Criminal Law- branch or division of law which defines crimes,
treats of their nature, and provides for their punishment.
Crime- is an act committed or omitted in violation of a public
law forbidding or commanding it.
Sources of Philippine Criminal Law
1. RPC
2. Special Penal Laws
3. Penal PDs
Common laws are the body of principles, usages and rules of
action. They are not recognized in the Philippines.
General Welfare clause (under police power)- the state has
the authority to define and punish crimes and to lay down the
rules of criminal procedure.
Limitation on the power to enact penal laws
1. No ex-post facto law or bill of attainder shall be
enacted- passage of retroactive laws which are
prejudicial to the accused
2. No person shall be held to answer for a criminal
offense without due process of law- criminal laws
must be of general application and must clearly
define the acts and omissions punished as crimes
Ex post facto law
1. makes criminal an act done before the passage of
the law
2. aggravates a crime
3. inflicts a greater punishment
4. authorizes conviction upon less or different
testimony than the law required
5. assumes to regulate civil rights and remedies only
6. deprives a person accused of a crime some lawful
protection to which has become entitled
Bill of attainder- legislative act which inflicts punishment
without a trial
Characteristics of criminal law
1. General- criminal law is binding on all person wo
live and sojourn in Philippine Territory
 Jurisdiction of civil courts is not affected by the
military character of the accused
 Articles of War shall- case involving a person subject
to military law
 Service-connected crimes- tried by court martial
Exceptions:
a. Treaty stipulations and international agreements
b. Laws of preferential application
c. Public international law
 Sovereigns and other chiefs of state
 Ambassadors, ministers plenipotentiary,
ministers resident and charges d’affaires
 Consul is not covered, unless there is a
treaty
2. Territorial- criminal laws undertake to punish crimes
within Philippine territory
Exceptions:
a. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine
ship or airship
 Within 12 miles- considered part of the territory
 If within a foreign territory- laws of foreign country
 Registered in MARINA
 No jurisdiction over the crime committed on the high
seas on board a vessel not registered or licensed in
the Phils.
 An offense committed on the high seas on board a
foreign merchant vessel is not triable by our courts.
b. When the offender should forge or counterfeit any
coin or currency note of the Philippines or
obligations and securities issued by the
Government
c. When the offender should be liable for acts
connected with the introduction into the
Philippines of the obligations and securities
mentioned in the preceding number
d. When the offender, while being public officer or
employee should commit an offense in the exercise
of his functions
e. When the offender should commit any of the
crimes against national security and the law of
nations
 Treason, conspiracy and proposal to commit treason,
espionage, inciting to war and giving motives for
reprisals, violation of neutrality, correspondence
with hostile country, flight to enemy’s country and
piracy and mutiny on the high seas.
Regional Trial Courts- have original jurisdiction over all crimes
and offenses committed on the high seas or beyond the
jurisdiction of any country on board a ship or warcraft of any
kind registered or licensed in the Philippines in accordance
with its laws.
Rules of foreign merchant vessels while in territory of
another country
1. French Rule- such crimes are not triable unless it
affects peace and security of the territory or the
safety of the state
 2. English Rule- such crimes are triable in that country
unless they merely affect things within the vessel or
they refer to the internal management
Warships- territory of the country to which they belong and
cannot be subjected to the laws of another state
3. Prospective- crimes are punished under the laws in
force at the time of their commission
Exception- when the new statute is more lenient or favorable
to the accused, it can be given retroactive effect
 Expressly made inapplicable to pending actions or
existing causes of action
 When the offender is a habitual criminal (within a
period of ten years from the date of his release or
last conviction found guilty of any of said crimes a
third time or oftener)
New law/repeal
 Lighter penalty- new shall be applied
 Heavier penalty- law at the time of the commission
 Total repeal- crime is obliterated
Self-repealing laws- repealed at the time of its expiration
Construction of repealing laws
 Strictly construed against the Government and
liberally in favor of the accused
 Spanish text is controlling
Two theories of criminal law
1. Classical Theory- basis of criminal liability is human
free will and the purpose of penalty is retribution.
Man is a moral creature with free will to choose
between good and evil.
2. Positivist Theory- man is influenced by a morbid
phenomenon and would act irrationally. Purpose of
penalty is reformation.
Art. 3. Definitions. — Acts and omissions punishable by law
are felonies (delitos).
Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo)
but also by means of fault (culpa).
There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate
intent and there is fault when the wrongful act results from
imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
Felonies- acts and omissions punishable by the RPC.
Elements of felonies
1. There must be an at or omission
2. It must be punishable by the RPC
3. The act is performed or the omission incurred by
means of dolo or culpa.
Act- any bodily movement tending to produce some effect in
the external world.
Omission- failure to perform a positive duty which one is
bound to do. There must be a law requiring the doing or
performance of an act.
Two type of felonies
1. Intentional felonies- the act or omission of the
offender is malicious. The act is performed with
deliberate intent.
2. Culpable felonies- the act or omission of the
