged mitigating circumstance of to comply, child  returned to Court for judgment.
minority (Article 68). o If child has reached 18, Court will determine
2. Release on Recognizance  Discharge
o Detained child:  Execute sentence
 Released on recognizance to parents  Suspend sentence for a time or until child turns
 Release of Child in Conflict with Law with bail 21.
 Transfer of youth to rehab center o In turn, the child can appeal the case to a higher court.
3. Detention of the Child Pending Trial 7. Credit in Service of Sentence
o May be released on BAIL or RECOGNIZANCE o Full time spent in actual commitment and detention.
o Institutionalization/Detention  last resort and 8. Probation as an Alternative to Imprisonment
withthe shortest possible time. o After conviction and sentence a child in conflict with
the law, the court may place the child under probation

in lieu of service of the sentence taking into the money to be paid to the city shall be used
consideration the best interests of the child. for the city’s payments for the maintenance of
o Probation Law of 1976 is amended accordingly. the confinement of the Child in Conflict with
the Law, pursuant to Section 588 of the AC.
VI. Rehabilitation & Reintegration 6. Confinement of convicted children in agricultural camps and
1. Objective of Rehabilitation & Reintegration other training facilities
o Intervention, approaches, strategies to improve their o Confinement to such may be done by the court in lieu
social functioning  Reintegration into of confinement in a regular penal institution
families,productive members of the community. o Such to be maintained by the Bureau of Corrections in
2. Court Order required before receiving a child in a coordination with the Department of Social Welfare
rehabilitation facility and Development.
o Details shall be entered into a register 7. Rehabilitation of Children in Conflict with the Law
o Must be complied with strictly o Children in conflict with the law whose sentences are
3. Separate facilities from adults suspended, my undergo any or a combination of
o Separated from adults unless from same family disposition measures best suited to the rehab and
o Home environment simulated for comfort welfare of the child (SC Rule on Juveniles in Conflict
4. Female children with the Law)
o Personal needs and problems attended to by female o Community-based rehab  child shall be
doctors, officers, and social workers released to parents. Guardians, relatives, or any other
5. Care and maintenance of the Child in Conflict with the Law responsible person in the community. Under the
o See paragraph 8 supervision and guidance of the local social welfare
o Flow of financial responsibility: and development officer (and in coordination with
o Parents/people liable for support (whole or in part) the abovementioned people), the child in conflict
o If #1 cannot pay: with the law shall participate in community-based
 Municipality (1/3) programs
 Province where municipality is located (1/3) o Based on progress, a final report shall be forwarded to
 National Government (1/3) the local social welfare and development to be
o Note: assessed by the court for final disposition of the case
 If Secretary of Finance says the municipality 8. Youth Rehabilitation Center
can’t pay, the National Government shall pay o 24-hour group care with trained staff.
(2/3) o Final report to be mdade, as well
 Chartered cities shall pay (2/3) of the expenses. 9. Civil liability of Youthful Offenders
If it cannot pay, then the internal revenue o Automatic:
allotments for that city shall be suspended and  Father, if not
 Mother, if not

 Guardian response to any inquiry made to him/her for any

o Voluntary: purpose.
 Relative o Presidential Decree No. 1179 shall not apply to those
 Family friend convicted of an offense punishable by death or life
10. Liability of parents or guardian or any person in the imprisonment.
commission of delinquent acts by their children or wards
o A person whether the parent/guardian of the child or
not, knowingly or willfully,
 Aids, causes, abets, or connives with the
commission by a child of a delinquency
 Does any act producing, promoting, or
contributing to a child’s being or becoming a
juvenile delinquent  P 500 / imprisonment
< 2 years OR both at court’s discretion
11. Confidentiality of records and proceedings
o Privileged and confidential.
o Public shall be excluded during the proceedings.
o Records shall not be disclosed directly or indirectly to
anyone by any of the parties/participants for any
purpose EXCEPT to determine the possible suspension
of the child in conflict with the law may have pursuant
to the Probation Law of 1976.
o Component authorities shall undertake all measures to
protect the confidentiality of proceedings.
o Separate police blotter for cases involving children in
conflict with the law.
o Adoption of a system of coding to conceal material info
leading to child’s identity.
o A person who has been in conflict with the law as a
child shall not be held under any provision of law, to be
guilty of perjury or of concealment or
misrepresentation by reason of his/her failure to
acknowledge the case or recite any fact related in

SECTION 2 – EXECUTION OF PRINCIPAL PENALTIES ● Article 84 – Place of execution and persons who may witness
the same.
Article 81. When and how the death penalty is to be executed. ● Article 85 – Provisions relative to the corpse of the person
The death sentence shall be executed with preference to any other executed and its burial.
and shall consist in putting the person under sentence to death by
electrocution. The death sentence shall be executed under the III. Death Sentence Shall Be Executed With Preference To Any Other
authority of the Director of Prisons, endeavoring so far as possible to Penalty
mitigate the sufferings of the persons under sentence during ● In accordance with Article 70 providing for successive service of
electrocution as well as during the proceedings prior to the execution. sentences.

If the person under sentence so desires, he shall be anaesthetized at IV. Death Sentence By Lethal Injection
the moment of the execution. ● This is in accordance with Republic Act No. 8177. Prior to the
enactment of said Republic Act No., the death penalty was
As soon as facilities are provided by the Bureau of Prisons, the carried out by electrocution.
method of carrying out the sentence shall be changed to gas
poisoning. V. When Death Sentence Shall Be Carried Out
The death sentence shall be carried out not later than one (1) year ● Not earlier than 1 year nor later than 18 months after the
after the judgment has become final. (As amended by Sec. 24, judgment becomes final and executory, without prejudice to
Republic Act No. 7659.) the President’s exercise of pardon.

POINTS Article 82. Notification and execution of the sentence and assistance
to the culprit.
I. Republic Act No. 9346 Expressly Repealed Republic Act No. 8177, The court shall designate a working day for the execution, but not the
Which Prescribed Death By Lethal Injection hour thereof; and such designation shall not be communicated to the
● According to Section 1 of Republic Act No. 9346, the imposition offender before sunrise of said day, and the execution shall not take
of the death penalty is prohibited. place until after the expiration of at least eight hours following the
notification, but before sunset. During the interval between the
II. Because The Death Penalty May Not Be Imposed Anymore, Articles notification and the execution, the culprit shall, in so far as possible,
81-85 Have No Application be furnished such assistance as he may request in order to be
● Article 81 – When and how the death penalty is to be executed. attended in his last moments by priests or ministers of the religion he
● Article 82 – Notification and execution of the sentence and professes and to consult lawyers, as well as in order to make a will
assistance to the culprit. and confer with members of his family or persons in charge of the
● Article 83 – Suspension of the execution of the death sentence. management of his business, of the administration of his property, or
of the care of his descendants.

o Before it was after 40 days.

POINTS 3. Person over 70 years of age
o Suspension is necessary to give the President time to
I. A convict sentenced to death may make a will. act, because only the President can commute the
● He has the right to consult a lawyer and make a will for the sentence.
disposition of his property. 4. Convict who becomes insane after final sentence of death has
● To know if the convict sentenced to death may dispose of his been pronounced (Article 79).
property inter vivos, it must first be ascertained if the death o But when he recovers his reason and before the
penalty was not executed by reason of commutation or pardon penalty has been prescribed, he may be put to death.
(Article 40).
o Thus, if the death penalty is not executed because of II. Article 83 v. Article 47
commutation or pardon, civil interdiction as an Article 83 Article 47
accessory penalty of Article 40 can be applied, and Purpose SUSPENSION of death When death penalty is NOT to be
according to Article 34, shall deprive the offender to penalty executed
dispose of his property by any act or conveyance inter Cases 1. Woman, while 1. Guilty person is more than
vivos. pregnant 70 y/o
2. Woman, within one 2. Upon appeal/automatic
Article 83. Suspension of the execution of the death sentence. year after delivery review of the SC, the
The death sentence shall not be inflicted upon a woman while she is 3. Person over 70 y/o majority vote is not obtained
pregnant or within one (1) year after delivery, nor upon any person 4. Convict who becomes to impose death penalty
over seventy years of age. In this last case, the death sentence shall insane after final 3. Convict is a minor (below
be commuted to the penalty of reclusion perpetua with the accessory sentence of death has 18)*
penalty provided in article 40. been pronounced *This may be added in view of
(Article 79) Article 68
In all cases where the death sentence has become final, the records of
the case shall be forwarded immediately by the Supreme Court to the III. Regional Trial Court Can Suspend Execution Of Death Sentence.
Office of the President for possible exercise of the pardoning power. ● Must be done:
(As amended by Sec. 25, Republic Act No. 7659.) o After the judgment has become final
o After the date has been fixed for execution
POINTS o Upon petition on behalf of the prisoner
o Based upon grounds which does not challenge the
I. Death Sentence Shall Be Suspended When The Accused Is: validity of the judgment or involve a
1. Woman, while pregnant review/reconsideration of the proceedings:
2. Woman, within one year after delivery (Republic Act No. 7659)  Insanity or pregnancy of convict

 Alleged non-identity of the prisoner with the POINTS

person actually convicted and sentenced
 Alleged lack of a suitable opportunity to be I. The “Burial Of The Body Of A Person Sentenced To Death” Should
heard on an application for executive clemency Not “Be Held With Pomp.”
o HOWEVER, the court cannot grant ● This is to prevent anyone from making a hero out of a criminal.
(PICpermanent, indefinite, conditional) suspension
of the execution of sentences in criminal cases. Article 86. – Reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal, prision mayor,
prision correccional and arresto mayor.
IV. Records To Be Forwarded To The Office Of The President, When The penalties of reclusion perpetua, reclusion temporal, prision
The Death Sentence Has Become Final mayor, prision correccional and arresto mayor, shall be executed and
● For the possible exercise of the pardoning power. served in the places and penal establishments provided by the
Administrative Code in force or which may be provided by law in the
Article 84. – Place of execution and persons who may witness the future.
The execution shall take place in the penitentiary of Bilibid in a space Article 87. – Destierro.
closed to the public view and shall be witnessed only by the priests Any person sentenced to destierro shall not be permitted to enter the
assisting the offender and by his lawyers, and by his relatives, place or places designated in the sentence, nor within the radius
not exceeding six, if he so request, by the physician and the therein specified, which shall be not more than 250 and not less than
necessary personnel of the penal establishment, and by such 25 kilometers from the place designated.
persons as the Director of Prisons may authorize.
Article 85. – Provision relative to the corpse of the person executed
and its burial. ● Memorize this.
Unless claimed by his family, the corpse of the culprit shall, upon the ● Destierro is a correctional penalty (6 months – 6 years)
completion of the legal proceedings subsequent to the execution, be ● Violation of destierro will give rise to evasion of sentence
turned over to the institute of learning or scientific research first (Article 156-159).
applying for it, for the purpose of study and investigation, provided
that such institute shall take charge of the decent burial of the Article 88. – Arresto menor.
remains. Otherwise, the Director of Prisons shall order the burial of The penalty of arresto menor shall be served in the municipal jail, or
the body of the culprit at government expense, granting permission to in the house of the defendant himself under the surveillance of an
be present thereat to the members of the family of the culprit and the officer of the law, when the court so provides in its decision, taking
friends of the latter. In no case shall the burial of the body of a person into consideration the health of the offender and other reasons,
sentenced to death be held with pomp. which may seem satisfactory to it.


84  Penintentiary  Priests
(Death Sentence)  Bilid Prison  Offender’s lawyers
 Offender’s relatives (not ------
exceeding 6, if so requested)
 Physician
 Necessary personnel of the
86  Places and penal
(Reclusión Perpetua, Reclusión establishments provided by ------ ------
Temporal, Prision Mayor, Prision the AC in force or those that
Correccional, Arresto Mayor) may be provided in the future
87  No place because said  Shall not be permitted to enter
(Destierro) convicted must leave the place ------ the place/s designated, nor
itself w/in a radius specified
 Banishment shall be < 250 km,
but > 25 km from place
88  Municipal jail, or *** Under officer’s surveillance *** Only when the court so
(Arresto Menor) *** House of the defendant provides, subject to the offender’s
himself 1. Health
2. Other reasons satisfactory to it


