1. Which of the following has the power to define and punish crime? a. The legislative b.

The Chief Executive c. The Supreme Court d. Sandiganbayan e. Trial Courts 2. Which of the following is not a limitation on the power of the legislative to enact penal laws? a. Prohibition against Bill of Attainders or Ex-post facto law. b. Equal Protection of the law c. Prohibition against cruel, degrading, or inhuman punishment or imposition of excessive fines. d. Abridgment of the obligation of contract. 3. Which of the following is not a characteristic of penal law? a. Generality b. Territoriality c. Prospectivity d. Retroactivity when favorable to accused e. Adjective or Remedial 4. Which rule on jurisdiction over crimes committed on foreign vessels while on Philippine waters is not followed in the Philippines? a. The French Rule The crimes are not triable in the Philippines unless the crimes affect the peace and security, or safety of the Philippines is endangered. b. The Anglo-American Rule or the English Rule the crimes are triable in the Philippines unless the crimes affect merely the internal management of the vessel. c. If the foreign vessel is a warship, Philippines Courts have no jurisdiction because a warship is an extension of the country to which it belongs and it is not subject to the laws of another state. d. The Philippines Courts have jurisdiction to try continuing crimes committed in a vessel sailing from a foreign port into Philippines waters, even if the crimes are not punishable in the foreign country were the vessel comes from the crimes are punishable under Philippine laws. 5. When does the repeal of penal law not extinguish crime? a. The repeal of a law under which there is pending case against the accused at the time of repeal. b. The repealing law wholly fails to penalize the acts defined and penalized in the repealing law. c. Implied repeal or repeal by re-enactment. 6. An escaped prisoner, then armed with a bamboo lance, was asked by a policeman to surrender, refused to do so and instead answered the latter with a stroke of his lance, the policeman in pursuing the prisoner fired his revolver and caused the death of the prisoner, Is the act of the policeman on resorting to extreme means will always be justified? a. Yes, since an arresting officer is required to act within the performance of his duty, he must stand his ground and cannot, like a private individual, take refuge in fight, his duty requires to overcome his opponent: b. No, it was provided under the Rule of Court that no violence or unnecessary force shall be used in making an arrest. Such provision accepts no exception: c. It depends, the reasonableness of the force employed by the arresting officer must be adjudged in the light of the circumstances as they appeared to the officer at the time he acted, and the means is generally considered to that which an ordinary prudent and intelligent person with the knowledge would have deemed necessary under the circumstances. 7. Which of the following is not a source of criminal law? a. The Constitution b. Acts of legislature c. Presidential Decrees and Executive Orders issued by Marcos during Martial Law, and by Cory Aquino during her Revolutionary Government. d. Implementing rules and regulations providing a penalty as authorized by the basic law. 8. Which of the following is an absolutory cause? a. Aberratio ictus

b. Praeter intentionem c. Mistake of fact d. Proximate cause e. Error in persona f. Impossible crime 9. Which of the following is a crime malum in se? a. Offenses punished by the Revised Election Code, a special law, for the omission or failure to include a voters name in the in the registry list of voters. b. Illegal possession of firearms c. Violation of BP 22 for issuing a bouncing check d. Offenses defined and punished by the Revised Penal Code. e. Carnapping Law f. Dangerous Drugs Law 10. The Revised Penal Code (RPC) belongs to the Classical Theory the main purpose is retribution under a system where gravity of the penalty is proportionate to the gravity of the crime committed, However, there are some articles in the RPC that are positivistic in orientation intended to curb the dreadful and dangerous tendencies of the individual. Which of the following articles in the RPC does not pertain to the Positivist School? a. Article 4, RPC impossible crimes b. Article 13, paragraph 7, RPC on the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and plea of guilty. c. Article 11, paragraph 1, RPC on self-defense d. Three fold rule e. Extenuating and absolutory causes 11. Which of the following is not a punishable conspiracy? a. Conspiracy to commit treason b. Conspiracy to commit rebellion c. Conspiracy to commit coup d etat d. Conspiracy to commit murder e. Conspiracy to commit sedition f. Monopolies and combination in restraint of trade 12. Which of the following is not a justifying circumstances? a. Self-defense b. Defense of property c. Defense of honor d. Defense of relatives e. Accident f. Avoidance of greater evil or injury g. Battered woman syndrome h. Defense of strangers 13. Which of the following is not an exempting circumstances? a. Imbecility b. Insanity c. Insuperable cause d. Minor exactly 9 years old at the time of the commission of the offense e. Entrapment f. Irresistible force g. Impulse of Uncontrollable fear h. Instigation i. Accident 14. Which of the following is not ordinary mitigating circumstances? a. Incomplete self-defense, incomplete defense of relatives and strangers b. Illness that diminishes the exercise of will power c. Lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong

