GOOD MORNING

CRIMINAL LAW BOOK I

CRIMINAL LAW
ONE

DEFINITIONS
Crime: A transgression done in violation of
a rule of conduct which specifically requires
its performance or non-performance.
Law: Sanchez Roman defines law as a rule
of conduct, just, obligatory, promulgated
by competent authority and of common
observance & benefit.
Criminal Law: Criminal law is a
substantive and public law which defines
crimes, classifies its nature and prescribes
a penalty therefore.

No Common Law Crimes in the

Philippines
Common law crimes are bodies of legal
rules and principles which are not based on
statute but on usages and traditions.
There are no common law crimes in the
Philippines. No act shall constitute as a
crime unless it is made so by law (U.S. vs.
Taylor, 28 Phil 599).
nullum crimen, nulla poena, sine lege
Art 5 RPC: if there is no law punishing the
act or omission, the court must dismiss the
case no matter how wicked the act may
seem.
PEOPLE vs. AVECILLA (GR No. 117033,

THEORIES IN CRIMINAL LAW

Classical or Juristic Theory Existence of
the offenders free will, or a persons
freedom to do an act. Under this theory, the
penalty for ones criminal act is imposed by
way of social retribution.
Positivist School of Thought Crime is a
natural social phenomenon to which the
actor was exposed; cannot be treated by
the blanket application of abstract legal
principles; man is a social being and his acts
are not only attributable to his own free will
but to other forces of society
Under this theory, the penalty has a corrective
purpose and is imposed by way of prevention
or deterrence

CHARACTERISTICS OF CRIM
LAW
Generality
Territoriality
Prospectivity

GENERALITY: General Application of

Criminal Laws:
Art 14, Civil Code
On all: military and PNP: Sec 46, RA 6975
(PNP); Sec 1, RA 7055 (AFP and Cafgu, Articles
of War Waiver by President)

EXCEPTIONS TO GENERALITY
Laws of preferential application RA 75,
subject to reciprocity and Parliamentary
Immunities
Generally accepted principles of public
international law Diplomatic Convention and
Doctrine of Sovereign Immunity
Treaty Stipulations Lance Corporal Smith

General Rule: TERRITORIALITY

(Art 2)
EXCEPTIONS:
Art 1 Constitution and the Archipelagic
theory
Baselines connect outermost points
from low watermark
UNCLOS, Art 3 12 NA mile territorial sea
UNCLOS, Art 33 contiguo zone
Exclusive Economic Zone 200 nautical
mile

12 mile limit
Baselines of Internal
waters

12 mile cont.
zone

EXCEPTIONS TO
TERRITORIALITY
1. Philippine ship or airship place of registry

French and English Rules foreign merchant ships

RA 6235

2. 2000 BAR, No. 1

3. Offenses related to forgery and counterfeiting
Philippine coins or currency and in the importation,
uttering and distribution in the Philippines
4. Offenses committed by public officers or
employees while performing their functions
5. Offenses against national security and the law of
nations

People vs. Lol-lo and Sarao

2008 Bar
High seas

PRINCIPLE OF
PROSPECTIVITY
Ex post facto laws
Art 22, penal laws favorable to the
accused
PEOPLE vs. AVECILLA (GR No.
117033, Feb. 15, 2001)

FELONIES: Acts or omissions

punishable by the RPC (Art 3)
THREE KINDS OF CRIMES:
felonies: dolo or culpa
offenses: special laws (General Rule:
Penalties)
infraction or misdemeanors:
violations of municipal ordinances

Two Modes of Committing

Felonies (Art 3)
Dolo or Malice: with deliberate
intent.
Culpa or Fault: imprudence,
negligence, lack of foresight or lack
of skill.

ELEMENTS OF FELONIES
There is an act or omission
Act or omission is punishable by the
RPC (PEOPLE vs. SILVESTRE &
ATIENZA and PEOPLE vs. FRANCIS
ABARCA, 153 SCRA 735)
Act or omission is incurred by dolo or
culpa all done with freedom

FELONIES BY DOLO
REQUISITES OF DOLO OR MALICE:
Freedom
Intelligence People vs. Taneo, lack of
intelligence and intent
Intent

No criminal intent, no crime, justified, No

civil liabilities, except in Art 11, par. 4
when a person commits an act to avoid a
greater evil or injury (see Art 432 of the
Civil Code)
No freedom or intelligence exempting,
civilly liable

MISTAKE OF FACT
Act should have been lawful and
actor is not negligent
US vs. AH CHONG
People vs. Oanis

FELONIES BY CULPA
Freely and intelligently but with
negligence
People vs. Guillen

OFFENSES UNDER SPECIAL

LAWS
Dolo or criminal intent or mens rea not
required
Good faith is not a defense
But there must be intent to perpetuate the
prohibited act
People vs. Asa and Balbastro firearms/civilian
guards
People vs. Landicho firearm for turn-over to
Mayor
People vs. Lucero confidential agent

MALA IN SE vs. MALA

PROHIBITA
Intent and good faith
Inherently immoral vs. wrongful by
statutory policy
RPC vs. SPL Estrada vs.
Sandiganbayan, G.R. 148560,
November 19, 2001 and Illegal
Exactions under the RPC

MOTIVE
Motive is the moving power which
impels one to action while intent is
the purpose to use a particular
means
Latter is not essential except:
Questions as to identity
Conflicting versions

People vs. Taneo, somnambulism

CRIMINAL LIABILITY (Art 4)

Any person committing a felony
although the wrongful act is different
from what is intended
Impossible crimes

REQUIREMENT UNDER PAR.