I. Reason:
● One of the juridical conditions of penalty is that it’s personal.
Article 89. – How criminal liability is totally extinguished.
II. Criminal And Civil Liability Is Extinguished When The Offender Dies
Criminal liability is totally extinguished:
Before Final Judgment
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties and
● People v. Castillo  When the accused died while the
as to pecuniary penalties, liability therefor is extinguished
judgment of conviction against him was pending, his civil
only when the death of the offender occurs before final
and criminal liability was extinguished by his death.
2. By service of the sentence;
A. Criminal Liability Is Extinguished By Death At Any Stage Of The
3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and
all its effects;
● Nobody will be there to serve the penalty.
4. By absolute pardon;
5. By prescription of the crime;
B. Civil Liability Is Extinguished Only When Death Occurs Before Final
6. By prescription of the penalty; Judgment
7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article
● Reason: civil liability exists only when the accused is convicted
344 of this Code. by final judgment
● The civil liability extinguished by death before final judgment
POINTS includes duty to restitute the proceeds of the crime (People v.
I. Extinction Of Criminal Liability Does Not Automatically/Necessarily
Mean That Civil Liability Is Also Extinguished III. Definition Of “Final Judgment”
● Extinction of criminal liability is a ground for motion to quash. ● As employed in the Revised Penal Code, this means judgment
o The order sustaining such motion is a bar to another beyond recall.
prosecution for the same offense. ● As long as the judgment has not become executory, it cannot
be truthfully said that defendant is definitely guilty of the
II. Causes Of Extinction Of Criminal Liability Distinguished From Causes felony.
Of Justification Or Exemption ● Judgment also becomes final:
Causes of extinction of Causes of justification or exemptions o After the lapse of the 15-day period of perfecting
criminal liability from criminal liability appeal
Arise AFTER the commission Arise from circumstances existing either o When the sentence is partially or fully served.
of the offense BEFORE or AT THE MOMENT of its

o When the defendant expressly waives, in writing, his o If the same act or omission complained of also arises
right to appeal. from contract  civil action must be filed against
theestate of the accused (Sec.5, Rule 86, Rules of Court).
IV. Effect Of The Death Of The Accused Pending Appeal On His
Criminal And Civil Liability VII. When Death Does Not Extinguish Criminal Liability
● General Rule: Death of the accused pending appeal of his ● The offense committed in a crime is against the state.
conviction extinguishes his the criminal liability and the civil
liability based solely on the offense committed. PAR. 2: BY SERVICE OF SENTENCE
● Exception: The claim for civil liability survives if the same may I. Extinguishes Criminal Liability But NOT Civil Liability
also be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict ● Crime is a debut incurred by the offender as a consequence of
such as law, contracts, quasi-contracts and quasi-delict. his wrongful act and the penalty is but the amount of his debt,
● Examples: which is extinguished once paid.
o Civil liability for the offense of physical injuries is ● Period during which convict was not inside prison walls cannot
entirely separate from the criminal action. be regarded as service of sentence. Service of sentence must
● Right of the offended party to file separate civil action not lost be in a penal institution.
by prescription when accused dies pending appeal.
o In such case, the statute of limitations on the civil PAR. 3: BY AMNESTY
liability is deemed interrupted during the pendency of I. Amnesty Defined
the criminal case, conformably with provisions of ● An act of the sovereign power granting oblivion or general
Article 1155 of the Civil Code. pardon for a past offense.
o A public act that must be concurred to by the Congress.
V. When Civil Liability Survives ● Rarely exercised in favor of a single individual, and usually in
● Action to recover damages from the same act or omission behalf of certain classes of persons who are subject to trial but
complained of must be filed as a separate civil action. have not been convicted (e.g. political offenders).
● It must be predicated not on the criminal liability previously
charged, but on other sources of obligation. II. Amnesty Completely Extinguishes The Penalty And All Its Effects
● Other sources of obligation: ● Act of grace, relieves the offender not only from suffering the
o If the same act or omission complained of also arises penalty but obliterates the effects of the conviction as if the act
from quasi-delict or may, by provision of law, result in were not criminal.
an injury to person or property  civil action must ● But the amnesty does not include any crime not covered by the
be filed against the executor or administrator of the proclamation itself. The latter must specify the crimes to which
estate of the accused. (Sec.1, Rule 87, Rules of Court). amnesty is extended.

III. Amnesty May Be Granted After Conviction


● The amnesty proclamation (e.g. Proclamation No. 51) in favor  If there are 3 accused: Principal by Direct
of the Hukbalahaps is applicable to those already undergoing Participation, Principal by Indispensable
sentence upon the date of its promulgation. Cooperation, and an accomplice, will the
marriage between the victim and the Principal
IV. Civil Liability Not Extinguished By Amnesty by Direct Participation extinguish the liability of
● Amnesty wipes out all traces and vestiges of the crime, but the other accused? YES. This was the intent of
does not extinguish civil liability. the Senate when they removed the original
proviso stating that the co-principal, etc. are
PAR. 4: BY ABSOLUTE PARDON not benefited, as manifested by Senator
I. Pardon Defined Enrile’s statement in Senate Bill No. 950.
● It is an act of grace proceeding from the power entrusted with  In rape cases, is the pardon of the parents of
the execution of the laws, which exempts the individual on the victim without the concurrence of the
whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for minor victim herself effective? Boado: NO.
the crime he has committed. Offended minor must also give her express
● Kinds: (1) absolute pardon and (2) conditional pardon. pardon.
● Delivery is an indispensable requisite. Until accepted, all that ● Article 344 (seduction, acts of lasciviousness, adultery,
may have been done is a matter of intended favor and may be concubinage, abduction).
cancelled. o Offended party may pardon before institution of
criminal case (filing of complaint).
II. Who Gives Pardon o Can the President pardon even if it’s a private crime?
A. Pardon By The Offended Party Does Not Extinguish Criminal Yes.
Liability ● What is the effect of an affidavit of desistance? Simply an
● Article 266-C (valid marriage between offender and victim in additional ground to buttress the accused’s defenses, not the
rape) sole consideration that can result in acquittal.
o Article 266-C: VALID marriage between offender and
offended party in rape or sexual assault will extinguish B. Pardon By The President
criminal liability and even the penalty already imposed. ● Private act of the President and must be proved by the
So even if the convict is already serving sentence, accused.
marriage with the victim will extinguish his criminal ● Must be done after final judgment.
liability. ● Does not extend to cases of impeachment.
 Marriage must be valid. If it is void, there will ● Absolute pardon by the President restores all civil rights,
be no extinguishment of criminal liability. EXCEPT:
(Upon declaration of the court that it was void, o Right to suffrage
does the accused go back to prison?) o Right to hold public office

Note: These two rights must be specifically granted by ● Adultery case: US v. Guarin
the pardon of the President o Facts: A was charged for adultery with a married
woman. The married woman was pardoned.
C. A v. B o Issue: Is A also pardoned?
Pardon By Offended Party President o Held: No because it is within the discretion of the Chief
General Can’t pardon, except in Article Any crime, including Executive on who is pardoned.
Rule 266-C and Article 344. private crimes. ● Adultery case: People v. Infante
When Before institution of criminal After final judgment o Facts: The one giving the pardon is the offended
action spouse.
Civil Doesn’t extinguish but can be Doesn’t extinguish civil o Held: Both offenders must be pardoned by the
offended party for it to be effective.
Liability waived by offended party. liability.
● Murder after evasion of sentence: Alvarez v. Director of Prisons
o Facts: A was convicted of murder. A evaded, and was
III. Amnesty v. Pardon consequentially convicted of evasion of service. A was
Amnesty Pardon pardoned for murder.
Both do not extinguish civil liability o Held: Pardon refers only to murder. It does not pardon
Blanket pardon to classes or Includes any crime, and exercised or remit the evasion of service of the sentence.
persons guilty of political offenses. individually by the President
May be exercised even before trial Exercised after conviction. PAR. 5&6: BY PRESCRIPTION OF THE CRIME AND BY PRESCRIPTION OF
or investigation. THE PENALTY
Looks backward and abolishes the Looks forward and relives I. Definitions:
offense itself. It is as though the offender from the consequences ● Prescription of crime  forfeiture or loss of the right of
person did not commit any of the crime to which he is theState to prosecute the offender after the lapse of a
offense in the first place. convicted. It does not work to certain time.
restore rights. ● Prescription of penalty  loss or forfeiture of the right of
theGovernment to execute the final sentence after lapse of time.
Amnesty makes an ex-convict no Pardon does not alter the fact that
longer a recidivist as it obliterates the accused is a recidivist as it
II. Conditions necessary:
the crime only extinguishes the personal
effects. ● That there be final judgment
● That the period of time prescribed by law for its enforcement
Needs concurrence of Congress No concurrence of Congress
has elapsed.
Public act  the courts should Private Act  Must be proved
take judicial notice. by
the person pardoned.
I. Reason:
IV. Situations

● Marriage of the offended woman with the offender after rape, II. In Computing The Period Of Prescription
seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness (Article 344) must A. The First Day Is To Be Excluded And The Last Day Included
be contracted in good faith, and not as a means to avoid ● Example: Offense committed on May 28, 1953. Filing was on
criminal liability (devoid of legal effects). July 27, 1953. The information is considered filed on 60th day.
o Prescription count: Day 1 begins on May 29, 2953.
Article 90. – Prescription of crime. ● A month is computed as a regular 30-day month. The running
Crimes punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or reclusion temporal period of prescription will commence the day following the day
shall prescribe in twenty years. on which the crime was committed.
● But as regards to the month of February of a leap year, 28th and
Crimes punishable by other afflictive penalties shall prescribe in 29th are considered separate days in computing prescription.
fifteen years.
B. Where The Last Day Of Prescription Falls On A Sunday Or Legal
Those punishable by a correctional penalty shall prescribe in ten Holiday
years; with the exception of those punishable by arresto mayor, ● The information can no longer be filed on the next day as the
which shall prescribe in five years. crime has already prescribed.

The crime of libel or other similar offenses shall prescribe in one year. C. When The Penalty Is A Compound One, The Highest Penalty Is The
Basis Of The Application Of The Rules In Article 90
The crime of oral defamation and slander by deed shall prescribe in ● When the fine is an alternative penalty higher than the other
six months. penalty which is by imprisonment – prescription of the crime is
based on the fine.
Light offenses prescribe in two months. o People v. Crisostomo  penalty is arresto mayor
(correctional) and fine P15,000 (afflictive), the
When the penalty fixed by law is a compound one, the highest prescription is 15 years.
penalty shall be made the basis of the application of the rules
contained in the first, second and third paragraphs of this article. (As III. Prescriptive Periods
amended by Republic Act No. 4661, approved June 19, 1966). A. Prescription Of Oral Defamation And Slander By Deed
● Simple slander  2 months
POINTS ● Grave slander  6 months

I. General Points B. Crimes Punishable By Arresto Menor Or A Fine Not Exceeding P200
A. Implication Of Prescription Of Crime Prescribe In 2 Months
● The state loses its right to prosecute. ● 2 months means 60 days.
● Fine of P200 exact is still a light felony.

● Amendatory act of reducing prescriptive period of libel from 2

C. Prescription Of Crimes Punishable By Fines years to 1 year.
● Fines are classified as affliction, correctional or light (Article
26). IV. Defense Of Prescription May Be Raised During The Trial Or During
● Subsidiary penalty should not be considered in determining the The Appeal
prescriptive period of the crime. ● If the accused failed to move to quash before pleading, he is
deemed to have waived all objections, and thus cannot apply
D. Destierro Is Correctional, So It Prescribes In 10 Years. for the defense of prescription (which under Article 89
extinguishes criminal liability).
E. Prescriptive Period Of Offense Punished Under Special Laws And ● Prescription although not invoked during trial may be invoked
Municipal Ordinances (Act No. 3763 Amending Act No. 3326). during appeal.
1. Only a fine or by imprisonment for not more than 1 month, or
both  1 year. V. The Accused Cannot Be Convicted Of An Offense Lesser Than That
2. Imprisonment for more than 1 month, but less than 2 years   Charged If The Lesser Offense Had Already Prescribed At The Time The
after 4 years. Information Was Filed.
3. Imprisonment for 2 years or more, but less than 6 years  
after 8 years. VI. Prescription Does Not Divest Court Of Jurisdiction; It Is A Ground
4. Imprisonment for 6 years or more  after 12 years. For Acquittal Of The Accused
5. Offense under internal Revenue Law  after 5 years. ● When there is a plea of prescription by the defense and the
6. Violations of municipal ordinances  after 2 months. same appears from the allegation of the information or is
7. Violations of regulations or conditions of certificate of established court must jurisdiction holding the action to
convenience by the Public Service Commission  after have prescribed and acquit the accused.
1 month.
● Act No 3326 is not applicable where the special law provides Article 91. – Computation of prescription of offenses.
for its own prescriptive period. The period of prescription shall commence to run from the day on
● Prescription for violations penalized by special laws and which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the authorities,
ordinances shall begin to run for the day of the commission of or their agents, and shall be interrupted by the filing of the complaint
the violation of the law. If not known at that time, from the or information, and shall commence to run again when such
discovery thereof and the institution of judicial proceedings for proceedings terminate without the accused being convicted or
its investigation and punishment. acquitted, or are unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable
to him.
F. Republic Act No. No. 4661 Not Applicable To Cases Already Filed In
Court Prior To June 18, 1966 The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is absent
from the Philippine Archipelago.

o Held: Yes. The period of prescription did not commence

POINTS to run until A revealed it to the proper authorities.

I. Outline Of Provisions C. Period Of Prescription Of Continuing Crime Never Runs

1. The period of prescription commences to run from the day on ● General Rule: Prescription period for continuing crime cannot
which the crime is discovered by the offended party, the begin to run because there could be no termination of
authorities or their agents. continuity and the crime does not end.
2. It is interrupted by the filing of the complaint or information. o Arches v. Bellasillo
3. It commences to run again when such proceedings terminate  Facts: Accused was charged with violation of
without the accused being convicted or acquitted or are municipal ordinance for having constructed
unjustifiably stopped for any reason not imputable to him. dikes without authorization. The dikes were
4. The term of prescription shall not run when the offender is built in 1939, and the case filed in 1947.
absent from the Philippines.  Held: There was nor prescription.
● Exception: If the information alleged that the continuing crime
II. When Prescription Begins To Run only existed until a specific time (e.g. dikes were an obstruction
A. Commences From Commission Or Discovery Of The Crime until a specific date only), then the crime ended on that
● The contrary view would be dangerous as the successful moment and prescription can be computed.
concealment of an offense during the period fixed for its
prescription would be the very means by which the offender D. Term Of Prescription Does Not Run When The Offender Is Absent
may escape punishment. From The Philippines
● It is discovery of crime, not discovery of the offender. ● Facts: A committed libel and immediately flew to Hong Kong
o The fact that culprit is unknown will not prevent he after, where he stayed for three years.
period of prescription from commencing to run. ● Held: If A returns, he can still be prosecuted for libel as it
o It is not necessary that the accused be arrested. prescription period did not begin to run

B. The Crime Is Discovered By: IV. Interruption Of Running Of Prescriptive Period: Filing Of Complaint
1. The offended party ● Period of prescription was interrupted when preliminary
2. The authorities examination was made by municipal mayor but the accused
3. Their agents could not be arrested because he was in hiding. The
● Example: proceedings in this case were stopped for reasons imputable to
o Facts: A saw B kill C. The body of C was never found. A the accused, that is, they fled to an unknown place making it
was neither a relative of C, nor an authority or agent. difficult to arrest them for further proceedings. Thus, the
o Issue: If a revealed the information 25 years later, can B prescriptive period does not resume to run.
be prosecuted?