d. Sufficient provocation e. Immediate (proximate) vindication of a grave offense f. Passion or obfuscation g. Voluntary surrender h. Voluntary plea of guilty i. Confession of guilt j. Being deaf and dump or blind 15. Which of the following is not a privileged mitigating circumstances? a. Incomplete self-defense, incomplete defense of relatives and strangers b. The Offender is 18 years old c. Schizoprenia d. Article 255, RPC concealment of honor of the mother in infanticide e. Article 268, RPC voluntary release of a person detained within 3 days without the accused attaining his purpose and before institution of criminal action. f. Article 333, RPC unjustified abandonment of the spouse in the crime of adultery 16. Insult may not be appreciated as a requisite for: a. Unlawful aggression in self defense and defense of relatives and strangers b. Passion and obfuscation as a mitigating circumstance c. Vindication of a Grave offense as a mitigating circumstance d. Sufficient provocation as a mitigating circumstance 17. In the following aggravating circumstances, it is not necessary that there is performance of official duties or functions at the time of the commission of the offense: a. Taking advantage of official position b. In contempt of or with insult to public authorities c. Lack of regard due to offended party by reason of rank d. The offense is committed in the palace of the Chief Executive or in his or her presence, or in a place dedicated to religious worship. 18. Which of the following aggravating circumstances may not be appreciated in crimes against persons? a. Evident premeditation b. Treachery c. Abuse of Superior Strength d. Means employed to weaken the defense e. Abused of official position f. Ignominy g. Cruelty h. Price, Reward or promise i. Dwelling j. Fraud, craft and disguise 19. Which of the following aggravating circumstances does not qualify the killing of homicide to murder? a. Evident premeditation b. Price, Reward or Promise c. Treachery d. Use of Poison e. Dwelling, Nightime and sex of offended f. Use of motor vehicle g. Use of Explosion 20. Which of the following is not an alternative circumstance? a. Relationship b. Age c. Intoxication d. Degree of Instruction and education of the offender e. All of the above 21. Which among the following is not included in civil interdiction criminally liable for felonies?

a. Parental authority b. Guardianship of the person or the property of the ward c. Marital Authority d. Management of his property e. Right to dispose of his property by any act or conveyance mortis causa f. Right to dispose of his property by any act or conveyance inter vivos 22. A minor 9 or under is a. Absolutely exempt from criminal liability b. Relatively exempt from criminal liability c. Enjoys privileged mitigating circumstance d. Extenuating circumstance e. Absolutory cause 23. Which of the following is not an accessory penalty? a. Suspension from public offices, profession or right of suffrage b. Civil interdiction c. Indemnification d. Payment of costs e. Perpetual or temporary absolute disqualification f. Perpetual or temporary special disqualification 24. What is meant by the term mens rea? a. no intent to commit so grave a wrong b. good faith in the commission of the crime c. no malice in committing the crime d. unlawful intent 25. Proximate cause means: a. the motive in committing the crime b. the unlawful intent in committing in committing the crime c. the efficient cause uninterrupted by any supervening event without which the result would not have occurred d. the reason of the offender in committing the crime e. Direct cause 26. Reckless imprudence is a crime only when: a. the offender is under the influence of drugs b. the offender is under the influence of liquor c. the imprudence results in the commission of a consummated felony or crime d. the felony is attempted e. the felony is frustrated 27. A child in conflict with the law is one who: a. Committed an intentional felony b. Was raised in a family of drug traffickers c. Is under 15 yrs of age d. Is over 15 and under 18 who committed a felony with discernment e. A child who is alleged as, accused of, or adjudged as, having committed an offense under Philippine laws. 28. In light felonies the following are criminally liable a. Principal only b. Accomplices only c. Accessories only d. Principal and Accomplices only. 29. In mala prohibita, the criminal liability of the offender is determined by his a. criminal intent b. intent to perpetrate the act c. negligence, lack of foresight, lack of skill

