2017 Crim 1 Dlsu

DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LAW \

COURSE OUTLINE

IN

CRIMINAL LAW 1

First Semester, AY 2017-2018 Renato M. Pambid COURSE DESCRIPTION This three-unit course is designed to provide law students with insights into the basic concepts, principles and elements of criminal law as provided for in Book I (Articles 1-113) of the Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815), as amended. There will be discussions on the basic concepts of felonies, penalties and criminal/civil liability arising from felonies. COURSE REQUIREMENTS 1. Active Participation in Class Discussions/ Quizzes (30%) 2. Mid-Term Examination (30%) 3. Final Examination (40%) BASIC REFERENCES The Revised Penal Code, Book I (L. B. Reyes) Cases on Criminal Law decided by the Supreme Court

COURSE OUTLINE INTRODUCTION A.

I. A.

Course Guidelines, Overview and Administrative Concerns

GENERAL PRINCIPLES Definitions

OF

CRIMINAL LAW

Page 2 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1 1.

Criminal law

Criminal law is that branch or division of law which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their punishment. It is that branch of public substantive law which defines offenses and prescribes their penalties. It is substantive because it defines the state’s right to inflict punishment and the liability of the offenders. It is public law because it deals with the relation of the individual with the state. 2.

Theories of criminal law

3.

Crime

Crime is an act committed or omitted in violation of a public law forbidding or commanding it.

B.

4.

Sources of Philippine criminal law

a.

The Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815) and amendments thereto – historical development b. Special criminal laws c. Penal provisions in other laws d. Local ordinances

5.

RPC, art. 5, 21

State authority to punish crimes 1.

Sources a. Const. (1987), art. II, sec. 5 b. Const. (1987), art. VI, sec. 1 c. Const. (1987), art. II, sec. 1 d. Cases: (i) People vs. Santiago, 43 Phil. 120 (1922) (ii) United States vs. Pablo, 35 Phil. 94 (1916)

2.

Limitations a. b. c. d.

Const. (1987), art. III, secs. 1, 14, 18, 19, 20, 22 Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, Rule 115 Civil Code, art. 2 Cases: (i) Pesigan vs. Angeles, 129 SCRA 174 (1984)

Page 3 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1 (ii)

Tañada vs. Tuvera, 136 SCRA 27 (1985)

Ex-post facto law Const. (1987), art. III, sec. 22 (iii) In re. Kay Villegas Kami, Inc., 35 SCRA 429 (1970) (iv) People vs. Villaraza, 81 SCRA 95 (1978) (v) U.S. vs. Diaz-Conde, 42 Phil. 766 (1922) Bill of attainder Const. (1987), art. III, sec. 22 (vii) People vs. Ferrer, 48 SCRA 382 (1972) C.

Characteristics of criminal law 1.

General a. b. c.

d. e. f.

2.

Const. (1987), art. VI, sec. 1 Civil Code, art. 14 Agreement Between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines and the Government of the United States of America Regarding the Treatment of United States Armed Forces Visiting the Philippines, 10 February 1998 (Visiting Forces Agreement), art. V, EDCA Republic Act No. 75 Republic Act No. 7055 Cf. Pres. Decree No. 1850; R.A. 6975 Cases: (i) United States vs. Sweet, 1 Phil. 18 (1901) (ii) Raquiza vs. Bradford, 75 Phil. 50 (1945) (iii) Liang vs. People, 323 SCRA 692 (2000) Read also Annotation on “Various Categories of Diplomatic Immunity from Local Jurisdiction” in 323 SCRA 699-715 (2000) (iv) Schneckenburger vs. Moran, 63 Phil. 249 (1936)

Territorial a. b. c. d.

RPC, art. 2 Const. (1987), art. I Visiting Forces Agreement, art. V Cases: (i) United States vs. Bull, 15 Phil. 7 (1910)

Page 4 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1 (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) 3.

People v. Look Chaw, 18 Phil. 573 (1910) United States vs. Ah Sing, 36 Phil. 978 (1917) People v. Lo-lo & Saraw, 43 Phil. 19 (1922) People v. Wong Cheng, 46 Phil. 729 (1922) Miquiabas v. Commanding General, 80 Phil. 262 (1948)

Prospective a.

RPC, arts. 1, 21, 22

A person shall be deemed to be habitual delinquent, if within a period of ten (10) years from the date of his release or last conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. [ Revised Penal Code, art. 62(5), as amended by Rep. Act No. 7659, sec. 23]

D.

b.

Civil Code, art. 4

c.