● Filing Of Complaint With The Prosecutor’s Office Interrupts ● Example: When the accused evaded arrest and the case has to
Running Period Of The Prescription Of Offense Charged. be archived by the court, the proceedings are stopped because
Institution of criminal action shall interrupt the period of of the fault of the accused.
prescription of the offense charged unless otherwise provided
in special laws. VI. Special Penal Laws
● The filing of the complaint in the municipal court even if it be A. Act No. 3326 Applies
merely for the purposes of preliminary examination or
investigation, interrupts the period of prescription. The Section 1. Violations penalized by special acts shall, unless otherwise
complaint or information that will interrupt the period of provided in such acts, prescribe in accordance with the following
prescription must be the proper information or complain rules: (a) after a year for offenses punished only by a fine or by
corresponding to the offense. imprisonment for not more than one month, or both; (b) after four
o Thus the filing of information containing elements for years for those punished by imprisonment for more than one month,
trespass to dwelling cannot be said to interrupt the but less than two years; (c) after eight years for those punished by
prescription of another case containing information imprisonment for two years or more, but less than six years; and (d)
concerning unjust vexation (People v. Abuya). after twelve years for any other offense punished by imprisonment
● Effect of filing amended complain or information upon period for six years or more, except the crime of treason, which shall
of prescription. prescribe after twenty years. Violations penalized by municipal
o If it is merely a correction of a defect, the date of the ordinances shall prescribe after two months.
original complaint or information should be considered.
Section 2. Prescription shall begin to run from the day of the
V. When Of Running Of Prescriptive Period Resumes commission of the violation of the law, and if the same be not known
A. “Proceedings Terminate Without The Accused Being Convicted Or at the time, from the discovery thereof and the institution of judicial
Acquitted” proceeding for its investigation and punishment.
● As such, the period of prescription commenced to run again. The prescription shall be interrupted when proceedings are instituted
● Termination of a criminal case contemplated in Article 91 on against the guilty person, and shall begin to run again if the
prescription of crimes refers to a termination that is final as to proceedings are dismissed for reasons not constituting jeopardy.
amount to jeopardy that would bar a subsequence prosecution. B. Article 91 May Apply When A Special Law (While Providing A
Prescriptive Period) Does Not Prescribe Any Rule For The Application
B. “Or Are Unjustifiably Stopped For Any Reason Not Imputable To Of That Period.
● If the proceedings are stopped for a reason imputable to the ● In Act 3326, what does “proceedings” mean?
accused, the period of prescription does not commence to run o It includes judicial proceedings, and
again. o It also includes executive proceedings. This means
investigation by the executive department.

● Hence, when a criminal complaint is filed in SEC for the with the Register of Deeds is constructive notice to all persons.
investigation of a crime, the period is interrupted. (SEC v. (People v. Reyes).
Interport  wherein the Court said that the investigation o Can the period start earlier? YES. If the falsification is
of the SEC for a crime under the Revised Securities Act discovered before filing with the Register of Deeds.
interrupted the period.) (People v. Pacificador).
● Hence, in a complaint under the Intellectual Property Law, the ● Does this apply to marriages for bigamy (Since The marriage
prescription period is interrupted when the complaint is filed certificate is registered with the civil registrar anyway)? NO.
with the Department Of Justice for preliminary investigation. The prescriptive period should begin to run from when the
o See also Panaguiton v. DOJ which said the same thing. offended party, State or its agents, acquired actual knowledge
● For cases under the Rules on Summary Procedure, the of the second marriage.
prescriptive period is interrupted when the information is filed o There is no counterpart provision in the Civil Register
in the Municipal Trial Court (no preliminary investigation eh). Act which states that filing with the civ register is
constructive notice. Moreover, bigamous marriages are
B. Some Laws Provide Their Own Prescriptive Periods usually done in a concealed manner. Hence, the period
● Omnibus Election Code - 5 years will only begin to run upon discovery of the bigamous
● Genocide Law (Republic Act No. 9851) - never prescribes marriage.
● Human Security Act (Republic Act No. 9372) - Revised Penal
Code has suppletory application. V. Prescription Of Certain Offenses
A. Prescription Of Election Offenses – (1) If Discovery Of Offense Is
C. Article 91 May Apply When A Special Law (While Providing A Incidental To Judicial Proceedings, Prescription Beings When Such
Prescriptive Period) Does Not Prescribe Any Rule For The Application Proceeding Terminates; Otherwise (2) From Date Of Commission.
Of That Period. ● Thus, if falsification committed by inspectors in connection with
● Facts: Accused was prosecuted for violation of Usury Law. counting the votes was known to the protestants and their
● Held: The rules of Article 91 regarding the commencement of election watchers BEFORE FILING of the election protests, the
the prescriptive period either from the day the offense was period of prescription began from the DATE OF COMMISSION
committed (if known) or the day it was discovered can apply. of the offense (People v. Cariño).
● Exception: In cases of SPL and the accused is not in the
Philippines, the prescriptive period keeps running (Romualdez B. Prescription Of The Offense Of False Testimony – From Time
v. Marcelo). Principal Case Is Finally Decided
● Supposing a real estate document is executed (like a REM, deed ● The act of testifying falsely against the defendant does not
of sale) and it is falsified. When does the period run? For constitute an actionable offense until the principal case is
documents required to be filed with the Register of Deeds, the finally decided. And before an act becomes a punishable
period begins to run upon filing with the Register of Deeds. offense, it cannot possibly be discovered as such by the
Why? Because Presidential Decree No. 1529 says that filing

offended party, the authorities or their agents (People v. ● Where the issue is the prescription of a crime and not the
Maneja). prescription of the penalty, Article 9 should prevail.
o Facts: A committed a crime to which the penalty was
Article 92. – When and how penalties prescribe. P200.
The penalties imposed by final sentence prescribe as follows: o Held: the prescriptive period is 2 months. Anytime
1. Death and reclusion perpetua, in twenty years; within that, A can be charged and convicted.
2. Other afflictive penalties, in fifteen years; ● The subsidiary penalty for nonpayment of the fine is
3. Correctional penalties, in ten years; with the exception of the immaterial
penalty of arresto mayor, which prescribes in five years; o If the fine is P525.00, the penalty prescribes in 10 years.
4. Light penalties, in one year. It being a correctional penalty.

POINTS Article 93. – Computation of the prescription of penalties.

The period of prescription of penalties shall commence to run from
I. General Points the date when the culprit should evade the service of his sentence,
● Loss of the State of the right to make the convict serve his and it shall be interrupted if the defendant should give himself up, be
sentence by the lapse of time. captured, should go to some foreign country with which this
Government has no extradition treaty, or should commit another
II. In Prescription Of Crimes, It Is The Penalty Prescribed By Law That crime before the expiration of the period of prescription.
Should Be Considered; In Prescription Of Penalties, It Is The Penalty
IMPOSED That Should Be Considered POINTS
● Examples:
o A committed a crime punishable by prision mayor. 12 I. Outline Of The Provisions
years elapsed before it was discovered. Can A still be 1. The period of prescription of penalties commences to run from
prosecuted? YES. The prescriptive period of an afflictive the date when the culprit ended the service of his sentence.
penalty is 15 years. 2. It is interrupted if the convict:
o After proving two mitigating circumstances without a. Gives himself up
aggravating, the imposed penalty was prision b. Be captured
correccional. A commenced to serve the sentence, but c. Goes to a foreign country with which we have no
escaped and remained at large for 12 years. If A is extradition treaty
caught, can he still be made to serve the remainder of d. Commits another crime before the expiration of the
his sentence? NO. The prescriptive period of a period of prescription.
correctional penalty is 10 years. ● Note: The period of prescription of penalties shall commence to
run again when the convict escapes again, after having been
III. Fine As A Light Penalty captured and returned to prison.

V. THIRD ELEMENT: Convict Has Not Given Himself Up Or Been

II. Elements Capture, Or Gone To A Foreign Country With Which We Have No
1. That the penalty is imposed by final sentence. Extradition Treaty, Or Committed Another Crime.
2. That the convict evaded the service of the sentence by escaping A. “Should go to some foreign country with which this Government
during the term of his sentence. has no extradition treaty”
3. That the convict who escaped from prison has not given himself ● If the convict escapes to a country where the government has
up or been capture, or gone to a foreign country with which we an extradition treaty, but that same treaty does not cover the
have no extradition treaty, or committed another crime. crime committed, the running of the prescriptive period will
4. That the penalty has prescribed, because of the lapse of time still be considered interrupted.
from the date of the evasion of the service of the sentence by
the convict. B. “Should commit another crime before the expiration of the period
of prescription”
III. FIRST ELEMENT: The Penalties Must Be Imposed By Final Sentence ● This assumes that the convict will be arrested for having
● If the convict appealed and thereafter fled to the mountains, committed such crime. He can thus be made to serve the
the penalty imposed upon him would never prescribe because remainder of the sentence which he evaded.
pending appeal the sentence is not final. ● Evading the service of the sentence is not committing a crime
before the expiration of the period of prescription of penalties.
IV. SECOND ELEMENT: Convict Evades Service Of Sentece o This phrase “should commit xxx” refers to crime
● Evasion of the service of the sentence is an essential element of committed when the prescription period has begun to
prescription of penalties. run.
● The defense of prescription of penalties will not prosper if one ● Period of prescription will commence to run from the date the
received a conditional pardon because there was no evasion of convict evades his sentence.
the service of the sentence. Evasion presupposed escaping
during the service of the sentence consisting in the deprivation VI. Reason why evasion of service of sentence is taken in favor of the
of liberty. convict in prescription of penalties
o Acceptance of a conditional pardon interrupts the ● During that period of prescription the escaped convict lives a
prescription period (it will stop running). life of a hunted animal, hiding mostly in the mountains and
● Period of prescription that ran during the time the convict forests in constant mortal fear of being caught. His life far from
evaded service of sentence is not forfeited upon his capture. being happy, comfortable and peaceful is reduced to a mere
o The prescription that ran in his favor should be taking existence filled with fear, discomfort, loneliness and misery.
into account. ● The convict who evades sentence is sometimes sufficiently
punished by his voluntary and self-imposed banishment and at
time, that voluntary exile is more grievous than the sentence
he was trying to avoid.

VII. Prescription of Crime v. Prescription of Penalty

Prescription of Crime Prescription of Penalty
Loss of right to prosecute Loss of right to enforce the
Prosecution has yet to begin Trial on the merits already
Convict may not have been under Convict already was in custody
Begins when corpus delicti Begins when crime of evasion of
discovered service of sentence is done

CHAPTER 2: PARTIAL EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY ● Where one is granted a conditional pardon on the condition
that he should not kill any more. What is his liability if he kills
Article 94. – Partial extinction of criminal liability. again? (1) Article 159 AND (2) Homicide. Two distinct crimes;
Criminal liability is extinguished partially: no complex crime.
1. By conditional pardon;
2. By commutation of the sentence; and PARAGRAPH 2: COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE
3. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while I. Commutation Of Sentence
he is serving his sentence ● Change of the decision of the court made by the Chief
Executive by reducing the degree of the penalty inflicted upon
POINTS the convict OR by decreasing the length of the imprisonment or
the amount of the fine.
I. Nature Of Conditional Pardon. Ii. Specific Cases Where Commutation Is Provided For By The Code.
● Conditional pardon delivered and accepted is considered a 1. When the convict sentenced to death is over 70 years of age
contract between the sovereign power of the executive and the (Article 83).
convict that the executive will release the convict upon 2. When eight justices of the Supreme Court fail to reach a
compliance with the condition. decision for the affirmation of the death penalty.
● Must be given after final judgment and must be accepted by ● In either case, the degree of the penalty is reduced from death
accused. to RP.
● Does not extinguish civil liability. ● In commutation of sentence, consent of the offender is not
necessary. The public welfare, not his consent, determines
II. Usual Condition Imposed Upon The Convict In Conditional Pardon. what shall be done. (Biddle v. Perovich)
● In conditional pardon: the condition usually imposed upon the
convict  “he shall not again violate any of the penal laws PARAGRAPH 3: GOOD CONDUCT ALLOWANCES
of the Philippines” I. For Good Conduct Allowances
● Allowances for good conduct are deductions from the term of
III. Effect Of Violation Of Condition sentence for good behavior. (Article 97)
● If one violates his conditional pardon, two things can happen: ● Different from that provided in Article 29 which is an
a. (Administrative Procedure) President orders his re- extraordinary reduction of full time or four-fifths of the
arrest and incarceration (no need for judicial preventive imprisonment from the term of the sentence.
determination of guilt), or ● A prisoner is also entitled to a special time allowance for
b. (Judicial Procedure) Prosecuted under 159 of the loyalty. (Article 98) A deduction of 1/5 of the period of his
Revised Penal Code. sentence is granted to a loyal prisoner. (See Article 158)