offender is not malicious. It is unintentional.
Wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence,
lack of foresight, or lack of skill.
Imprudence- deficiency of action, lack of skill
Negligence- deficiency of perception, lack of foresight
A criminal act is presumed to be voluntary.
Requisites of dolo or malice
1. FREEDOM- when a person acts without freedom, he
is no longer a human being but a tool
2. INTELLIGENCE- power to determine the morality of
human acts
3. INTENT- presumed from the commission of an
unlawful act
Requisites of mistake of fact as a defense
1. Act done would have been lawful had the facts as
the accused believe them to be
2. Intention of the act is lawful
3. Mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the
part of the accused
Requisites of culpable felony
1. FREEDOM- when a person acts without freedom, he
is no longer a human being but a tool
2. INTELLIGENCE- power to determine the morality of
human acts
3. IMPRUDENCE, NEGLIGENCE, LACK OF FORESIGHT
OR SKILL
Third class of crimes are punished by special laws- it is enough
that the prohibited act is done freely and consciously.
Mala in se- wrongful from their nature, criminal intent
Mala prohibita- wrong merely because prohibited by statute,
sufficient it was intentionally done
Motive- moving power which impels one to action for a
definite result. It is not an essential element of a crime.
Intent- purpose to use a particular means to effect such result
Motive when relevant
 Identity of accused
 Antagonistic theories- two version of the killings
 No eyewitnesses
 Circumstantial evidence
It is established by the testimony of witnesses on the acts or
statements of the accused before or immediately after the
commission of the offense.
Art. 4. Criminal liability. — Criminal liability shall be
incurred:
1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the
wrongful act done be different from that which he intended.
2. By any person performing an act which would be an
offense against persons or property, were it not for the
inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or an account
of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.
A person is still liable:
1. Mistake in the identity of the victim (error in
personae)
2. Mistake in the blow (aberratio ictus)
3. Result is greater than that intended (praeter
intentionem)
Person is still criminally liable for a different felony that which
he intended
a. An intentional felony has been committed
b. Wrong done to the aggrieved party be direct,
natural and logical consequence of the felony
committed by the offender
A person is criminally responsible for acts committed by him
in violation of the law and for all the natural and logical
consequences resulting therefrom.
Proximate cause- cause which in natural and continuous
sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening cause,
produces the injury.
Not the proximate cause
a. There is an active force that intervened between the
felony committed and the resulting injury and the
active force is distinct act or fact absolutely foreign
from the felonious act of the accused
b. Resulting injury is due to the intentional act of the
victim
Not an intervening cause
 Weakness or disease of the victim
 Nervousness or temperament of the victim
 Causes which are inherent in the victim
 Neglect of the victim or third person
 Erroneous or unskillful medical treatment
 Delay in the treatment
Requisites of impossible crime
1. Act performed would be an offense against persons
or property
2. Act was done with evil intent
3. Its accomplishment is inherently impossible or that
the means employed is either inadequate or
ineffectual
4. Act performed should not constitute a violation of
another provision of the RPC
2 kinds of inherent impossibility?
1. Legal impossibility - occurs where the intended acts,
even if completed, would not amount to a crime. It
would apply to those circumstances where:
a. the motive, desire and expectation is to
perform an act in violation of the law;
b. there is intention to perform the physical
act;
c. there is a performance of the intended
physical act; and
d. the consequence resulting from the
intended act does not amount to a crime
2. Factual impossibility - occurs when extraneous
circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond his
control prevent the consummation of the intended
crime.
Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies. —
Consummated felonies as well as those which are frustrated
and attempted, are punishable.
A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary
for its execution and accomplishment are present; and it is
frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of
execution which would produce the felony as a consequence
but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of
causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.
There is an attempt when the offender commences the
commission of a felony directly or over acts, and does not
perform all the acts of execution which should produce the
felony by reason of some cause or accident other than this
own spontaneous desistance.
Development of a crime
a. Internal acts- mere ideas in the mind of a person
b. External acts
 1. Preparatory acts- ordinarily not punishable
2. Acts of execution- attempted, frustrated,
consummated
Attempted Felony- it never passes the subjective phase of
the offense
1. Offender commences the commission of the felony
directly by overt acts
2. He does not perform all acts of execution which
would produce a felony
3. Offender’s act is not stopped by his own
spontaneous desistance
4. The non-performance of all acts of execution was
due to cause or accident other than his
spontaneous desistance
Overt act- is some physical activity or deed indicating the
intention to commit a particular crime. It may not be by
physical activity.
Indeterminate offense- purpose of the offender in
performing an act is not certain. Its nature in relation to its
objective is ambiguous.
 Only offenders who personally execute the
commission of a crime can be guilty of attempted
felony.
 When there is conspiracy, the rule is- the act of one