d. ignorance of the law e. mistake of fact 30. To overcome intelligence as an element of criminal liability one has to prove a. Deprivation of cognition b. Under the compulsion of an irresistible force c. Mistake of fact d. Mistake of identity Answer Key: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. A D E A C C A C D A D E E A A 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. A D E E B E A C D C C E D B A

CRIMINAL LAW MCQs 1.While Nina was one the way home one night, she was stabbed and killed by alias Boy Astig who had been waiting for her since earlier that night. Boy Tangkad and Boy Culit, the brother and cousin of Boy Astig, respectively, came to the crime scene thereafter and saw the lifeless body of Nina. Boy Tangkad suggested to bury the body of Nina in a nearby empty lot so as to conceal the crime done. Boy Astig, Boy Tangkad and Boy Culit participated in carrying Nias body and thereafter buried it. A week after, Boy Astig, Boy Tangkad and Boy Culit were caught by the police. What is the criminal responsibility of Boy Astig, Boy Tangkad and Boy Culit? a. Boy Astig is the principal, while Boy Tangkad and Boy Culit are accessories b. Boy astig, Boy Tangkad and Boy Culit are all considered principals c. Boy Astig is the principal, while Boy Culit is an accessory and Boy Tangkad is exempt from criminal liability d.Boy Tangkad and Boy Astig are both principals since the prior suggested to conceal the criminal act and the former did the act of killing the victim Answer: C.. Boy Astig is principal and Boy Culit is an accessory for having concealed the body of the crime to prevent its discovery. While it is true that Boy Tangkad likewise participated in concealing Nias body, he is exempt from criminal liability since he is a brother of the offender. Boy Culit is not exempt, not being one of those mentioned in the law as exempted from criminal liability as an accessory. 2. Roland Smith, an American consul delegated by the American government to the Philippines bumped into a pedestrian crossing the street, while he was driving recklessly and imprudently along Roxas Boulevard in Manila. The pedestrian died after being hit by Smiths car. While being prosecuted in court for the crime of reckless imprudence resulting to homicide. Smith then raised diplomatic immunity as a defense, alleging that he cannot be subjected under Philippine laws and regulations. Is his defense tenable? a. Yes. Consuls enjoy immunity from criminal prosecution b. Yes. Criminal acts by the consuls as a foreign delegate is covered by diplomatic immunity. c . No. The crime committed by the consul is not covered by the immunity supplied by the law

d.No. Diplomatic immunity extends only to sovereigns or heads of states, ambassadors, ministers plenipotentiary, and `resident ministers. Answer: D. Schneckhenburger V. Moran (63 Phil. 245) : No. Under international law, only sovereigns or heads of states, ambassadors, ministers, plenipotentiary and ministers, presidents enjoy diplomatic immunity. 3.Mark, an 8 year old boy is fond of watching the television show, POWERFUL RANGERS. One afternoon while he was engrossed watching his favorite TV show, his yaya Angelina changed the channel to her favorite Spanish telenovela, Marimar. Enraged, Mark hurried to get the gun of his fathe rkept in the bedside table in the masters bedroom and without any warning, shot yaya Angelina which then caused her death. Is John liable? a. Yes. Mark is criminally liable but not civilly liable. b. Yes. Mark is criminally liable since he is a Youth Offender at the time when he committed the offense. c. No, He is both not criminally and civilly liable for being a minor, he is exempt from both liabilities. d. No, he is not criminally liable because he is only 8 years old. Answer: D. No, Mark is not criminally liable because he is only 8 years old. A minor below 9 years old is absolutely exempt from criminal liability although not from civil liability.(Article 12, paragraph 2, RPC)IN order that a person under 9 years of age is to be exempt from criminal liability, whether or not he acted with discernment is immaterial. 