I. Parole Under Indeterminate Sentence Law. Executive Pardons and Parole
● The parole granted to a convict by the Parole Board should be Statute Administrative Code Indeterminate Sentence Law
added. A parole may be granted to a prisoner after serving the Involved
minimum penalty under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. Penalty for The convict may be The convict cannot be
violation ordered rearrested or prosecuted under Article 159.
A. Definition Of Parole reincarcerated by the He can be rearrested and
● Parole consists in the suspension of the sentence of a convict Chief Executive, or may reincarcerated to serve the
after serving the minimum term of the indeterminate penalty, be prosecuted under unserved portion of his
without granting a pardon, prescribing the terms upon which Article 159 of the Revised original penalty
the sentence shall be suspended. Penal Code
● If convict fails to observe the conditions of the parole, the
Board of Pardons and Parole is authorized to direct his arrest II. Probation
and return to custody and thereafter to carry out his sentence
without deduction of the time that has elapsed between the III. Partial Repeal Of A Penal Law
date of the parole and the subsequent arrest.
Article 95. – Obligation incurred by a person granted conditional
B. Is Conviction Necessary To Revoke Parole? Yes. pardon.
● The mere commission, not conviction by the court, of any crime Any person who has been granted conditional pardon shall incur the
is sufficient to warrant parolee’s arrest and re-incarceration obligation of complying strictly with the conditions imposed
(Guevara). therein, otherwise, his noncompliance with any of the conditions
● In a petition for habeas corpus, it was contended that the specified shall result in the revocation of the pardon and the
recommitment order was premature, because it came down provisions of Article 159 shall be applied to him.
before his convictions of the series of estafa committed by him
during the period of the parole. It was held that it was now POINTS
rather academic, even assuming that final conviction is
necessary in order to constitute a violation of the condition of I. Outline Of The Provisions:
the parole (Fortunato v. Director). 1. He must comply strictly with the conditions imposed in the
C. Conditional Pardon v. Parole 2. Failure to comply with the conditions shall result in the
Conditional Pardon Parole revocation of the pardon. Under Section 64(i), R.A.C., the Chief
When Given any time after final Given after the prisoner has Executive may order his arrest and reincarceration. (People v.
Given judgment served the minimum penalty Aglahi)
imposed on him

3. He becomes liable under Article 159. This is the judicial him to the following deduction from the period of his sentence:
remedy. 1. During the first two years of imprisonment, he shall be
allowed a deduction of five days for each month of good
II. Condition Of Pardon Is Limited To The Unserved Portion Of The behavior;
Sentence, Unless An Intention To Extend It Beyond That Time Is 2. During the third to the fifth year, inclusive, of his
Manifest imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of eight days
● Duration of the conditions subsequent, annexed to a pardon  for each month of good behavior;
limited to the period of the prisoner’s sentence, unless an 3. During the following years until the tenth year, inclusive, of
intention to extend it beyond the term of his sentence was his imprisonment, he shall be allowed a deduction of ten days
manifest from the nature of the condition or the language in for each month of good behavior; and
which it was imposed. (Infante v. Warden) 4. During the eleventh and successive years of his imprisonment,
he shall be allowed a deduction of fifteen days for each month
III. Illustration: of good behavior.
● If a convict was sentenced to 12 years and 1 day of relclusion
temporal (the maximum term of the indeterminate penalty), POINTS
and after serving 5 years he was granted a conditional pardon -
the condition being that he should not commit any crime in the I. Application Of The Provisions Of Article 97
future - that condition must be complied with by him until the ● People v. Tan: Release of appellee Tan by the provincial
end of the 7 years from the grant of the conditional pardon, it warden, after an imprisonment of only 2 years, 8 months and
being the unserved portion of his sentence. 21 days, was premature.
● If he commits a crime after the expiration of the 7 years, he is ● Under paragraph No. 1, Article 97 of the Revised Penal Code,
not liable for violation of the conditional pardon. The condition he may be allowed a deduction of 5 days for each month of
of the pardon is no longer operative when he commits a new good behavior during his first 2 years of imprisonment, which
offense. would be 24 months multiplied by 5, or 120 days;
● But if he commits a crime before the expiration of the 7 years, ● Under paragraph No. 2, he may be allowed a deduction of 8
he is liable for violation of the conditional pardon. days a month for the next 3 years.
● For the balance of 8 months, multiplied by 8, we have 64 days;
Article 96. – Effect of commutation of sentence. so that the total credit for good behavior would be 184 days,
The commutation of the original sentence for another of a different equivalent to 6 months and 4 days. The prisoner’s actual
length and nature shall have the legal effect of substituting the latter confinement of 2 years, 8 months and 21 days, plus his possible
in the place of the former. total credit of 6 months and 4 days, would give the result of 3
years, 2 months and 25 days. Since the maximum term of his
Article 97. – Allowance for good conduct. sentence is 4 years and 2 months, appellee Tan has an
The good conduct of any prisoner in any penal institution shall entitle unserved portion of 11 months and 5 days.

II. No Allowance For The Good Conduct While Prisoner Is Released II. The Deduction Of 1/5 Is Based On The Original Sentence
Under Conditional Pardon ● While this article mentions “the period of his sentence,” it
● Reason  the good conduct time allowance is given in should be understood that the convict is to be credited for
consideration of the good conduct observed by the loyalty with 1/5 of his original sentence -- not of the unexpired
prisoner while serving his sentence. In this case, the portion of his sentence.
accused was enjoying liberty under a conditional pardon. He
was not serving the remitted penalty in prison (People v. III. Article 158 Provides For Increased Penalty
Martin). ● Article 158: a convict who evaded the service of his sentence
● By a consideration of the terms of Article 96 alone, and also in by leaving the penal institution where he had been confined,
conjunction with other parts of the Revised Penal Code, the on the occasion of disorder resulting from a conflagration,
phrase “any prisoner” in Article 97 thereof is to be regarded as earthquake, explosion or similar catastrophe or during a mutiny
referring only to a prisoner serving sentence (Baking v. Director in which he did not participate, is liable to an increased penalty
of Prisons). (1/5 of the time still remaining to be served – not to exceed 6
Article 98. – Special time allowance for loyalty. months), if he fails to give himself up to the authorities within
A deduction of one-fifth of the period of his sentence shall be granted 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation by the Chief
to any prisoner who, having evaded the service of his sentence under Executive announcing the passing away of the calamity.
the circumstances mentioned in Article 158 of this Code, gives himself
up to the authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a Article 99. – Who grants time allowance.
proclamation announcing the passing away of the calamity or Whenever lawfully justified, the director of Prisons shall grant
catastrophe referred to in said article. allowances for good conduct. Such allowances once granted shall not
be revoked.
I. What Is Special Time Allowance For Loyalty Of Prisoner?
● It is a deduction of 1/5 of the period of the sentence of a I. The Authority To Grant Time Allowance Is Exclusively Vested In The
prisoner who, having evaded the service of his sentence during Director.
the calamity or catastrophe mentioned in Article 158, gives ● Allowance for good conduct is not an automatic right, for the
himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following the Director or Prisons must grant it.
issuance of the proclamation by the President announcing the o Allowances for good conduct once granted by the
passing away of the calamity or catastrophe. Director of Prisons cannot be revoked by him.
● He must escape and then return. If he doesn’t escape, just stays ● There is no justification for the provincial warden’s usurping
put in the prison, he doesn’t get any good conduct allowance. the authority of the Director of Prisons in crediting the prisoner
o Lesson: escape, but return.
with good conduct time allowance. Such authority is
exclusively vested in the Director. (People v. Tan)

TITLE FIVE: CIVIL LIABILITY B, the injured party, was indemnified in the criminal
case for the damages caused to him, the latter cannot
recover damages in a separate civil action for the same
● Civil liability under the Revised Penal Code includes:
I. Persons Civilly Liable For Felonies
a. Restitution
As a general rule, an offense causes two classes of injuries:
b. Reparation of the damage caused
1. Social injury, produced by the disturbance and alarm which are
c. Indemnification for consequential damages (Article
the outcome of the offense.
2. Personal injury, caused to the victim of the crime who may
have suffered damage, either to his person, to his property, to
II. Basis Of Civil Liability
his honor, or to her chastity.
● Underlying the legal principle that a person who is criminally
● The social injury is sought to be repaired through the
liable is also civilly liable is the view that from the standpoint of
imposition of the corresponding penalty while the personal
its effects, a crime has dual characters:
injury, through indemnity, which is civil in nature.
a. As an offense against the state because of the
disturbance of the social order
Article 100. – Civil liability of a person guilty of felony.
b. As an offense against the private person injured by the
Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. crime unless it involves the crime of treason, rebellion,
espionage, contempt ad others wherein no civil liability
POINTS arises on the part of the offender either because there
are no damages to be compensated or there is no
I. Civil Liability Arising From Offenses private person injured by the crime.
● Every person who, contrary to law, willfully or negligently ● In the ultimate analysis, what gives rise to the civil liability is
causes damage to another, shall indemnify the latter for the really the obligation of everyone to repair or to make whole the
same. (Article 20, Civil Code) damage caused to another by reason of his act or omission,
● Civil obligations arising from the criminal offenses shall be whether done intentionally or negligently and whether or not
governed by the penal laws. (Article 1161, Civil Code) punishable by law (Occena v. Icamina).
● The civil liability arising from negligence under the Revised
Penal Code is entirely separate and distinct from the III. Damages That May Be Recovered In Criminal Cases
responsibility for fault or negligence called a quasi-delict. ● Crimes against property  damages based on the price of
(Article 2176, Civil Code) But the party claiming payment for thething and its special sentimental value to the injured party
the damage done cannot recover twice for the same act or may be recovered, if the thing itself cannot be restored
omission of the defendant. (Article 2177, Civil Code) (Article 106 Revised Penal Code).
o Thus, if A was convicted of serious physical injuries
through negligence under the Revised Penal Code, and

● Crimes against persons (like the crime of physical injuries)  ● Thus, if felony committed could not or did not cause any
the injured party is entitled to be paid for whatever he spent damage to another, offender is not civilly liable even if he is
for the treatment of his wounds, doctor’s fees, and for criminally liable for the felony committed.
medicine, as well as the salary or wages unearned by him o Example: A slapped the face of the mayor who was
because of his inability to work due to his injuries. then in the performance of his duty. Under Article 148,
● Damages may also be recovered for loss or impairment of the crime committed is direct assault. As the slapping
earning capacity in cases of temporary or permanent personal did not cause any injury to the mayor, A is not civilly
injury (Article 2205, Civil Code). liable.
● Moral damages may be recovered in a criminal offense ● Possible that there’s a crime but no civil liability, like in
resulting in physical injuries, in the crimes of seduction, victimless crimes.
abduction, rape, or other lascivious acts, adultery or o But if the state is the one aggrieved, the state can
concubinage, illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest, illegal recover civil liability (e.g. Malversation).
search, libel, slander or any other form of defamation, and in ● Possible that there’s no crime, but there’s still civil liability
malicious prosecution. (Article 2219, Civil Code) (Article 332 – swindling relatives).
● Exemplary damages as a part of the civil liability may be
imposed when the crime was committed with one or more V. A Person Criminally Liable For A Felony Is Also Civilly Liable
aggravating circumstances. (Article 2230, Civil Code)  Every person criminally liable is also civilly liable.
● Damages for death caused by a crime have been raised to Php  Civil liability arising from crimes (ex delicto) shall be governed
75,000.00 (People v. Lucero). In addition: by the penal laws, subject to the provisions of Articles 29 to 35,
1. The defendant shall be liable for the loss of the earning 2176, 2177, and 2202, 2204, 2206, 2216, 2230, 2233, and 2234
capacity of the deceased, unless the deceased, on (regulating damages) of the Civil Code and to the provisions of
account of permanent physical disability not caused by Rule 111, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
defendant, has no earning capacity;
2. He shall be liable to give support if the deceased was A. Since A Person Criminally Liable Is Also Civilly Liable, Does His
obliged to give support under Article 291 of the Civil Acquittal In A Criminal Case Mean Extinction Of His Civil Liability?
Code to one not an heir of the deceased; ● The Revised Penal Code is silent on this point. But the Revised
3. He shall pay moral damages for mental anguish to the Rules of Criminal Procedure provides:
spouse, legitimate and illegitimate descendants and o “The extinction of the penal action does not carry with
ascendants. (Article 2206, Civil Code) it extinction of the civil. However, the civil action based
on delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is a
IV. But If There Is No Damage Caused By The Commission Of The finding in a final judgment in the criminal action that
Crime, The Offender Is Not Civilly Liable the act or omission from which the civil liability cay
arise did not exist.” (Section 2, paragraph 4, Rule III,
Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)

● Thus, the dismissal of the information or the criminal action subsequent civil action based upon the alleged criminal act
does not affect the right of the offended party to institute or (Republic v. Asaad).
continue the civil action already instituted arising from the ● But where the state is party to the civil action, the issues
offense, because such dismissal or extinction of the penal determined by the conviction of the defendant are concluded
action does not carry with it the extinction of the civil one in the civil action.
(People v. Velez). In this case, there was a pending separate
civil action, arising out of the same offense, filed by the B. Civil Liability May Exist, Although The Accused Is Not Held
offended party against the same defendant. Criminally Liable, In The Following Cases:
● Though the death of an accused-appellant during the pendency 1. Acquittal on reasonable doubt. – When the accused in a
of an appeal extinguished his criminal liability, his civil liability criminal prosecution is acquitted on the ground that his guilt
survives. Extinction of criminal liability does not necessarily has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt, a civil action for
mean that the civil liability is also extinguished. Only the damages for the same act or omission may be instituted
criminal liability, including the fine, which is pecuniary, but not (Article 29, Civil Code).
civil, of the accused is extinguished by his death, but the civil Award in judgment of acquittal.
liability remains (Petralba v. Sandiganbayan). o The court may acquit an accused on reasonable doubt
● An Acquittal In A Criminal Case Is Not Evidence Of Innocence and still order payment of civil damages already proved
In Subsequent Civil Action Based Upon The Alleged Criminal in the same case without need for a separate civil
Act. In a civil case, the Solicitor General moved for the action. The reason is the accused has been accorded
cancellation of the certificate of naturalization issued in favor due process. To require a separate civil action would
of the petitioner, upon the ground that it was secured illegally mean needless clogging of court dockets and
and fraudulently. Among the acts of misrepresentation and unnecessary duplication of litigation with all its
misconduct imputed to the petitioner was the alleged attendant loss of time, effort, and money on the part of
maltreatment by him of Mrs. Joist. It appeared that the all concerned (Maximo v. Gerochi, Jr.).
Municipal Court which tried the maltreatment case acquitted 2. Acquittal from a cause of non-imputability –The exemption
the defendant (petitioner). The court trying the civil case did from criminal liability in favor of an imbecile or insane person,
not take into account the evidence introduced in that civil case and a person under 15 years of age, or one over 15 but under
in support of the charge of maltreatment. 18 years of age, who has acted without discernment, and those
Held: The trial court erred in not taking into account the acting under the compulsion of an irresistible force or under
evidence introduced in the civil case in support of the charges the impulse of an uncontrollable fear of an equal or greater
of maltreatment. The Supreme Court stated that the great injury, does not include exemption from civil liability (Article
weight of authority supports the rule that a judgment of 101, Revised Penal Code).
acquittal is not effective under the doctrine of res judicata in a 3. Acquittal in the criminal action for negligence does not
later civil action involving the same subject-matter. An acquittal preclude the offended party from filing a civil action to recover
in a criminal prosecution does not constitute a bar to a