is the act of all.
 If anything, yet remained for him to do, he would be
guilty of an attempted crime.
 One who takes part in planning a criminal act but
desists in its actual commission is exempt from
criminal liability.
The desistance should be made before all the acts of
execution are performed.
Spontaneous desistance of a malefactor exempts him from
criminal liability for the intended crime but it does not
exempt him from the crime committed by him before his
desistance.
Attempted vs physical injury- intent to kill vs intent to injure.
If died, intent to kill is presumed.
In attempted felony, the offender never passes the subjective
phase of offense.
Subjective phase- starting from the point where the offender
begins the commission of the crime to that point where he
has still control over his acts, including their natural course.
Frustrated Felony- reached the objective phase
1. The offender performs all acts of execution
2. All the acts performed would produce the felony as a
consequence
3. But the felony is not produced
4. By reason of causes independent of the will of the
perpetrator
In homicide or murder, the crime is consummated if the
victim dies. If the victim survives, the crime is frustrated.
If after the first blow, someone had rushed to the assistance
of the victim and the defendant NOT believing that he had
performed all the acts necessary to cause the death-
attempted murder.
If the wound inflicted was mortal, frustrated. No wound
inflicted or the wound was not mortal, attempted.
If the crime is not produced because of the timely
intervention of a third person, it is frustrated.
If the crime is not produced because the offender himself
prevented its consummation, there is no frustrated felony, for
the 4th element is not present. Ex. From murder to physical
injuries
Frustrated Attempted
The offender has not accomplished his criminal purpose
The offender has performed The offender merely
all the acts of execution commences the
which would produce the commission of a felony
felony. directly by overt acts and
does not perform all the
acts of execution.
Attempted/Frustrated Impossible Crime
The evil intent of the offender is not accomplished
The evil intent is possible of The evil intent cannot be
accomplishment accomplished
Intervention of certain It is inherently impossible of
cause or accident in which accomplishment or because
the offender had no part the means employed by the
offender is inadequate or
ineffectual
Consummated felony- when all the elements necessary for
its execution and accomplishment are present. Every crime
has its own elements which must all be present constitutes a
culpable violation of a precept of law.
Crimes and their elements
1. Parricide
a. That a person is killed.
b. That the deceased is killed by the accused.
c. That the deceased is the father, mother, or
child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or
a legitimate other ascendant or other
 descendant, or the legitimate spouse of the
accused.
2. Murder
a. That a person was killed.
b. That the accused killed him.
c. That the killing was attended by any of the
following qualifying circumstances:
i. with treachery, taking advantage
of superior strength, with the aid
or armed men, or employing
means to weaken the defense or of
means or persons to insure or
afford impunity
ii. in consideration of price, reward or
promise
iii. by means of inundation, fire,
poison, explosion, shipwreck,
stranding of vessel, derailment or
assault upon a street car or
locomotive, fall of airship, by
means of motor vehicles or with
the use of any other means
involving great waste or ruin
iv. on occasion of any of the
calamities enumerated in the
preceding paragraph, or of an
earthquake, eruption of a volcano,
destructive cyclone, epidemic or
any other public calamity
v. with evident premeditation
vi. with cruelty, by deliberately and
inhumanely augmenting the
suffering of the victim or outraging
or scoffing at his person or corpse
d. The killing is not parricide or infanticide.
3. Homicide
a. That a person was killed.
b. That the accused killed him without any
justifying circumstances.
c. That the accused had the intention to kill,
which is presumed.
d. That the killing was not attended by any of
the qualifying circumstances of murder, or
by that of parricide or infanticide.
4. Rape- By a man who have carnal knowledge of a
woman under any of the following circumstances:
a. through force, threat or intimidation
b. when the offended party is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious
c. by means of fraudulent machination or
grave abuse of authority
d. when the offended party is under 12 years
of age or is demented, even though none of
the circumstances mentioned above be
present
e. By any person who, under any of the
circumstances mentioned in par 1 hereof,
shall commit an act of sexual assault by
inserting
i. his penis into another person’s
mouth or anal orifice, or
ii. any instrument or object, into the
genital or anal orifice of another
person
5. Robbery
a. That there be personal property belonging
to another.
b. That there is unlawful taking of that
property.
c. That the taking must be with intent to gain,
and
d. That there is violence against or
intimidation of any person, or force upon
anything
6. Theft
a. That there be taking of personal property.
b. That said property belongs to another.
c. That the taking be done with intent to gain.
d. That the taking be done without the
consent of the owner.
e. That the taking be accomplished without
the use of violence against or intimidation
of persons or force upon things.
7. Estafa
a. That the accused defrauded another (a.) by
abuse of confidence, or (b) or means of
deceit and
b. That damage or prejudice capable of
pecuniary estimation is caused to the
offended party or third person
8. Less Serious Physical Injuries
a. That the offended party is incapacitated for
labor for 10 days or more (but not more
than 30 days), or needs medical attendance
for the same period of time
b. That the physical injuries must not be those
described in the preceding articles
Theft can only be attempted or consummated. No crime of