4. Jimmy hacked Peter with a bolo but the latter was able to stop the swings of attack, causing him to have a two-inch wound on his right palm. Jimmy failed to hack Peter further because 4 policemen arrived. Jimmy was charged by the police at the prosecutors office for homicide. Three weeks after the criminal act, Peter was rushed to the hospital because of tetanus infection because of the two-inch would on the palm which he sustained during the attack. After the day when he was rushed to the hospital, Peter died..Is it then proper to charge Jimmy of HOMICIDE for the death of Peter? a. Yes, the death of Peter is the direct the direct, natural and logical consequence of the wounds sustained by Peter b. Yes, since the tetanus from the wound sustained by Peter was not distinct and foreign to the crime, causing Jimmy liable for homicide c. No, since the death of the victim must be the direct, natural and logical consequence of the wounds sustained by Peter d. No, Jimmy cannot be charged with homicide since Peter died more than 3days after the attempted killing of Jimmy Answer: C. People V. Cardenas: 56 SCRA 631: The rule is that the death of the victim must be the direct, natural and logical consequence of the wounds inflicted upon him by the defendant. Urbano V. IAC (No. L-72964, January 7, 1988) : the SC held that at the time the wound was inflicted, the severe form of tetanus that killed him was not yet present. It is more medically probable that the victim was infected only with a mild case of tetanus because the symptoms of tetanus appeared on the 22nd day after the hacking incident or more than 14 days after the infliction of the wound. Thus, the medical findings lead to the distinct possibility that the infection of the wound by the tetanus was an efficient intervening cause later or between the time the victim was wounded to the time of his death. The infection was therefore distinct and foreign to the crime. (People V. Rellin, 77Phil 1038) 5. Julio was planning to kill Andy, his business rival. With a bolo in his hand, Julio waited to ambush Andy in a dark alley where the latter usually passes on his way home. When Julio saw a shadow came by, Julio raised his bolo and struck the person passing again and again. It turned out that the victim he was able to kill was not Andy, but his own father. What crime did Julio commit? a. Parricide b. Homicide c. None, he is absolved from criminal liability on ground of error in personae d. None, since there was no criminal intent because he was intending to kill a different person than that actually killed

Answer: A. Parricide against his father. Julio committed the crime of parricide because criminal liability shall be incurred by any person committing a felony although the wrongful act done was different from that which he intended. (RPC,Article 3, par. 1) 6. At the height of an altercation, Niles shot Travis but missed his target and shot Mik instead. Mic died. Niles, invoking the doctrine of aberratio ictus, claims exemption from criminal liability. Is Niles defense tenable? A .Yes mistake in the blow exempts Niles from criminal liability because it resulted in two felonies regarded as a complex crime b. Yes he is exempt from criminal liability because of the tenable defense of abberatio ictus c. No, since aberratio ictus does not exempt one from criminal liability d. No, aberratio ictus is inapplicable in the given situation Answer: C. Abberatio ictus thus resulted in at least 2 felonies- the attempted felony on the intended victim who was not hit and the felony on the unintended victim who was hit. A complex crime under Article 48 of the RPC resulted because the single act constitutes 2 or more grave or less grave felonies Article 48. Penalty impossible for complex crimes: When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the penalty for the serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period. 7. A wealthy 65-year old haciendero already has poor eyesight, poor hearing and has been sick with tuberculosis for the last 15 years. He was robbed and killed inside his hacienda while he was asleep. X was found guilty as the principal, Y and Z as accomplices of the crime. The judge resolving the guilt of the accused considered abuse of superior strength as aggravating circumstance against X, Y and Z. Is the judge correct? a. Yes , the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength is appreciated in the given case b. Yes, but only as to X because he is the principal c. No, X,Y and Z did not take advantage of their strength to consume the offense d. No, there was no abuse of superior strength possibly employed because X, Y and Z did not use a powerful weapon to kill the victim Answer: C. People V. Cortes (55 Phil. 143) NO. There was no abuse of superior strength because X, Y, Z did not take advantage of their combined strength in order to consummate the offense. This is evident from Xs participation in the commission of the crime as principal. And B and C as accomplices 8. Trina eloped with Martin. Whereupon, Trinas father Ney went to Martins house. Upon reaching the house, Ney was shouting while trying to inquire where Trina is, threatening to kill Martin. Martin tried going downstairs but Ney held Martins waist trying to stop him. Meanwhile, Karen, the older sister of Martin while carrying her 2month old