damages, based on the new theory that the act is a quasi-delict. b. If the criminal action is filed after said civil action has
(Article 2177, Civil Code) already been instituted, the latter shall be suspended in
4. When there is only civil liability. –When the court finds and so whatever stage it may be found before judgment on
states in its judgment that there is only civil responsibility, and the merits. The suspension shall last until final
not criminal responsibility, and that this finding is the cause of judgment is rendered in the criminal action.
acquittal. (De Guzman v. Alva) Nevertheless, before judgment on the merits is
rendered in the civil action, the same may, upon
VI. Prosecution Of Civil Action Arising From Crime motion of the offended party, be consolidated with the
A. Provisions Of Revised Rules Of Criminal Procedure (Rule 111) On criminal action in the court trying the criminal action. In
The Prosecution Of Civil Action Arising From Offenses: case of consolidation, the evidence already adduced in
● Institution of criminal and civil actions – When a criminal the civil action shall be deemed automatically
action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of civil reproduced in the criminal action without prejudice to
liability arising from the offense charged shall be deemed the right of the prosecution to cross-examine the
instituted with the criminal action unless the offended party witnesses presented by the offended party in the
waives the civil action, reserves the right to institute it criminal case and of the parties to present additional
separately, or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal evidence. The consolidated criminal and civil actions
action. shall be tried and decided jointly (Section 2, Rule 111,
o The criminal action for violation of B.P. Blg 22 shall be Revised Rules Of Criminal Procedure).
deemed to include the corresponding civil action. No ● Judgment in civil action not a bar. –A final judgment rendered
reservation to file such civil action shall be allowed. in a civil action absolving the defendant from civil liability is not
● When civil action may proceed independently. – In the cases bar to a criminal action against the defendant for the same act
provided for in Articles 32, 33, 34, and 2176 of the Civil Code of or omission subject of the civil action (Section 5, Rule 111,
the Philippines, the independent civil action may be brought by Revised Rules Of Criminal Procedure).
the offended party. It shall proceed independently of the ● Suspension by reason or prejudicial question. – A petition for
criminal action and shall require only a preponderance of suspension of the criminal action based upon the pendency of a
evidence. In no case, however, may the offended party recover prejudicial question in a civil action may be filed in the office of
damages twice for the same act or omission charged in the the prosecutor or the court conducting the preliminary
criminal action (Section 3, Rule 111, Revised Rules Of Criminal investigation. When the criminal action has been filed in court
Procedure). for trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed in the same
● When separate civil action is suspended. – criminal action at any time before the prosecution rests
a. After the criminal action has been commenced, the (Section 6, Rule 111, Revised Rules Of Criminal Procedure).
separate civil action arising therefrom cannot be
instituted until final judgment has been rendered in the VII. Exception To The Rule That Extinction Of The Criminal Action Does
criminal action; Not Extinguish Civil Action.

● The civil action reserved by the complainant during the a. Under Article 29 of the Civil Code, when the accused in
prosecution of the criminal action will be allowed after a criminal prosecution is acquitted on the ground that
termination of the criminal proceedings, only when he as the his guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt, a
right thereto, that is to say, when the judgment rendered is one civil action for damages for the same act or omission
of conviction, or, in case the accused is acquitted, the may be instituted.
complainant is based on some other fact that was charged with b. According to Section 2(b), Rule 111 of the Rules of
the crime of estafa thru falsification of commercial documents. Court, extinction of the penal action does not carry
The court acquitted him from the charge on the ground that with it extinction of the Civil, and in that case the lower
money had been received or retained by him pursuant to an court did not make any declaration that the fact from
arrangement between the latter and the offended party, and which the civil may arise did not exist
that the liability of the defendant for the return of the amount
so received arises from a civil contract, not from a criminal act, A. When The Final Judgment In A Criminal Case Does Not State "That
and may not be enforced in the criminal case (People v. The Fact From Which The Civil Might Arise Did Not Exist," Extinction
Miranda). Of The Penal Action Does Not Carry With It Extinction Of The Civil
● Since the court acquitted the accused on the ground that the ● The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it
money had been received or retained by appellant pursuant to extinction of the civil action. However, the civil action based on
an arrangement between the latter and the offended party, in delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is a finding in a
order to conceal the transaction from the other offended party, final judgment in the criminal action that the act or omission
it was improper and unwarranted to impose a civil liability in from which the civil liability may arise did not exist.
the same criminal action. The liability of the defendant for the ● When the accused in a criminal case for estafa (Revised Penal
return of the amount so received arises from a civil contract, Code Article315) was acquitted because there was no
not from a criminal act, and may not be enforced in the conversion or misappropriation, an element of the crime, then
criminal case but in a separate civil action (People v. Miranda). but the evidence shows that she really received the jewelry,
● People v. Lagman: Complainant appealed, through her private then the civil action is not extinguished (Laperal v. Alvia).
prosecutor, from the decision of the lower court, acquitting the ● But if in a criminal case for arson, the court states in its
accused on the ground of reasonable doubt, the Court of judgment of acquittal that "the accused cannot in any manner
Appeals Held: "With respect to the award of damages in favor be held responsible for the fire," such declaration fits well into
of the complainant, the rule is that in a criminal case, the the exception of the rule and actually exonerates the accused
accused is civilly liable only if he is found guilty. But not if he is from civil liability (Tan v. Standard Vacuum Oil Co.).
declared innocent. In the case before us, the accused was ● The question is whether appellants may still recover damages
acquitted of the crime charged. Therefore, the award of from Priela, considering that he has been explicitly acquitted by
damages in favor of the complainant should be set aside." the trial court, upon the ground that "he has not been remiss in
o Ruling is erroneous for two reasons: his caution nor in his presence of mind trying to avoid" said
"freak accident."

Held: Pursuant to the Rules of Court: "Extinction of the penal criminal action (Section 2, Rule 111, Revised Rules Of Criminal
action does not carry with it extinction of the civil, unless the Procedure).
extinction proceeds from a declaration in a final judgment that ● The rule which requires the suspension of the civil case after
the fact from which the civil might arise did not exist." In the the criminal action has been commenced, refers to the
case at bar, the decision appealed from has not only acquitted commencement of the criminal action in court and not to the
Priela; but also, declared that the collision, which resulted in mere filing of a complaint with the prosecuting officer. (Coquia
the destruction of appellants' car, had not been due to any et al v. Cheong)
negligence on his part. SInce appellants' civil action is
predicated upon Priela's alleged negligence, which does not B. Judgment In The Civil Case Already Promulgated Cannot Be
exist, according to said final judgment, it follows necessarily Suspended By The Filing Of Criminal Action
that his acquittal in the criminal action carries with it the ● The provisions of Section 2 of Rule 111, Rules of Court, that
extinction of the civil responsibility arising therefrom (Faraon v. "after a criminal action has been commenced, no civil action
Priela). arising from the same offense can be prosecuted, and the same
shall be suspended, in whatever stage it may be found, until
VIII. Commencement Of Criminal Action Not A Condition Precedent To final judgment in the criminal proceeding has been rendered"
The Filing And Prosecution Of Civil Action Arising From Crime does not contemplate the suspension of a judgment already
● The Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure permit the institution promulgated in a civil action by the filing of a criminal
of a civil action to demand civil responsibility arising from crime complaint with the prosecution attorney charging the winning
before the institution of the criminal prosecution. party with having introduced false documentary evidence.
● A contrary doctrine would render the right of the injured party (Tanda v. Aldaya)
to indemnity a myth, and justice a farce, for the guilty party
would be able to dispose of his property (Alba v. Acuna). IX. Section 2 of Rule 111 applies only (1) when the claimant in the civil
action is the offended party in the criminal action and (2) both cases
A. But The Civil Action Arising From Crime Cannot Be Instituted Or arise from the same offense.
Prosecuted In The Following Cases: ● Section 2, Rule 111, Revised Rules Of Criminal Procedure,
1. After the criminal action has been commenced, the separate requiring the suspension of the civil action in view of the
civil action arising therefrom cannot be instituted until final commencement of the criminal action applies only when the
judgment has been entered in the criminal action (Section 2, claimant in the civil action is the same offended party in the
Rule 111, Revised Rules Of Criminal Procedure). criminal action and both cases arise from the same offense or
2. If the criminal action is filed after the said civil action has transaction. (Belleza v. Huntington)
already been instituted, the latter shall be suspended in ● Thus, if in the civil case, the plaintiff is the accused in the
whatever stage it may be found before judgment on the merits. criminal case and the defendant in that civil case is the
The suspension shall last until final judgment is rendered in the offended party in the criminal case, the counterclaim covering
not only the sum of P24,000.00 advanced to the plaintiff to

purchase jute bags but also the sum of P171,000.00 as damages reserved his right to have civil damages determined in a
which the defendant claims to have sustained, and the separate civil action (People v. Vigo).
information in the criminal case being merely confined to the ● Under Article 100 of this Code, when an information or
former sum (P24k) the claimant (plaintiff) is not the offended complaint is filed, even without any allegation of damages and
party in the criminal case and both cases do not arise from the the intention to prove and claim them, it is to be understood
same transaction (Belleza v. Hintington). that the offender is liable for them (People v. Celorico).
● The rule that a civil action shall be suspended until final
judgment is rendered in criminal case, applies when the civil XI. Civil Liability Of The Accused Extends In Favor Of Persons Not
action arises from the offense charged in the criminal case Mentioned In The Information.
(Alerta, et al. v. Medoza). ● In criminal cases where the intervention of the aggrieved
parties is limited to being witnesses for the prosecution, the
X. Section 2(A) Of Rule 111 Applies Only To Civil Liability Arising From civil liability of the accused should not extend only in favor of
Crime the person or persons mentioned in the information. Unless
● Thus, when the cause of action in the civil case is based on the record shows that an omitted party has waived the civil
culpa contractual and not on the civil liability arising from the liability or has reserved the right to file a separate civil action to
offense involved in the criminal case, Section 2(a) of Rule 111 recover the same, such party's right to the civil liability arising
Rules of Court does not apply and the trial court erred in from the offense is impliedly included in the criminal action.
suspending the hearing of the civil case until the final (People v. Despavellador)
determination of the criminal case. Section 2(a) of Rule 111
contemplates a case where the offended party desires to press XII. Attachment in criminal cases.
his right to demand indemnity from the accused in the criminal ● When the civil action is properly instituted in the criminal
case which he may assert either in the same criminal case or in action as provided in Rule 111 the offended party may have the
a separate civil action (Parker v. Panlilio). property of the accused attached as security for the satisfaction
● Culpa contractual is the basis of a civil action against a of any judgment that may be recovered from the accused in the
transportation company, for instance, for its failure to carry following cases:
safely its passenger to his destination. The obligation to pay for a. When the accused is about to abscond from the
damages arises from contract, and not from crime. Philippines;
b. When the criminal action is based on a claim for money
A. Allegations Of Damages In Information Not Necessary. or property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied or
● The court may sentence the accused to pay the offended party, converted to the use of the accused who is a public
moral and material damages, even if there is no specific officer, officer of a corporation, attorney, factor,
allegation of such damages in the information, provided the broker, agent, or clerk, in the course of his employment
offended party has not expressly waived such liability or as such, or by any other person in a fiduciary capacity,
or for a willful violation of duty;

c. When the accused has concealed, removed, or separate civil action after proper reservation is made therefor
disposed of his personal property, or is about to do so; (People v. Lipana).
d. When the accused resides outside the Philippines. ● The reason for the rule is that the continuation of the offended
party's intervention in a criminal action depends upon the
A. Writ Of Attachment, Etc. May Be Issued In Criminal Cases. continuation of such action by the provincial fiscal. Once the
● Within the criminal action, with which the civil action is criminal action is dismissed by the trial court on petition of the
impliedly instituted, the offended party may obtain the provincial fiscal, the offended party's right to intervene ceases,
preliminary writ of attachment. The court in which the civil and he cannot appeal from the order of dismissal, otherwise, it
action is pending is, after the filing of the information in the "would be tantamount to giving said offended party the
criminal case, not ipso facto deprived of the power to issue direction and control of the criminal proceeding" (People v.
preliminary and auxiliary writs, such as preliminary injunction, Lipana).
attachment, appointment of receiver, fixing amounts of bonds, ● But the offended party may rightly intervene by interposing an
and other processes, of similar nature, which do not go into the appeal from the order dismissing the action upon a question of
merits of the case (Ramcar, Inc. v. De Leon). law (People v. Maceda).
● Availability of provisional remedies – The provisional remedies
in civil actions insofar as they are applicable may be availed of C. Right To Appeal As To Civil Liability.
in connection with civil action deemed instituted with the ● When the court found the accused guilty of criminal
criminal action. negligence, but failed to enter judgment of civil liability, the
private prosecutor has a right to appeal for purposes of the civil
XIII. Appeals liability of the accused. The appellate court may remand the
A. From The Judgment Of Conviction In Criminal Case, Two Appeals case to the trial court for the latter to include in its judgment,
May Be Taken the civil liability of the accused. (People v. Ursua)
● Every criminal case involves two actions: one criminal and
another civil. From a judgment of conviction, two appeals may, D. Offended Party Has Right To Be Heard During The Appeal.
accordingly, be taken. The accused may seek a review of said ● When a judgment convicting the accused is appealed, the
judgment as regards both actions. Similarly, the complainant offended party has the right to be heard during appeal. If the
may appeal with respect only to the civil action. The right of Solicitor General asks for the reversal of the appealed judgment
either to appeal or not to appeal is not dependent upon the and the acquittal of the accused, the offended party has also
other (People v. Coloma). the right to be heard. (People v. Villegas)