Cases: (i) Gumabon v. Director of Prisons, 37 SCRA 420 (1971) (ii) In Re: Kay Villegas Kami, Inc., supra (iii) People v. Narvaez, 121 SCRA 389, (1983) (iv) People v. Ringor, 320 SCRA 342 (1999) (v) People v. Pimentel, 288 SCRA 542 (1998) (vi) See also People v. Lacson, 382 SCRA 365 (2002), 400 SCRA 267 (2003), and 413 SCRA 20 (2003) for further reference

Construction/Interpretation of Penal Laws 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Strict construction against the State and liberally in favor of the accused Const. (1987), art. III, sec. 14(2) Spanish text of the Revised Penal Code prevails over its English transaction Retroactive application if favorable to the accused RPC, art. 22 Prescribed, but undeserved, penalties, RPC, art. 5, 2nd par. Effects of repeal/amendment of penal law a. Tuates v. Bersamin, G.R. No. 138962, 4 October 2002

Page 5 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1 b. c. II.

CRIMES

AND

Benedicto v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 125359, 4 September 2001 People v. Garcia, 85 Phil. 651 (1950)

FELONIES

A. Crimes in general 1. Elements a. b.

Aristotel Valenzuela vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 160188, June 21, 2007 People of the Philippines vs. Cora Abella Ojeda, G.R. 104238 to 58, June 3, 2004

2. Crimes Mala in se and Mala prohibita a. b. c. d. e. 3.

Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude a.

4.

Lozano v. Martinez, 146 SCRA 323 (1986) Magno v. Court of Appeals, 210 SCRA 475 (1992) Read also Annotation, “A Theory of Crime and Punishment” David Nitafan, 210 SCRA 483 (1992) United States v. Go Chico, 14 Phil. 128 (1909) Joseph Ejercito Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 10, 2001 People vs. Daniel Quijada, G.R. No. 115008-09, July 24, 1996

Edgar Teves vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 180363, April 28, 2009 (Separate concurring opinion of Justice Brion)

Relation of RPC to special laws a. f.

RPC, art. 10 Ladonga v. People, 451 SCRA 673 (2005)

B. Felonies 1. a.

Definition/Elements, RPC, art. 3

Act i.

People v. Gonzales, 183 SCRA 309 (1990)

Page 6 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1 b.

Omission (i) (ii) (iii)

RPC, art. 116, 137, 208, 213(2)(b), 223, 234, 275(1) Pres. Decree Nos. 953, 1153 People v. Sylvestre and Atienza, 56 Phil. 353 (1931)

c.

Punishable by the Revised Penal Code

(i).

Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege A familiar maxim in criminal law is “Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege” which means “There is no crime where there is no law punishing it.” [Potenciano Evangelista v. People, G.R. Nos. 108135-36, 14 August 2000] The maxim Nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege has its roots in history. It is in accordance with both centuries of civil law and common law tradition. Moreover, it is an indispensable corollary to a regime of liberty enshrined in our Constitution. It is of the essence then that while anti-social acts should be penalized, there must be a clear definition of the punishable offense as well as the penalty that may be imposed - a penalty, to repeat, that can be fixed by the legislative body, and the legislative body alone. So constitutionalism mandates, with its stress on jurisdictio rather than guvernaculum. The judiciary as the dispenser of justice through law must be aware of the limitation on its own power. [Concurring Opinion, Justice Fernando, People v. Cabural, G.R. No. 34105, 4 February 1983] (ii)

RPC, art. 3, 5, 1st par., sec. 21

(i) Juanito Rimando vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 176364, September 18, 2009 (ii) Artemio Villareal vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 151258, February 1, 2012 2.

How committed RPC, art. 3, 365 a.

Dolo (i) Elements Melchor Maderazo vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 165065, September 26, 2006 (ii) Presumption of intent United States v. Apostol, 14 Phil. 92 (1909) United States v. Catolico, 18 Phil. 504 (1911)

Page 7 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

(iii) (iv)

(v)

b.

Culpa (i) Elements People v. Carmen, 355 SCRA 267 (2001) Jason Ivler vs. Hon. Maria Rowena Modesto San Pedro, G.R. No. 172716, November 17, 2010 Artemio Villareal vs. People, G.R. No. 151256, February 1, 2012 (supra) (ii)

B.