child, approached the fighting Martin and Ney to try to stop them. Karen attempted to remove the hand of Ney from Martins waist but Ney pulled Karens hand causing her and he baby she is holding to fall off the floor. Karen fell over her baby causing the baby to die moments later. Is Ney liable for the death of the baby? a. Yes because he committed a felony. b. Yes because the intent to kill is evident. c. No because the wrongful act done (the death of the child) is different from what was intended. (removing the hand of Karen violently) d. No since the act exceeds the intent. Answer: A. Article 4, Paragraph 1, RPC: Yes, he incurred criminal liability because he was committing a felony (removing Karens hand) which is coercion although the wrongful act done (the death of the child, which is homicide) be different from what he intended. 9. Krish, in a miniskirt was caused Tred to his stop his car when he saw Krish walking along Burgos Street in Makati. Because of Krishs charm and beauty, Tred Ted tried to give Krish a ride in his car. Tred then brought Krish to a nearby motel where he tried to ravish Krish. Tred however failed in his attempt because of the

inherent impossibility of its accomplishment for then he discovered that Krish is a MALE. Is Tred guilty of a crime? a. Yes, he is guilty of rape b. Yes, he is guilty of an impossible crime c. No, since the crime has not been consummated d. No since Krish was aware of the consequences of her acts and was aware of the consequences of the acts of Tred Answer: B.Under R.A. 8353, Sec. 2, rape is now classified as a crime against persons, so he may be guilty of an impossible crime. Article 4, 2nd paragraph and Article 59: THE accused already performed all the acts of execution for raping the victim but the same was not produced by reason of the fact that the act intended was by its nature one of impossible accomplishment because the accused, a man, could not have carnal knowledge of another man(victim). 10. Jenn had a fight with her neighbor over dumping garbage in front of the formers gate. One evening Jenn set up sacks and rags soaked with kerosene oil which she placed near the posts fronting her neighbors lawn. The maid of her neighbor saw the dump of sack and rags and removed it immediately thereafter. May the neighbor sue Jenn for any crime? a. Yes, frustrated arson b. Yes, grave threats c. No, the intent to damage the property of the neighbor is lacking in the said facts d. No, there isnt any crime consummated as thus it was prevented by the maid from occurring Answer: A. U.S. V. Valdez (39 Phil. 240) : There was frustrated arson where some rages and jute sacks were soaked in kerosene oil, placed near the portion of the entresol of an uninhabited house, then set fire, since no part of the house begun to burn although fire would have started in the said partition, if it was not extinguished on time. 11. Edgardo induced his friend Vicente, in consideration of money, to kidnap a girl he is courting so that he may succeed in courting her and eventually making her accede to marry him. Vicente asked for more money which Edgardo failed to put up. But Edgardo failed to give Vicente the money the latter required so Vicente got angry. Vicente, because of anger, reported the matter to the police. May Edgardo be charged for attempted kidnapping? a. Yes, intent to commit a crime is sufficient to convict one b. Yes, because he communicated his desire to kidnap t he girl as may be proven by the positive and direct evidence as may be proven by Vicente c. No, he may not be charged for attempted kidnapping but he may be charged for bribery d. No, since he has not commenced the kidnapping ANSWER: D. No. he has not commenced the kidnapping because he has not done any overt act to kidnap or detain the girl, or in any other manner to deprive her of her liberty. What Edgardo has done, after he decided to kidnap the girl he was courting was to PROPOSE to Vicente, However, such proposal is not punishable because the law does not specially provide a penalty thereof. (Article 6 last paragraph, RPC in relation to Articles 8 and 267) 12. John and Art devised a plan to murder Jewel. The plan is devised as follows:- in an alley near the house of Jewel, John will hide behind the big lamp post and shoot Jewel when the latter passes through on his way to work- Art will then come from the other end of the alley and simultaneously shoot Jewel from behind. On the appointed day, Art was caught by the police before reaching the alley. When John shot Joel as planned, he was unaware that Art was arrested earlier. What is the criminal liability of Art and John? a. John is the principal, Art is an accessory b. John is the principal, Art has no liability since he was apprehended c. John and Art has equal liabilities as principals although Art was apprehended d. Both are liable. In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all.