B. Remedy Of Offended Party Where Fiscal Asks For Dismissal. E. Civil Liability May Be Added Within The 15-Day Period, Even If The
● If the criminal action is dismissed by the court on motion of the Convict Has Started Serving Sentence.
fiscal upon the ground of insufficiency of evidence, the ● Before the expiration of the 15-day period for appealing, the
offended party has no right to appeal, his remedy being a trial court can amend the judgment of conviction by adding a

provision for the civil liability of the accused, and this independently. IN the same way that the civil suit can
notwithstanding that the judgment became final because the be tried, the criminal prosecution has to run its course
accused had commenced the service of his sentence (People v. (Rojas v. People).
Rodriguez). 3. When the civil action is against a member of a city or municipal
● This ruling applies even though an appeal from the judgment of police force for refusing or failing to render aid or protection to
conviction has already been perfected (People v. Co Ko Tong). any person in case of danger to life or property. Such peace
● But after the 15-day period for appealing, the trial court cannot officer shall be primarily liable for damages, and the city or
amend its decision by adding thereto the civil liability (Sese v. municipality shall be subsidiarily responsible therefor. (Article
Montesa). 34, Civil Code)
4. In an action for damages arising from fault or negligence, there
XIV. An Independent Civil Action May Be Brought By The Injured Party being no pre-existing contractual relation between the parties
During The Pendency Of The Criminal Case, Provided The Right Is (quasi-delict) (Article 2176, Civil Code).
Reserved o Responsibility for such fault or negligence is entirely
● In cases provided in Articles 31-34 and 2176 of the Civil Code, separate and distinct from the civil liability arising from
the independent civil action may be brought by the offended negligence under the Revised Penal Code. But the
party. It shall proceed independently of the criminal action, and plaintiff cannot recover damages twice for same act or
shall require only a preponderance of evidence. In no case, omission of the defendant (Article 2177, Civil Code).
however, may the offended party recover damages twice for o The purpose of the reservation is to prevent the matter
the same act or omission charged in the criminal action. (Sec. 3, from becoming res adjudicata. (Philippine Railway Co.
Rule 111, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure) v. Jalandoni)

A. Reservation Of The Right To Institute Separate Civil Action B. Effect Of Reservation Of Right To Intervene In Prosecution Of
Necessary In The Following Cases: Criminal Case.
1. In any of the cases referred to in Article 32, Civil Code. ● Once the offended party has reserved his right to institute a
2. In cases of defamation, fraud, and physical injuries. separate civil action to recover indemnity, he thereby loses his
o The words "defamation", "fraud" and "physical injuries" right to intervene in the prosecution of the criminal case.
are used in their ordinary sense. The term "physical Consequently, appellant no longer had any right to move for
injuries" means bodily injury, not the crime of physical the reconsideration of, much less to appeal from the decision in
injuries. It includes attempted homicide, frustrated the criminal case, insofar as it decided the question of civil
homicide, or even death (Carandang v. Hon. Vicente indemnity, for appellant no longer had any standing in the case
Santiago). (Tactaquin v. Palileo).
o Estafa is included in the term "fraud." ● Article 33 of the Civil Code has modified the provisions of Rule
o Where fraud is the basis for both civil and the criminal 107, Rules of Court. Under said article, a civil action to recover
actions, they are according to law, to proceed damages for physical injuries, distinct and separate from the

criminal action and of which it shall proceed independently, ● This is another exception to the rule that the criminal action
may be brought by the injured party; hence, the right to file shall be decided first and that the civil action should be
said complaint for damages need not even be reserved. suspended.
(Alvarez v. Manalaysay) ● Prejudicial questions must be decided before any criminal
prosecution may be instituted or may proceed (Article 36 new
C. If The Offended Party In The Criminal Case Is Represented By A Civil Code).
Private Prosecutor, He Cannot File An Independent Civil Action. ● Petition for the suspension of the criminal action based upon
 If the offended party elected to claim the civil liability in the the pendency of a prejudicial question in a civil action, may be
criminal case by intervening therein through a private filed in the office of the prosecutor or the court conducting the
prosecutor and the court did not award any civil liability preliminary investigation. When the criminal action has been
because the offended party did not present evidence, he filed in court for trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed in
cannot thereafter file an independent civil action for said civil the same criminal action at any time before the prosecution
liability. The matter is already res judicata in the criminal case. rests.
(Roa v. De la Cruz) ● For the principle on prejudicial question to apply, it is essential
that there be two cases involved, invariably a civil case and a
D. When The Accused Pleaded Guilty During The Arraignment, So That criminal case. If the two cases are both civil or if they are both
The Offended Party Could Not Have Expressly Renounced His Right To criminal, the principle finds no application (Malvar v. Cruz).
File The Civil Action Or Reserved The Same, Can The Latter
Subsequently File A Civil Action For Indemnity For Physical And Moral A. Prejudicial Question Defined
Damages Caused By The Accused? ● A prejudicial question is one which arises in a case, the
 The mere appearance of a private prosecutor in the criminal resolution of which is a logical antecedent of the issue involved
case does not necessarily constitute such intervention on the in said case, and the cognizance of which pertains to another
part of the aggrieved party as could only import an intention to tribunal (Jimenez v. Averia).
press claim for damages in said criminal case and a waiver of ● It is based on a fact distinct and separate from the crime but so
the right to file a separate civil action for damages, where the intimately connected with it that it determines the guilt or
accused had pleaded guilty upon arraignment and was innocence of the accused.
immediately sentenced, there being no chance for the
aggrieved party to present evidence in support of the claim for B. Elements Of Prejudicial Question
damages and to enter a reservation in the record to file a ● The two essential elements of a prejudicial question are:
separate civil action (Reyes v. Sempio-Diy). 1. The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to
the issue raised in the criminal action; and
XV. Prejudicial Question 2. The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the
criminal action may proceed. (Section 5, Rule 111, Rules of

Otherwise stated: document. Was it proper for the fiscal to proceed with the
1. The prejudicial question must be determinative of the case investigation of the criminal complaint for falsification?
before the court; Held: No. The Fiscal must wait until the case before the
2. Jurisdiction to try said question must be lodged in another Supreme Court is decided first, because if the Supreme Court
tribunal. (People v. Aragon) should decide that the document is genuine and has not been
substituted, such finding would be contrary to the stand taken
C. Venue Of The Actions. by the Fiscal (De Leon v. Mabanag)
● Spanish jurisprudence, from which the principle of prejudicial 2. The pendency of a petition for judicial declaration of nullity of
question has been taken, requires that the essential element the first marriage is not a prejudicial question in an action for
determinative of the criminal action must be cognizable by bigamy. The subsequent judicial declaration of the nullity of the
another court. This requirement of a different court is first marriage is immaterial because prior to the declaration of
demanded in Spanish jurisprudence because Spanish courts are nullity, the crime had already been consummated (Mercado v.
divided according to their jurisdictions, some courts being Tan).
exclusively of civil jurisdiction, others of criminal jurisdiction. In 3. A case for annulment of marriage is a prejudicial question to a
the Philippines where our courts are vested with both civil and bigamy case if it is proved that the accused's consent to such
criminal jurisdiction, the principle of prejudicial question is to marriage was obtained by means of duress, violence and
be applied even if there is only one court before which the civil intimidation in order to establish that his act in the subsequent
action and the criminal action are to be litigated. But in this marriage was an involuntary one and as such the same cannot
case, the court, when exercising its jurisdiction over the civil be the basis for conviction (Donato v. Luna).
action for the annulment of marriage, for example, is 4. A civil case was filed for unpaid wages claimed by a number of
considered as a court distinct and different from itself when laborers. In that case, the obligation of defendants to pay
trying the criminal action for bigamy (Merced v. Diez). wages was in issue. There was then a criminal action pending
against one of the defendants in the civil case for protracted
D. Examples delay in the payment of wages as penalized by Com. Act. No.
Prejudicial Question: 303. The defendants asked for the suspension of the civil action
1. There was a pending appeal before the Supreme Court wherein until the criminal case be finally disposed of. Must the court
the principal question involved was the genuineness of a order the suspension of the trial of the civil action? No. The
certain document. After the presentation of the appellant's obligation to pay wages is a prejudicial question, for there can
brief, appellee presented a motion alleging that said document be no extended delay in the payment of such obligations unless
was false. The Supreme Court resolved that when the appeal the obligation be first proved (Aleria v. Mendoza).
was to be determined on the merits, the said motion would be Not A Prejudicial Question
decided. At that stage of the case, appellee filed with the City 1. If it is the second wife who filed the civil action against the
Fiscal a complaint for falsification based on the same accused charged with bigamy, alleging that the accused by
means of force and threats forced her to marry him, the

accused cannot properly claim that the civil action is a

prejudicial question, because even if the allegation in the civil F. When To Plead Prejudicial Question.
case is true, the fact remains that the accused contracted the ● A petition for suspension of the criminal action based upon the
second marriage voluntarily. If the second wife were the one pendency of a prejudicial question in a civil action may be filed
accused of bigamy, she could perhaps raise force or in the office of the prosecutor or the court conducting the
intimidation as a defense in the charge of bigamy, because on preliminary investigation. When the criminal action has been
her part there was no consent to the marriage; but not the filed in court for trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed in
party, who used the force or intimidation. The latter may not the same criminal action at any time before the prosecution
use his own malfeasance to defeat the action based on his rests. (Sec. 6 Rule 111 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure)
criminal act (People v. Aragon).
2. A and B were accused of violation for the Copyright Law. Later, XVI. Civil Liability Under Special Penal Laws
A and B brought an action for cancellation of the copyrights a ● If SPL, is there civil liabilities? Yes. There must be evidence that
prejudicial question which must be decided first? No. Until a party including the government sustained substantial injury
cancelled, the copyrights are presumed to have been duly so that the accused may be civilly liable.
granted and issued (Ocampo v. Tancinco). o Batas Pambansa Bilang 22
Compare Aleria v. Mendoza and Ocampo v. Tancinco o Anti-Fencing (Presidential Decree No. 1612) – Sec 3(a)
In the case of Aleria v. Mendoza, the ruling is consistent with the includes accessory penalty of Revised Penal Code
presumption of innocence on the part of the accused. In the case of (hence, civil liability under Art 104 [restitution]).
Ocampo v. Tancinco, the ruling is based on the presumption of o VAWC (Republic Act No. 9262) – accused liable to
regularity in the granting and issuance of the copyrights. battered woman.
● Special Penal Law and Revised Penal Code is violated by the
E. When The Question Is Not Determinative Of The Guilt Or Innocence same act, can you have more than one civil liability? NO. This is
Of The Parties Charged With Estafa, It Is Not A Prejudicial Question. the case for violation of B.P. Blg. 22 and estafa.
● The alleged prejudicial question is not determinative of the
guilt or innocence of the parties charged with estafa. Even if XVII. Civil Liability In Complex Crimes
the execution of the receipt in the civil case was vitiated by ● If crime is absorbed by another crime, can there be civil liability
fraud, duress or intimidation, the guilt of the accused could still in the absorbed crime? YES. For example, you murder someone
be established by other evidence by showing that they actually in furtherance of rebellion. You will still be civilly liable for the
received from the complainant the sum of P20,000.00 with murder, even if it lost its juridical existence. Liable for civil
which to buy a fishing boat and that instead of doing so, they indemnity and moral damages (People v. Hernandez).
misappropriated the money and refused to return it to him ● Also when homicide is absorbed by arson. Still liable for civil
upon demand. A claim to this effect is a matter of defense to be indemnity and moral damages for the homicide (People v
interposed by the party charged in the criminal proceeding. Malngan).
(Jimenez v. Averia)