frustrated theft.
Unlawful taking is deemed complete from the moment the
offender gains possession of the thing, even he has no
opportunity to dispose of the same.
Manner of committing the crime
1. Formal Crimes- consummated in one instant, no
attempt. Ex. Slander and false testimony.
 2. Crimes consummated by mere attempt or proposal
or by overt act. Ex. Flight to enemy’s country,
corruption of minors, treason
3. Felony by omission- no attempted stage when the
felony is by commission
4. Crimes requiring the intervention of two persons to
commit them are consummated by mere agreement.
Ex. Betting in sports contests and corruption of
public officer. If the offer is rejected, attempted
felony.
5. Material crimes- three stages of execution
 No crime of frustrated rape
There is no attempted or frustrated impossible crime
ARTICLE 7. When Light Felonies are Punishable. — Light
felonies are punishable only when they have been
consummated, with the exception of those committed
against person or property.
Light felonies- those infractions of law for the commission of
which the penalty or arresto menor (1 day to 30 days) or a
fine not exceeding Php200, or both, is provided.
1. Slight physical injuries
2. Theft
3. Alteration of boundary marks
4. Malicious Mischief
5. Intriguing against honor
ARTICLE 8. Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit Felony. —
Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable
only in the cases in which the law specially provides a
penalty therefor.
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of a felony and
decide to commit it.
There is proposal when the person who has decided to
commit a felony proposes its execution to some other
person or persons.
Mere conspiracy or proposal is not a felony.
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an
agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide
to commit it. Generally, it is not a crime unless the law
specifically provides a penalty thereof as in treason, rebellion
and sedition.
When the conspiracy relates to a crime actually committed, it
is not a felony but only a manner of incurring criminal liability.
(act of one is the act of all)
Requisites of conspiracy:
1. That two or more persons came to an agreement
2. That the agreement concerned the commission of a
felony
3. That the execution of the felony is decided upon
Direct proof is not essential to establish conspiracy. Quantum
of proof required to establish conspiracy.
If the crime of treason or rebellion was actually committed
after and because of the proposal- proponent will be liable
for treason or rebellion as a principal by inducement.
Requisites of proposal:
1. That a person has decided to commit a felony
2. That he proposes its execution to some other person
or persons
What constitutes the felony of proposal to commit treason or
rebellion is the making of proposal. The law does not require
that the proposal be accepted by the person to whom the
proposal is made.
The crimes in which conspiracy and proposal:
1. Treason- against external security
2. Coup d’etat, rebellion and sedition- against internal
security
3. Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade-
against economic security
ARTICLE 9. Grave Felonies, Less Grave Felonies and Light
Felonies. — Grave felonies are those to which the law
attaches the capital punishment or penalties which in any of
their periods are afflictive, in accordance with article 25 of
this Code.
Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with
penalties which in their maximum period are correctional, in
accordance with the abovementioned article.
Light felonies are those infractions of law for the
commission of which the penalty of arresto menor or a fine
not exceeding 200 pesos or both, is provided.
Grave Felonies- Fine Php 6,001 and above
1. Death
2. Reclusion Perpetua
3. Reclusion Temporal
4. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification
5. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification
6. Prision Mayor
Less Grave Felonies- Fine Php 201- Php 6000
1. Prision Correcional
2. Arresto Mayor
3. Destierro
Light Felonies
1. Arresto Menor
2. Fine not exceeding 200
ARTICLE 10. Offenses Not Subject to the Provisions of this
Code. — Offenses which are or in the future may be
punishable under special laws are not subject to the
provisions of this Code. This Code shall be supplementary to
such laws, unless the latter should specially provide the
contrary.
Justifying Circumstances- are those where the act of a person
is said to be in accordance with law, so that such person is
deemed not to have transgressed the law and is free from
both criminal and civil liability.
No civil liability except in no. 4. The civil liability is borne by
the person benefited by the act.
1. Self-Defense
Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided
that the following circumstances concur:
1. Unlawful aggression;
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel it;
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the
person defending himself.
Self-defense must be proved with certainty by sufficient,
satisfactory and convincing evidence. The burden of proof
rests upon the accused.
Self-defense includes the defense of the person’s rights, right
to property and right to honor.
Unlawful aggression- is equivalent to assault or at least
threatened assault of an immediate and imminent kind.
There is unlawful aggression when the peril to one’s life, limb
or right is either actual or imminent.
There must be actual physical force or actual use of weapon
or at least a threat to inflict real injury.
Unlawful aggression is an indispensable requisite. There can
be no self-defense, complete or incomplete, unless the victim
has committed an unlawful aggression against the person
defending himself.
Aggression must be unlawful
The fulfillment of a duty or the exercise of a right in
amore or less violent manner is an aggression, but it is lawful.
A person may use force or violence to protect his
property.
There is unlawful aggression when the peril to one’s life, limb
or right is either actual or imminent.