The people of the Philippines vs. Eutiquia Carmen, G.R. No. 137268, March 26, 2001 Lehner Martires vs. Ricardo Cokieng, G.r. No. 150192, February 17, 2005 General and specific intent People v. Puno, 219 SCRA 85 (1993) People v. Delim, 396 SCRA 386 (2003) Intent and Motive People v. Temblor, 161 SCRA 623 (1988) People v. Hassan, 157 SCRA 261 (1988) People v. Delim, supra Mistake of fact United States v. Ah Chong, 15 Phil. 488 (1910) People v. Oanis, 74 Phil. 257 (1943)

Distinguished from dolo People v. Pugay, 167 SCRA 439 (1988)

Criminal Liability 1.

How incurred a. Wrongful act done be different from what was intended (i) RPC, art. 14(1), 13(3), 48, 49, 14(3) (ii) United States v. Brobst, 14 Phil. 310 (1909) (iii) People v. Mananquil, 132 SCRA 196 (1984) (iv) People v. Iligan, 191 SCRA 643 (1990) (v) People v. Sabalones, 294 SCRA 751 (1998) (vi) People v. Guillen, 85 Phil. 307 (1950) (vii) People v. Albuquerque, 59 Phil. 150 (1933) (viii) Bataclan v. Medina, 102 Phil. 181 (1957) b.

Impossible crimes (i) RPC, art. 4(2), 59 (ii) People v. Balmores, 85 Phil. 493 (1950) (iii) Intod v. Court of Appeals, 215 SCRA 52 (1992)

Page 8 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

2.

Stages of commission a.

Definitions (i) RPC, art. 6 and 7 (ii) United States v. Eduave, 36 Phil. 209 (1917) (iii) People v. Enriquez, 281 SCRA 103 (1997) (iv) People v. Listerio, 335 SCRA 40 (2000)

b.

Specific felonies (i) Rape People v. Erinia, 50 Phil. 998 (1927) People v. Hernandez, 49 Phil. 980 (1925) People v. Orita, 184 SCRA 105 (1990) People v. Campuhan, 329 SCRA 270 (2000) (ii) Theft United States v. Adiao, 38 Phil. 754 (1918) People v. Dino, 45 O.G. 3446 Aristotel Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No. 160188, 21 June 2007 (iii) Robbery People v. Lamahang, 61 Phil. 703 (1935) People v. Salvilla, 184 SCRA 671 (1990) (iv) Murder People v. Borinaga, 55 Phil. 433 (1930) People v. Sy, 94 Phil. 885 (1954) People v. Trinidad, 169 SCRA 51 (1989) People v. Ravelo, 202 SCRA 655 (1991) (v) Homicide People v. Kalalo, 59 Phil. 715 (1934)

c.

Penalties to be imposed in relation to stages of commission RPC, art. 6, 7, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56 and 57

3.

Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony a. RPC, art. 8, 115, 136, 141, 186, 306 b. People v. Peralta, 25 SCRA 759 (1968) c. United States v. Bautista, 6 Phil. 581 (1906)

4.

Multiple offenders a. Recidivism, RPC, art. 14(9) b. Habituality (Reiteracion), RPC, art. 14(10) c. Quasi-Recidivism, RPC, art. 160

Page 9 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1 d. 5.

III.

Habitual Delinquency, RPC, art. 62(5)

Classification of felonies,

RPC, art. 7, 9

CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH AFFECT CRIMINAL LIABILITY A.

B.

Justifying Circumstances RPC, art. 11 1.

Self-defense People v. Boholst-Caballero, 61 SCRA 180 (1974) People v. Alconga, 78 Phil. 366 (1947) United States v. Mack, 8 Phil. 701 (1907) People v. Sumicad, 56 Phil. 643 (1932) People v. Genosa, 419 SCRA 537 (2004) Republic Act No. 9262, sec. 3 & 26

2.

Defense of honor People v. Luague, 62 Phil. 504 (1935) People v. De la Cruz, 61 Phil. 344 (1935) People v. Jaurigue, 76 Phil. 174 (1946)

3.

Defense of property People v. Apolinar, 38 OG 2870 United States v. Bumanglag, 14 Phil. 644 (1909) People v. Narvaez, 121 SCRA 389 (1983)

4.

Defense of relative United States v. Esmedia, 17 Phil. 260 (1910)

5.

Avoidance of a greater evil People v. Norma Hernandez, 55 OG 8465 Ty v. People, 439 SCRA 220 (2004)

6.

Fulfillment of duty People v. Delima, 46 Phil. 738 (1922) People v. Belbes, 334 SCRA 161 (2000)

7.

Lawful order of superior People v. Beronilla, 96 Phil. 566 (1955)

Exempting Circumstances 1.