● If a check bounces, accused can be liable for B.P. Blg. 22 and whenever damage has been caused with the consent of the
estafa. Will the accused pay the value of the check twice, or authorities or their agents, indemnification shall be made in the
just once? Although there are two crimes, there is only one manner prescribed by special or regulations.
check. Thus, there should only be one payment of the payment
(Rodriguez v. Ponferrada). Third. In cases cases falling within subdivisions 5 and 6 of Article 12,
● If there is a complex crime (2 crimes), can there be more than 1 the persons using violence or causing fear shall be primarily liable and
civil liability? YES. Number of civil liabilities for as many victims secondarily, or, if there be no such persons, those doing the act shall
(e.g. a man kills two people with one bullet). be liable, saving always to the latter that part of their property
exempt from execution.
Article 101. Rules regarding civil liability in certain cases.
The exemption from criminal liability established in subdivisions 1, 2, POINTS
3, 4, 5 and 6 of article 12 and in subdivision 4 of article 11 of this Code
does not include exemption from civil liability, which shall be I. Justifying Circumstances
enforced subject to the following rules: ● General Rule: No civil liability.
First. In cases of subdivisions 1, 2, and 3 of article 12, the civil liability ● Exception: Paragraph 4, Article 11 (person who avoided a
for acts committed by an imbecile or insane person, and by a person greater injury); primary liability is on the one who benefited
under nine years of age, or by one over nine but under fifteen years of from such avoidance. If there were several benefited, they will
age, who has acted without discernment, shall devolve upon those all bear the liability proportionately.
having such person under their legal authority or control, unless it
appears that there was no fault or negligence on their pArticle II. Exempting Circumstances
Should there be no person having such insane, imbecile or minor ● General Rule: Exemption from criminal liability does not
under his authority, legal guardianship, or control or if such person be include exemption from civil liability.
insolvent, said insane, imbecile, or minor shall respond with their own ● Exceptions:
property, excepting property exempt from execution, in accordance a. No civil liability in paragraph 4 of Article 12, which
with the civil law. provides for injury caused by mere accident.
b. There is no civil liability in paragraph 7 of Article 12,
Second. In cases falling within subdivision 4 of article 11, the persons which provides for failure to perform an act required by
for whose benefit the harm has been prevented shall be civilly liable law when prevented by some lawful or insuperable
in proportion to the benefit which they may have received. cause.
The courts shall determine, in sound discretion, the proportionate
amount for which each one shall be liable. II. Who Are Civilly Liable For The Acts Of An Insane Or Minor, Exempt
When the respective shares cannot be equitably determined, even From Criminal Liability?
approximately, or when the liability also attaches to the Government, ● The civil liability for acts committed by an imbecile or insane or
or to the majority of the inhabitants of the town, and, in all events, minor exempt from criminal liability shall devolve upon the

persons having legal authority or control over them, if the latter

are at fault or negligent (primarily liable). Innkeepers are also subsidiarily liable for the restitution of goods
● If there is no fault or negligence on their part, or even if at fault taken by robbery or theft within their houses from guests lodging
or negligent but insolvent, or should there be no person having therein, or for the payment of the value thereof, provided that such
such authority or control, the insane, imbecile, or such minor guests shall have notified in advance the innkeeper himself, or the
shall respond with their own property not exempt from person representing him, of the deposit of such goods within the inn;
execution. and shall furthermore have followed the directions which such
innkeeper or his representative may have given them with respect to
III. Persons Civilly Liable For Acts Committed By Youthful Offenders the care of and vigilance over such goods. No liability shall attach in
● Article 201 of the Child and Youth Welfare Code provides that case of robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons
the civil liability for acts committed by a youthful offender shall unless committed by the innkeeper's employees.
devolve upon the offender’s father and, in case of his death or
incapacity, upon the mother or in case of her death or POINTS
incapacity, upon the guardian.
● The final discharge of a child in conflict with the law does not I. Elements Of Paragraph 1: (Subsidiary Civil Liability)
obliterate his civil liability. 1. That the innkeeper, tavern keeper or proprietor of
establishment or his employee committed a violation for
IV. Duty Of The Court In Trying An Insane municipal ordinance or some general or special police
● Even though the courts exempt the insane from criminal regulation.
liability, they must fix the civil liability to be paid to the victim. 2. That a crime is committed in such inn, tavern or establishment.
3. That the person criminally liable is insolvent.
V. Who Are Civilly Liable For Acts Committed By Persons Acting Under ● Presence of all the elements will render the innkeeper, tavern
Irresistible Force Or Uncontrollable Fear? keeper or proprietor of the establishment subsidiarily liable.
● The persons using violence or causing fear are primarily liable.
● If there be no such persons, those doing the act shall be liable II. Elements Of Paragraph 2:
secondarily. 1. The guests notified in advance the innkeeper or the person
representing him of the deposit of their goods within the inn or
Article 102. – Subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers, tavernkeepers house.
and proprietors of establishments. 2. The guests followed the directions of the innkeeper or his
In default of the persons criminally liable, innkeepers, tavernkeepers, representative with respect to the care of and vigilance over
and any other persons or corporations shall be civilly liable for crimes such goods.
committed in their establishments, in all cases where a violation of 3. Such goods of the guests lodging therein were taken by robbery
municipal ordinances or some general or special police regulation with force upon things or theft committed within the inn or
shall have been committed by them or their employees. house.

● It is not necessary that the effects of the guest be actually owns a truck and uses it in the transportation of his own
delivered to innkeeper. It is enough that they were within the products is engaged in industry.
inn (De los Santos v. Tam Khey). o Hospital not engaged in industry; nurses not servants.
o Private persons without business or industry, not
III. No Liability subsidiarily liable.
● General Rule: No liability shall attach in case of robbery with ● Subsidiary liability of employers, etc., “for felonies committed
violence against or intimidation of persons. by their employees”
● Exception: When committed by the innkeeper’s employees. o “Committed”  implies a conviction.
● No defense of diligence of a good father of the family.
Article 103. – Subsidiary civil liability of other persons.
The subsidiary liability established in the next preceding article shall III. SECOND ELEMENT: The Felony Must Be Committed By The Servant
also apply to employers, teachers, persons, and cor[porations Or Employee Of The Defendant In The Civil Case
engaged in any kind of industry for felonies committed by their ● Decision convicting an employee is binding upon the employer
servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices, or employees in the discharge with respect to the civil liability and its amount.
of their duties. o Provisions of Article 102 and 103 are deemed written
into the judgments to which they are applicable.
POINTS o No need for an express pronouncement.
● “While in the discharge of his duties”  The subsidiary liability
I. Elements does not arise from any and all offenses that the employee may
1. There is an employer-employee relationship. commit, but limited to those, which he shall be found guilty of
2. The employer, teacher, person or corporation is engaged in any in the discharge of his duties.
kind of industry.
3. Any of their servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices or A. Enforcement Of Civil Liability Is Upon Motion For Subsidiary Writ Of
employees commits a felony while in the discharge of their Execution
duties. ● The subsidiary liability may be enforced only upon motion for
4. The said employee is insolvent and has not satisfied his civil subsidiary writ of execution against the employer and upon
liability. proof that the employee is insolvent.
5. Conviction attained finality. ● No subsidiary liability of defendant-employer under Article 103
if his employee has not been previously criminally convicted.
II. FIRST ELEMENT: Employee Must Be Engaged In Industry ● The subsidiary liability of the employer is not determined in the
● “Industry”  any department or branch of art, occupation criminal case against the employee.
or business; especially, one which employs so much labor o Reservation to bring action by the injured party against
and capital and is a distinct branch of trade. Hence, a person the employer is not necessary.

B. Employer Has The Right To Take Part In The Defense Of His ● The employer who is engaged in any kind of industry, for the
Employee. crime committed by his employee while in the discharge of his
● It is his concern that his interested is protected by taking virtual duties.
participation in the defense of his employee. The failure of his ● Those having an imbecile or insane person or minor exempt
employee is also the employer’s failure. from criminal liability under their legal authority or control, if
● The employer can challenge the sheriff’s return which shows they are at fault or negligent, for acts committed by the
non-satisfaction. imbecile, insane or minor.
● Persons who acted under the compulsion of irresistible force or
C. Certified Copy Of Decision Sufficient To Prove Offense Committed under the impulse of uncontrollable fear are civilly liable of the
By Servant Or Employee. person who used violence or who caused the fear is insolvent
● Judgment of conviction of servant or employee in the absence or cannot be found.
of any collusion between the defendant and the offended party ● Is teacher liable for student’s acts? Only when engaged in
binds the persons subsidiary liable. The plaintiff can rely solely industry. (Compare with 2180 which talks of quasi-delicts)
on the judgment of the conviction. ● Visiting doctor left gauze in stomach of patient. Patient died.
Are hospitals liable for consulting/visiting doctors? (Ramos v.
IV. THIRD ELEMENT: Employer Is Subsidiarily Liable For The Full CA and Professional Services v. Agana)
Amount Against Employee o Yes, because of (1) control in hiring and firing of these
● But this is without prejudice to the right of action against the consultants/doctors, (2) performance of duties within
employee for contribution. hospital premises, (3) consultant’s acts subject to
review by the hospital, and (4) hospital controlled staff
V. Persons Civilly Liable In The Absence Of Those Criminally Liable, of consultants.
The Civil Responsibility Being A Necessary Part Of The Criminal o Moreover, private corporation who owned the hospital
Liability was subsidiarily liable under corporate responsibility.
● Innkeeper, tavernkeeper and any other person or corporation ● Philippine Rabbit Bus case:
who committed violation of municipal ordinance or some o Filing of criminal action necessarily includes subsidiary
general or special police regulation, and the person who liability of employer. He may not be a party but in
committed a crime in his establishment cannot be found or is effect, he is bound by the judgment. Employer may
insolvent. assist in the defense of his employee, but he may not
● Innkeeper, for robbery with force upon things or theft of goods actually participate in the criminal case.
of guests lodging therein, provided the guests notified the o The judgment binds the employer.
innkeeper in advance of the deposit of their goods within the  Except if there’s collusion between the
inn, and provided further that such guests followed the offended and the erring employee.
directions of the innkeeper with respect to the care of and o Extent of liability of employer: only in terms of civil
vigilance over such goods. liability (he can’t be jailed) and the amount of the civil

liability. His civil liability can’t be separated from his

● If the employee is acquitted based on reasonable doubt, is
there civil liability for the employer? YES. Only time when no
civil liability is when the court says that he did not actually
commit the acts on which the charge is based on.
● Regardless as to who the actual owner of the car is, the
registered owner is the operator of the same with respect to
the public or third persons.
o Registered owner liable, but can recover from the
actual owner.

VIII. Other notes

● Articles 103 is applicable to violations of the Revised Motor
Vehicle Law
● Articles 102 and 103 of the Revised Penal Code not repealed
by Article 2177 of the New Civil Code (p.931).

CHAPTER 2: PERSONS CIVILLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES o While civil liabilities include restitution, pecuniary liabilities
do not include restitution, because the latter refer to
Article 104. – What is included in civil liability. liabilities to be paid out of the property of the offender. In
The civil liability established in Articles 100, 101, 102, and 103 of this restitution, there is nothing to pay in terms of money, as
Code includes: the property unlawfully taken is returned, and;
1. Restitution; o Pecuniary liabilities include (a) fine, and (b) the costs of the
2. Reparation of damage caused; proceedings. Civil liabilities do not include them.
3. Indemnification for consequential damages.
Article 105. – Restitution – How made.
POINTS The restitution of the thing itself must be made whenever possible,
with allowance for any deterioration, or diminution of value as
I. Civil Liability In Criminal Cases determined by the court.
● There are crimes where there is no civil liability. There are The thing itself shall be restored, even though it be found in the
crimes where only one or none at all of these civil obligations is possession of a third person who has acquired it by lawful means,
possible. saving to the latter his action against the proper person, who may be
● Example: Theft or robbery  when property is recovered, liable to him.
onlyreparation, if it was damaged, will be allowed.
o Restitution  return of property This provision is not applicable in cases in which the thing has been
o Reparation  pay the value of property stolen (if acquired by the third person in the manner and under the
it cant be recovered); payment of hospital bills of requirements which, by law, bar an action for its recovery.
the offended
o Indemnification for consequential damages  loss POINTS
of salary or earning.
I. The Restitution Of The Thing Itself Must Be Made Whenever
II. When Property Taken Away Is Not Recovered, The Court Must Possible
Order The Accused To Restore It To Its Owner Or, As An Alternative, ● The convict cannot, by way of restitution, give to the offended
To Pay Its Just Value party a similar thing of the same amount, kind or species of
quality. The very thing taken must be returned.
III. Civil Liabilities Distinguished From Pecuniary Liabilities
● Article 104, providing for three forms of civil liabilities, and II. With Allowance For Any Deterioration Or Diminution Of Value
Article 38, providing for the order of payment of pecuniary ● The Court will assess the amount of the deterioration and, in
liabilities, may be distinguished as follows: addition to the return of the property, the culprit will be
o Both include (a) the reparation of the damage caused, ordered to pay such amount representing the deterioration.
and (b) indemnification for consequential damages;

III. The Thing Itself Shall Be Restored, Even Though It Be Found In The recovered, the court should order its return to the owner. In
Possession Of A Third Person Who Has Acquired It By Lawful Means this case, the offense was proved but not the identity of the
● General Rule: The owner of the property illegally taken by the offender (People v. Alejano).
offender can recover it from whomsoever is in possession ● Restitution is limited to crimes against property
thereof. o When a crime is not against property, no restitution or
● Under the Civil Code, the person who has lost any personal reparation can be done.
property or has been unlawfully deprived thereof cannot
obtain its return without reimbursing the price paid therefore, VI. Salary Of Acquitted Accused May Not Be Ordered Paid In Criminal
only when the possessor thereof acquired it in (1) good faith Cases
and at a (2) public sale. ● It devolves upon the head of the department concerned, and is
● Restitution cannot be ordered before final judgment. discretionary with him.