Actual- the danger must be present, that is, actually in
existence.
Imminent- that the danger is on the point of happening. It is
not required that the attack already begins, for it may be too
late.
A light push on the head with the hand does not constitute
unlawful aggression. A mere push or shove, not followed by
other acts, does not constitute unlawful aggression.
A slap on the face is an unlawful aggression- the face
represents a person and his dignity; slapping is a serious
personal attack.
Retaliation is not self-defense. In retaliation, the aggression
that was begun by the injured party already ceased to exist
when the accused attacked him. In self-defense, the
aggression was still existing when the aggressor was injured
or disabled by the person making a defense.
The attack made by the deceased and the killing of the
deceased by defendant should succeed each other without
appreciable interval of time.
A public officer exceeding his authority may become an
unlawful aggressor.
Nature, character, location and extent of wound of the
accused allegedly inflicted by the injured party may belie the
claim of self-defense.
Improbability of the deceased being the aggressor belies the
claim of self-defense.
When the aggressor flees, unlawful aggression no longer
exists. But if the aggressor is retreating to take more
advantageous position, the unlawful aggression is considered
continuing.
NO unlawful aggression when there is agreement to fight. But
if the aggression is ahead of the stipulated time and place, it
is unlawful.
One who voluntarily joined a fight cannot claim self-defense.
Unlawful aggression in defense of other rights.
1. Attempt to rape a woman- defense of right to
chastity.
2. Defense of property
 Can be invoked as a justifying circumstance only
when it is coupled with an attack on the person
of one entrusted with said property.
3. Defense of home
The belief of the accused may be considered in determining
the existence of unlawful aggression.
A mere threatening or intimidating attitude, not preceded by
an outward and material aggression, is not unlawful
aggression, because it is required that the act be offensive
and positively strong, showing the wrongful intent of the
aggressor to cause an injury.
When intent to attack is manifest, picking up a weapon is
sufficient unlawful aggressor.
An aggression that is expected is still real, provided it is
imminent.
Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or
repel it
The second requisite of defense presupposes the existence of
unlawful aggression, which is either imminent or actual. 1. To
Prevent and 2. To Repel
The reasonableness of the necessity depends upon the
circumstances
1. Necessity of the course of action taken
a. Place and occasion of the assault
considered
b. The darkness of the night and the surprise
which characterized the assault considered
When only minor physical injuries are inflicted after unlawful
aggression has ceased to exist, there is still self-defense if
mortal wounds were inflicted at the time the requisites of
self-defense were present.
The person defending is not expected to control his blow.
However, he is not to indiscriminately fire his deadly weapon.
2. Necessity of the means used
Test of reasonableness
a. The nature and quality of the weapons
b. Physical condition, character and size
c. Other circumstances considered
Reasonable necessity of means employed to prevent or repel
unlawful aggression to be liberally construed in favor of law-
abiding citizens.
First two requisites common to three kinds of legitimate
defense.
Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person
defending himself
When the person defending himself from the attack by
another gave sufficient provocation to the latter, the former
is also to be blamed for having given cause for the aggression.
1. When no provocation at all was given to the
aggressor by the person defending himself
2. When, even if a provocation was given, it was not
sufficient
3. When, even if the provocation was sufficient, it was
not given by the person defending himself
4. When, even if a provocation was given by the person
defending himself, it was not proximate and
immediate to the act of aggression
The provocation must be sufficient, which means that it
should be proportionate to the act of aggression and
adequate to stir the aggressor to its commission.
To engage in a verbal argument cannot be considered
sufficient provocation.
Battered Woman Syndrome- can be a justifying circumstance
Any woman may find herself in an abusive relationship with a
man once. If it occurs a second time, and she remains in the
situation, she is defined as a battered woman syndrome.
Flight, incompatible with self-defense
Defense of Relatives
Relatives that can be defended
1. Spouse
2. Ascendants
3. Descendants
4. Legitimate, natural, or adopted brothers and sisters,
or relatives by affinity in the same degrees
5. Relatives by consanguinity within the fourth civil
degree
Requisites of defense of relatives
1. Unlawful aggression
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel it
3. In case the provocation was given by the person
attacked, the one making a defense had no part
therein
The fact that the relative defended gave provocation is
immaterial.
Defense of Strangers
Requisites of defense of Strangers
1. Unlawful aggression
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to
prevent or repel it
3. The person defending be not induced by revenge,
resentment, or other evil motive.
Who are deemed strangers?
Any person not included in the enumeration of relatives
mentioned in paragraph 2.
Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does an
act which causes damage to another, provided that the
following requisites are present:
1. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists;
2. That the injury feared be greater than that done to
avoid it;
3. That there be no other practical and less harmful
means of preventing it.
Damage to another- this term covers injury to persons and Any person who acts in obedience to an order issued by a
damage to property superior for some lawful purpose.