Insanity

RPC, art. 12

Page 10 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1 People People People People People People People

C.

v. v. v. v. v. v. v.

Bonoan, 64 Phil. 87 (1937) Ambal, 100 SCRA 325 (1980) Puno, 105 SCRA 151 (1981) Dungo, 199 SCRA 860 (1991) Yam-id, 308 SCRA 651 (1999) Valledor, 383 SCRA 653 (2002) Belonio, 429 SCRA 579 (2004)

2.

Somnabulism People v. Taneo, 58 Phil. 255 (1933)

3.

Minority Republic Act No. 9344, as amended RPC, art. 80 Pres. Decree No. 603, as amended Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law (A.M. No. 021-18-SC) People v. Doquena, 68 Phil. 580 (1939) People v. Navarro, 51 OG 4062 Jose v. People, 448 SCRA 116 (2005) People v. Jacinto, G.R. No. 182239, 16 March 2011 People v. Arpon, G.R. No. 183563, 14 December 2011

4.

Accident People v. Bindoy, 56 Phil. 15 (1931) U.S. v. Tanedo, 15 Phil. 196 (1910) Pomoy v. People, 439 SCRA 439 (2004)

5.

Irresistible force/uncontrollable fear United States v. Caballeros, 4 Phil. 350 (1905) United States v. Exaltacion, 3 Phil. 339 (1904)

6.

Insuperable cause U.S. v. Vicentillo, 19 Phil. 118 (1911) People v. Bandian, 63 Phil. 530 (1936)

Mitigating Circumstances,

RPC, art. 13

1.

Lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong People v. Ural, 56 SCRA 138 (1974)

2.

Sufficient provocation People v. Leonor, 305 SCRA 285

3.

Immediate vindication of a grave offense

Page 11 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1 United States v. Ampar, 37 Phil. 201 (1917) People v. Pajares, 210 SCRA 237 (1992)

D.

E.

3.

Passion or obfuscation United States v. Hicks, 14 Phil. 217 (1909) United States v. De la Cruz, 22 Phil. 429 (1912)

4.

Illness People v. Javier, 311 SCRA 576 (1999)

5.

Analogous circumstances Canta v. People, 353 SCRA 250 (2001)

Aggravating Circumstances, 1.

Insult to public authorities People v. Rodil, 109 SCRA 308 (1981)

2.

Dwelling People v. Daniel, 86 SCRA 511 (1978)

3.

Nighttime/Disguise People v. Bermas, 309 SCRA 741 (1999)

4.

Evident premeditation United States v. Manalinde, 14 Phil. 77 (1909)

5.

Treachery People v. Sangalang, 58 SCRA 737 (1974)

6.

Ignominy People v. Torrefiel, 45 OG 803 People v. Alfanta, 320 SCRA 357 (1999)

Alternative Circumstances, 1.

F.

RPC, art. 14

RPC, art. 15

Intoxication People v. Camano, 115 SCRA 688 (1982)

Absolutory Causes and Similar Situations 1.

Instigation and entrapment People v. Lua Chu, 56 Phil. 44 (1931) United States v. Phelps, 16 Phil. 440 (1910)

Page 12 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1 2. IV.

Absolutory causes RPC, art. 6(3), 7, 16, 20, 247, 280, 332, 344

PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE A.

In Grave and Less Grave Felonies,

RPC, art. 16

1.

Principals, RPC, art. 17 a. Principals by direct participation United States v. Diris, 26 Phil. 133 (1918) b. Principals by inducement People v. Ong Chiat Lay, 60 Phil. 788 (1934) United States v. Indanan, 24 Phil. 203 (1913) People v. Kichi Omine, 61 Phil. 609 (1935) c. Principals by indispensable cooperation People v. Montealegre, 161 SCRA 700 (1988) People v. Simbra, 117 SCRA 242 (1982)

2.

Accomplices a. RPC, art. 18 b. People v. Nierra, 96 Phil. 1 (1980) People v. Doble, 114 SCRA 131 (1982) People v. Doctolero, 193 SCRA 632 (1991)

3.

Accessories a. RPC, art. 19 and 20 b. People v. Talingdan, 84 SCRA 19 (1978) Vino v. People, 178 SCRA 626 (1989) c. Pres. Decree Nos. 1612 and 1829

B.

In Light Felonies,

V.

PENALTIES RPC, art. 21-88

A.

General Principles 1.

RPC, art. 16

Constitutional limitations Const., art. III, sec. 1, 2, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, & 22 a. No ex post facto law and bill of attainder b. Due process c. No cruel and inhuman punishment

Page 13 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1 2.