1
Intentional felony
wrong done is direct, natural and
logical consequence of the felony
committed
el que es causa de la cause el que es
causa del mal causado
PEOPLE vs. FRANCIS ABARCA, supra
(resulting crime is different from what is
intended)

ERROR IN PERSONAE (PP v.

Oanis)

Actual victim mistaken as

intended victim

ABERRATIO ICTUS (PP v.

MABUG-AT)
Intended victim

Actual victim

PRAETER INTENTIONEM
(People vs. Cagoco)

Intended victim same as actual victi

But a more serious crime is produce

IMPOSSIBLE CRIMES
2000 Bar, impossible crime is not a
crime but with a penalty; person
punished for his criminal tendencies
Intod vs. CA, 215 SCRA 52

MANNER OF COMMITTING
CRIMES
1. FORMAL CRIMES (offenses under
special laws, Pecho vs. SB)
2. CRIMES BY OMISSION (no attempted
stage)
3. MATERIAL CRIMES (3 stages of
execution)

STAGES OF EXECUTION
1. ATTEMPTED
2. FRUSTRATED STAGES
3. CONSUMMATED STAGES

SUBJECTIVE PHASE
PHASE WHEREIN THE ACTOR
CONCEIVES THE IDEA OF COMMITTING A
CRIME
Internal Acts not penalized
Preparatory Acts to a particular crime
not penalized for as long as they, in
themselves, do not constitute an offense
ACTOR HAS CONTROL OVER HIS ACTIONS
SPONTANEOUS DESISTANCE no liability
provided no other crime is committed

OBJECTIVE STAGE
State wherein the offender
performed all the acts of execution
needed for the crime
No more control
Crime is either frustrated or
consummated

CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS

MORTALITY OF WOUND: Borinaga and
Kalalo rulings
When the wound inflicted is not fatal,
homicide or murder is only
attempted (Velasco vs. People, GR
166479, February 28, 2006, 433
SCRA 649 and People vs. Dela Cruz,
GR 154348, June 8, 2004, 431 SCRA
388)

RAPE
ORITA ruling
People vs. Efren Valez (GR 136738, March
12, 2001) child, inch penetration
People vs. Campuhan (GR 129433, March
30, 2000) epidermal contact
PEOPLE vs. MONTERON (G.R. No. 130709,
March 6, 2002) adult/ on top of female orgn
PEOPLE vs. MARIO (G. R. No. 132550,
February 19, 2001) cannot recall (woke
up/wet-sticky substance)
PEOPLE vs. COLLADO (G.R. Nos. 13566770[1], March 1, 2001) no intent to penetrate

THEFT AND ROBBERY

1. VALENZUELA VS. PEOPLE (GR No.
160188, June 21, 2007) Theft is a formal
crime. It can only be attempted or
consummated and there can be no
frustrated stage in the crime of theft.
Unlawful taking complete when offender
gains possession, even if no opportunity
to dispose
2. PP v. LEOPOLDO SALVILLA (184 SCRA
671) control and dominion even if no
asportation or no opportunity to dispose

CONSPIRACY & PROPOSAL

When proposal is accepted, there is conspiracy
Act of one is the act of all
PEOPLE vs. ROEL PUNZALAN, ET. AL. (GR 78853;
November 9, 1991) A co-conspirator is liable for such
other crimes which could be foreseen and which are
the natural and logical consequences of the conspiracy

PEOPLE vs. RICARDO LASCUNA, ET. AL. (GR

90626; August 18, 1993) time of commission;
liable for graver offense unless he performed
overt acts to prevent the graver offense
PEOPLE vs. DE LA CERNA, ET. AL. (GR L-20911,
October 30, 1967) If the conspirators select a
particular individual or group of individuals to be
their victim and another person was killed by
some, only those who actually participated in
the killing are liable

TWO FACETS OF
CONSPIRACY
1. CONSPIRACY AS A MODE OF
INCURRING CRIMINAL LIABILITY
(needs an overt act)
2. CONSPIRACY AS A CRIME
Crimes against National Security
Anti-Terrorism Law conspiracy to
commit murder, etc

ART 10
GEN RULE: RPC principles not applicable
to offenses under special laws:
Penalties
Stages of execution
Degrees of participation
graduation

Exception: Suppletory application when

applicable
MARTIN SIMON RULING