A. When The Third Person Acquired The Thing “In The Manner And VII. The Court Has Authority To Order The Reinstatement Of The
Under The Requirements Which, By Law, Bar An Action For Its Accused Acquitted Of A Crime Punishable By The Penalty Of Perpetual
Recovery” Or Temporary Disqualification
● Restitution shall not be ordered by the court when the thing
has been acquired by the third person in the manner and under Article 106. – Reparation – How made.
the circumstances, which, by law, bar an action for its recovery. The court shall determine the amount of damage, taking into
consideration the price of the thing, whenever possible, and its
IV. When The Liability To Return A Thing Arises From Contract, Not special sentimental value to the injured party, and reparation shall be
From A Criminal Act, The Court Cannot Order Its Return In The made accordingly
Criminal Case.
● This is applied in cases where the liability arose from a civil POINTS
contract such as loans.
I. Reparation Will Be Ordered By The Court If Restitution Is Not
V. Restitution May Be Ordered, Even If Accused Is Acquitted, Provided Possible
The Offense Is Proved And It Is Shown That The Thing Belongs To ● When the stolen property cannot be returned because it was
Somebody Else. sold by the thief to an unknown person, he will be required by
● As a rule, if the accused is acquitted, the court should not order the court, if found guilty, to pay the actual price of the thing +
the return of the property to its alleged owner. But if it is its sentimental value to its owner.
shown that the ring belonged to, and was in the possession of, ● If there is no evidence as to the value of the thing unrecovered,
somebody else, and that it was stolen from him, but the reparation cannot be made (People v. Dalena, CA).
identity of the thief was not established by the prosecution,
and the accused pawned it in the pawnshop from which it was II. Reparation Includes

● Repair of material damage caused by the robbers in breaking ● In physical injuries, the injured party is entitled to be paid for
doors, wardrobes, in addition to the value of the thing taken, whatever he spent for the
may be assessed and included as part of the reparation to be o Treatment of his wounds
paid by the robbers. o Doctor’s fees, and for medicine
● In a rape case, reparation includes the value of the woman’s o Salary or wages unearned by him because of his
torn garments. inability to work due to the injuries
● Note: Indemnity for medical services still unpaid may be
III. Civil Damages Are Limited To Those Caused By And Flowing From recovered.
The Commission Of The Crime
● Thus, the unpaid hire of the bicycle arose under the contract of II. Contributory Negligence On The Part Of The Offended Party
hire and did not result from the commission of the crime. The Reduces The Civil Liability Of The Offender
amount corresponding to the unpaid hire is recoverable in a
civil action (U.S. v. Dionisio). III. When Civil Indemnity May Be Increased On Appeal
● It may be increased only if it will not require an aggravation of
IV. Payment By The Insurance Company Does Not Relieve The the decision in the criminal case on which it is based.
Offender Of His Obligation To Repair The Damage Caused
● That payment by the insurance company was not made on IV. Damages Recoverable In Case Of Death
behalf of the accused, but was made pursuant to its contract 1. P75,000  in recent cases
with the owner of the car, but the insurance company is 2. Loss of the earning capacity of the deceased
substituted to the right of the offended party as regards the 3. Support in favor of a person to whom the deceased was obliged
damages (People v. Reyes). to give
4. Moral damages for mental anguish in favor of spouse,
Article 107. – Indemnification – What is included. descendants and ascendants of the deceased
Indemnification of consequential damages shall include (1) not only 5. Exemplary damages in certain cases
those caused the injured party, but also (2) those suffered by his
family or by a third person by reason of the crime. V. Damages In Crimes And Quasi-Delicts
● Article 2202, Civil Code  In crimes and quasi-delicts,
POINTS thedefendant shall be liable for all damages, which are the
natural and probable consequences of the acts or
I. Indemnity v. Reparation omissions complained of.
● Indemnity  refers generally to crimes against ● Article 2204, Civil Code  damages may be respectively
persons. increased or lessened according to the aggravating or
● Reparation  refers to crimes against property. mitigating circumstances.

A. Examples Of Indemnity

● Article 2206, Civil Code  The amount of damages for D. Civil Indemnity For Rape With Homicide
deathcaused by a crime or quasi delict shall be at least 50,000 ● Set at P100,000
In addition E. Damages Recoverable For Rape With Homicide
o Defendant shall be liable for the loss of the earning ● P100,000 as civil indemnity
capacity of the deceased and the indemnity shall be ● P75,000 as moral damage
paid to the heirs of the latter. ● P25,000 as temperate damages
o If the deceased was obliged to give support according ● P100,000 as exemplary damages
to the provisions of Article 291, the recepient may
demand support from the person causing the death. F. Civil Liability For Rape By Sexual Assault
o The spouse, legitimate and illegitimate descendants ● Civil indemnity is separate and distinct from the award of moral
and ascendants of the deceased may demand moral damages, which is automatically granted in rape cases.
damages. ● Moral damages are additionally awarded without need of
further pleading or proof.
VI. Effect Of Republic Act No. 9346 On Civil Indemnity Of Heinous
Crimes G. The Amount Of Damages For Death Caused By A Crime Is Increased
● It should be understood that the debarring of the death penalty From Time To Time By The Supreme Court
by Republic Act No. 9346 did not correspondingly declassify
those crimes previously catalogued as “heinous”. VII. Indemnity For Lost Earnings
● Computed as follows:
A. Civil Indemnity For Murder And Homicide
● Civil indemnity of P75,000 and P50,000 are awarded Net earning capacity =
automatically without need of allegation and proof. Life expectancy x (Gross annual income – Living expenses)

B. Civil Indemnity For Crimes Qualified By Circumstances Where The ● Life expectancy is computed as:
Death Penalty May Be Imposed
● Award of P75,000 civil indemnity is not dependent on actual 2/3 x (80 – age of the deceased at the time of death)
imposition on the death penalty but on the fact that qualifying
circumstances warranting the imposition of the death penalty A. Documentary Evidence Should Be Presented To Substantiate A
attended the commission of the offense. Claim For Loss Of Earning Capacity
● Exception: Damages may be awarded despite the absence of
C. Civil Indemnity For Rape documentary evidence if there is testimony that the victim was
● Qualified Rape  shall not be less than P75,000 (1) self-employed earning less than the minimum wage or (2)
● Simple Rape Shall not be less than P50,000

employed as a daily-wage worker earning less than the o A criminal offense resulting in physical injuries
minimum wage under current labor laws. o Seduction, abduction, rape or acts of lasciviousness
o Adultery or concubinage
B. Computation Of Award For Loss Of Earning Capacity Is Based On o Illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest
The Life Expectancy Of The Deceased o Illegal search
● Not the life expectancy of the heirs or beneficiaries. o Libel, slander or any other form of defamation
o Malicious prosecution
C. Compensation For Loss Of Earning Capacity, Not Required That The ● Note: parents of the seduced, abducted, raped or abused may
Victim Is Gainfully Employed also recover moral damages.
● Awarded not for loss of earnings but for loss of capacity to ● In crimes of rape, moral damages may additionally be awarded
earn. to the victim, without need for pleading or proof of the basis
VIII. Temperate Damages ● Claim for moral damages does not determine court jurisdiction.
● Article 2224 Civil Code – Temperate or moderate damages may
be recovered when the court fins that some pecuniary loss was X. Exemplary damages
suffered but its amount cannot be proved with certainty. ● Are imposed, by way of example or correction for the public
o More than nominal but less than compensatory. good, in addition to the moral, temperate, liquidated or
● Temperate damages may be awarded in the following cases: compensatory damages. (Article 2229, Civil Code)
o If income is not sufficiently proved. ● Also called corrective, punitive, or vindictive damages.
o If the court finds that some pecuniary loss has been
suffered but its amount cannot be proven with A. Exemplary Damages May Be Given When One Or More Aggravating
certainty. Circumstances Are Present
o In lieu of actual damages (where actual damanges ● Such damages are separate and distinct form fines and s shall
proved amount to be less than P25,000, temperate be paid to the offended party.
damages in the amount of P25,000 shall be awarded)
 To rule otherwise would be anomalous and B. Exemplary Damages Cannot Be Recovered As A Matter Of Right
unfair because the victim’s heirs who tried but ● The court will decide whether or not they should be
succeeded in proving actual damages below adjudicated
P25,000 would be in a worse situation than ● While the amount of exemplary damages need not be proved,
those who might have presented no receipts at the plaintiff must show that he is entitled to moral, temperate
all but who would now be entitled to P25,000. or compensatory damages before the court may consider the
question of whether or not exemplary damages should be
IX. Moral damages awarded.
● May be recovered in the following and analogous cases

● Exemplary damages may be awarded where the ● Recovery of attorney’s fees in the are recoverable in the
circumstances of the case show the highly reprehensible or concept of actual or compensatory damage.
outrageous conduct of the offender. This is because exemplary
damages are corrective in nature. This may be imposed even if XII. Interest May Be Added To The Damages Awarded
aggravating circumstances were not alleged, but proven during ● Interest at the rate of 6% may likewise be added
the course of trial.
o Set-off does not apply. As long as there is an
aggravating circumstance – regardless of the number of XII. Civil Liability Not Part Of The Punishment
mitigating circumstances – exemplary damages may be  As the liability is not part of the punishment for the crime, the
imposed. action of the SC in affirming the judgment as tot eh guilt and
punishment of the accused and of reversing it as to the
C. Exemplary Damages Increased To P30,000 question of damages, with instructions to try the civil branch of
the case does not constitute double jeopardy.
D. Distinction Between Civil Indemnity And Moral Damages
● Civil indemnity is itself equivalent to actual or compensatory Article 108. – Obligation to make restoration, reparation for damages,
damages in civil law. or indemnification for consequential damages and actions to demand
● The civil liability provided by the Revised Penal Code, that is the same; Upon whom it devolves.
restitution, reparation and indemnification, all corresponds to The obligation to make restoration or reparation for damages and
actual or compensatory damages in the Civil Code, since the indemnification for consequential damages devolves upon the heirs of
other damages provided therein are moral, nominal, temperate the person liable.
or moderate, liquidated and exemplary or corrective damages,
which have altogether different concepts and fundamentals. The action to demand restoration, reparation and indemnification
likewise descends to the heirs of the person injured.
E. Moral And Exemplary Damages Do Not Require Proof Of Pecuniary
● The assessment of such damages is left to the court discretion.
I. The Heirs Of The Person Liable Has No Obligation If Restoration/
XI. Actual Damages Must Be Proved Indemnification Is Not Possible And The Deceased Left No Property
● Except as provided by law or by stipulation, one is entitled to ● Illustration:
an adequate compensation for such pecuniary loss suffered by o If A stole a ring which he later sold to a stranger and
him as he has duly proved. after A’s conviction, A died but he left no property, A’s
● Such compensation is referred to as actual or compensatory heirs cannot be made to repair the damages. But if he
damages. left property, the heirs may be required.
● Indemnity cannot be assessed on speculation or guesswork.

II. Civil Liability Is Possible Only When The Offender Dies After Final and accessories of a felony; Preference in payment.
Judgment Notwithstanding the provisions of the next preceding article, the
● If the offender is death was condemned by final principals, accomplices, and accessories, each within their respective
judgment to pay civil liability, the offended party may make class, shall be liable severally (in solidum) among themselves for their
effective his claim by filing a copy of the judgment of conviction quotas, and subsidiaries for those of the other persons liable.
against the deceased with the court taking cognizance of the
testate or interstate proceedings. The subsidiary liability shall be enforced, first against the property of
● If death of the offender took place before any judgment, the the principals; next, against that of the accomplices, and, lastly,
action for restitution must be dismissed. against that of the accessories.

III. Indemnity Not Possible In Acquittal Whenever the liability in solidum or the subsidiary liability has been
● The case having been dismissed by the court, no judgment for enforced, the person by whom payment has been made shall have a
indemnity was proper in the criminal proceeding right of action against the others for the amount of their respective
IV. Right Of Heirs Of The Deceased
● The heirs of the deceased have a right to enforce the civil POINTS
responsibility of the accused in their favor in a civil action
I. Civil And Subsidiary Liabilities Of Principals
Article 109. – Share of each person civilly liable. ● When there are principals and accessories in the commission of
If there are 2 or more persons civilly liable for a felony, the courts the crime, the principals are solidarily liable of their quota and
shall determine the amount for which each must respond. subsidiarily liable for representing the quota of their
II. Civil And Subsidiary Liabilities Of Accomplices
I. Apportionment Of Civil Liability ● The accomplices are jointly and severally liable for the portion
● Civil liability is apportioned according to the degree of the adjudged against them and are subsidiarily liable for the
offenders’ liability, respective responsibilities and actual portion of their principal in case of the latter’s insolvency.
● The person with greater participation in the commission of the Article 111. – Obligation to make restitution in certain cases.
crime should have a greater share in the civil liability than those Any person who has participated gratuitously in the proceeds of a
who played a minor role in the crime or those who had no felony shall be bound to make restitution in an amount equivalent to
participation in the crime but merely profited from its effects. the extent of such participation.

Article 110. – Several and subsidiary liability of principals, accomplices POINTS


I. Not Criminally Liable

● Person who participated gratuitously  no criminal liability.

II. Must Not Be An Accessory

● If the person knew that the property came from an illegal
source, he is an accessory and is his not only civilly liable but
also criminally liable.

III. “Participated Gratuitously”

● Refers to an innocent person who has participated in the
proceeds of a felony through the liberality of the offender.
o He should no have paid for the stolen property which
he received from the offender. Otherwise Article 105 is
● If A without knowing it was stolen, received a ring from B, and
sold it for P500, then if B cannot pay for the original amount of
the ring, A is subsidiariliy liable but only for P500.

IV. The Fortune Of The Innocent Person Must Be Augmented By His

● It is necessary that his fortune has been augmented by his
participation in the proceeds of the crime.
● Merely participating in eating something stolen does not make
the participant obligated to make restitution.

CHAPTER 3: EXTINCTION AND SURVIVAL OF CIVIL LIABILITY III. Offender Is Civilly Liable Even If Stolen Property Is Lost By Reason
Of Force Majeure
Article 112. – Extinction of civil liability. ● Where it appears that a person has been deprived of the
Civil liability established in Articles 100, 101, 012 and 103 of this Code possession of his property, the malefactor is responsible to the
shall be extinguished in the same manner as other obligations owner either:
in accordance with the provisions of Civil Law o For the return of the property
o For the payment of its value if it cannot be returned
Article 113. – Obligation to satisfy civil liability.
I. Civil Liability Is, Therefore, Extinguished: Except in case of extinction of his civil liability as provided in the next
1. By payment or performance preceding article, the offender shall continue to be obliged to
2. By the loss of the thing due satisfy the civil liability resulting from the crime committed by
3. By the condonation or remission of the debt him, notwithstanding the fact that he has served his sentence
4. By the confusion or merger of the rights of creditor and debtor consisting of deprivation of liberty or other rights, or has not
5. By compensation been required to serve the same by reason of amnesty,
6. By novation pardon, commutation of sentence or any other reason
7. Annulment, recission, fulfillment of a resolutory condition and
prescription (Article 1231, Civil Code). POINTS
8. Prescription (for filing cause of action – Tejuco v. E.R. Squib &
Son Phil. Corp.) I. Civil Liability Is Not Extinguished Notwithstanding The Following:
9. Subsequent agreement between the accused and the offended ● Service of the sentence
party (People v. Tablante Vda. De Marte, C.A.). ● Amnesty
● Pardon
II. Effect Of Condonation Of Civil Liability ● Commutation
● Express condonation by the offended party has the effect of ● Application for probation
waiving civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured
● Civil liability may arise from:
o Crime (Revised Penal Code)
o Breach of contract/culpa contractual (Civil Code)
o Tortious act/culpa aquiliana (Civil Code)