Answer: C. Art is liable also as principal because of conspiracy. It is evident that Art agreed with John concerning the murder of Jewel. After the agreement, Art decided to commit it by participating in the criminal act. The fact that Art was apprehended before he was able to reach the alley was of no moment. The agreement and the going to the alley of Art constitute overt acts which makes him liable for the crime. In conspiracy, two or more persons may be subject to penalty while in proposal, only one person, the proponent may be subject to penalty. 13. Boy Negro was arrested and charged with Illegal Possession of Firearms for having in his possession a .45 caliber pistol. Upon arraignment, he pleaded guilty and invoked his plea as a mitigating circumstance. Can the Court consider that plea as a mitigating circumstance in imposing the proper penalty on him? a. No, circumstances which affect criminal liability are not applicable to special laws b. No, mitigating circumstances are appreciated only when the penalty is indivisible such as in the given problem c. Yes, since the penalty in Illegal possession of firearms is indivisible, then mitigating circumstance may be considered d. Yes, mitigating circumstances may be appreciated in special laws Answer: A. The provisions of the RPC on circumstances which affect criminal liability, such as plea of guilty, are not applicable to special laws. Furthermore, mitigating circumstances, such as the plea of guilty, are appreciated only where the penalty is divisible, which is not so the case with the penalty provided under the law punishing illegal possession of firearms. 14. X was indebted to Z. When the latter tried to collect the indebtedness, X insulted him and hit him with his fists. When Z then was cornered in the edge of the room, he drew his bolo and struck it on the stomach of X. X tried to wrestle the bolo, but Z struck more blows, and as a consequence X died. Prosecuted for homicide, Z raised self-defense. Is it tenable? a. Yes, self-defense can be appreciated in the given facts because all 3elements are present b. Yes, there is a reasonable necessity of the means employed, which implies material consummerability between the means and attack of the defense c. No. One of the elements of self defense is not met d. No all the elements of self-defense were not met Answer: c. No. The defense of self-defense is not tenable. There is absent in the facts one of the elements of self-defense, which is reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression. The use of the bolo by Z may not be considered as reasonable means to repel Xs attack who used only his fists. People V. Amania (G.R. 97612, March 23, 1993): There should be reasonable necessity in both the action taken as well as the means used, and the latter depends on whether or not the aggressor himself was armed, the nature and quality of the weapon used and the physical condition and size of both the aggressor and the person defending himself. 15. SPO1 Nega saw Billy, an inmate escaping from jail. SPO1 then ordered the latter to surrender. Enraged, Billy attacked SPO1 Nega with a screw driver. Billy missed his first attempt to hit SPO1 Nega and before he could strike again, SPO1 Nega shot him immediately and Billy was killed. Can SPO1 Nega claim self- defense? a. Yes, the unlawful aggression on part of Billy is reasonable method for repelling the attack considering that Billy was armed with a weapon b. Yes the first hit of Billy which he missed is the reason why SPO1 Nega is justified in shooting Billy c. No, unlawful aggression already ceased when SPO1 fired his gun and shotBilly d. NO, the screw driver held by Billy cannot be considered a weapon which can threaten SPO1Nega Answer: A. YES. Self-defense is TENABLE. There was unlawful aggression on the part of Billy when he attacked SPO1 Nega, Shooting Billy is a reasonable method for repelling the unlawful aggression considering that Billy was armed with a screwdriver, which could kill.