If the evil sought to be avoided is merely expected or Requisites

anticipated or may happen in the future, is it not applicable.
The great evil should not be brought about by the negligence
or imprudence of the actor.
When the accused was not avoiding evil, he cannot invoke
the justifying circumstance of avoidance of a greater evil or
injury.
1. That an order has been issued by a superior
2. That such order must be for some lawful purpose
3. That the means used by the subordinate to carry out
said order is lawful
Both the person who gives the order and the person who
executed it, must be acting within the limitations prescribed
by law.

The persons for whose benefit the harm has been prevented,
shall be civilly liable in proportion to the benefit which they
may have received.
Any person who acts in the fulfillment of a duty or in the
lawful exercise of a right or office.
When the order is not for a lawful purpose, the subordinate
who obeyed it is criminally liable.
The subordinate is not liable for carrying out an illegal order
of his superior, if he is not aware of the illegality if the order
and he is not negligent.

Requisites
1. That the accused acted in the performance of a duty
or in the lawful exercise of a right or office
2. That the injury caused or the offenses committed be
the necessary consequence of the due performance
of duty or lawful exercise of such right or office.

People v Delima- the deceased was under the obligation to

surrender, and had no right, after evading service of his
sentence, to commit assault and disobedience with a weapon
in his hand, which compelled the policeman to resort to such
an extreme means, which, although it proved to be fatal, was
justified by the circumstances.

Shooting of prisoner by guard must be in self-defense or

absolutely necessary to avoid his escape.

Shooting an offender who refused to surrender is justified.

But shooting a thief who refused to be arrested is not
justified.

The attitude adopted by the deceased in putting his hands in

his pocket is not sufficient to justify the accused to shoot him.

The public officer acting in the fulfillment of a duty may

appear to be an aggressor but his aggression is not unlawful,
it being necessary to fulfill his duty.

Lawful Exercise of right- the owner or lawful possessor of a

thing has the right to exclude any person from the enjoyment
and disposal thereof.

The actual invasion of property may consist of a mere

disturbance of possession or of a real dispossession.

Lawful Exercise of office- the executioner of the Bilibid Prison

cannot be held liable for murder performed by him or a
surgeon who amputated the leg of a patient to save him.