Prospectivity RPC, art. 1, 21, 22, Civil Code, art. 4

B.

Purposes

C.

Penalties that may be imposed RPC, art. 21, 24, 25 1.

Death penalty a. Const., art. III, sec. 19(1) b. Republic Act No. 9346 c. Republic Act No. 7659 d. People v. Echegaray, 267 SCRA 682

D.

Classification

E.

Duration and Effect 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. F.

RPC, art. 25, 26 RPC, art. 27 to 45

Reclusion perpetua v. Life imprisonment Destierro Preventive imprisonment RPC, art. 29 Civil interdiction RPC, art. 34 Bond to keep the peace RPC, art. 35 Subsidiary penalty RPC, art. 39

Application 1.

Rules for the application of penalties on principals, accomplices and accessories RPC, art. 46, 50 to 57

2.

Rules for graduating penalties RPC, art. 61 to 65, 71

3.

Complex crimes and Special complex crimes a. RPC, art. 48 b. Enrile v. Salazar, 186 SCRA 217 c. Napolis v. Court of Appeals, 43 SCRA 301 d. People v. Toling, 62 SCRA 17 e. People v. Salvilla, 184 SCRA 671 f. People v. Valdez, 304 SCRA 611

4.

Continued crime and Continuing crime a. People v. De Leon, 49 Phil 437

Page 14 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

G.

5.

Penalties in special cases RPC, art. 48, 49, 58, 59, 60, 67, 68, 69

6.

Three-fold rule RPC, art. 70

7.

Indeterminate Sentence Law a. Act 4103, as amended b. People v. Simon, G.R. No. 930280, 29 July 1994, 234 SCRA 555 (1994) c. Rosa Lim v. People, G.R. No. 130038, 18 September 2000 d. People v. Gabres, 267 SCRA 581, 595-596 (1997) e. People v. Lampaza, 319 SCRA 112 (1999) f. People v. Oyanib, G.R. No. 130634-35, 12 March 2001 g. People v. Ducosin, 59 Phil. 109 (1933) h. People v. Formigones, 87 Phil. 658 (1950)

Execution and Service 1.

Probation a. Pres. Decree No. 968, as amended b. Francisco v. Court of Appeals, 243 SCRA 384 (1995) c. Yusi v. Morales, 121 SCRA 854 (1983) d. Cal v. Court of Appeals, 251 SCRA 523 (1995) e. Llamado v. Court of Appeals, 174 SCRA 566 (1989) f. Baclayon v. Mutia, 129 SCRA 148, 154 (1984) g. Bala v. Martinez, 181 SCRA 459 (1990) h. Salgado v. Court of Appeals, 189 SCRA 304 (1990)

2.

Children in conflict with the law

VI.

EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY RPC, art. 89-99

A.

Total Extinction RPC, art. 89 1.

Death of the convict a. People v. Bayotas, 236 SCRA 239 (1994) b. People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 190610, 25 April 2012

Page 15 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

B.

2.

Service of the sentence

3.

Amnesty Const., art. VII, sec. 19 People v. Patriarca, G.R. No. 135547, 29 September 2000 People v. Casido, G.R. No. 116512, 7 March 1997 Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, 82 Phil. 642 (1949)

4.

Absolute pardon Const., art. VII, sec. 19 Flora v. Oximana, G.R. No. 19745, 31 January 1964 Barrioquinto v. Fernandez, supra Pelobello v. Palatino, G.R. No. 48100, 20 June 1941 RPC, art. 23, 344

5.

Prescription of the crime RPC, art. 90 and 91 Act No. 3326

6.

Prescription of the penalty RPC, art. 92 and 93

7.

Marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article 344 of the RPC

Partial Extinction RPC, art. 94 1.

Conditional pardon RPC, art. 95 In re. Antonio Infante, G.R. No. 4164, 12 December 1952

2.

Commutation of the sentence RPC, art. 96

3.

Good conduct allowances RPC, art. 97, 98 and 99

VII.

CIVIL LIABILITY RPC, art. 100-113 Chua v. Court of Appeals, 443 SCRA 142 (2004)

A.

Persons civilly liable

Page 16 of 16CRIMINAL LAW 1

1. 2. 3. 4. B.

What civil liability includes 1.

C.

Carpio v. Doroja, 180 SCRA 1(1989) Basilio v. Court of Appeals, 328 SCRA 341 (2000) Philippine Rabbit v. Court of Appeals, 427 SCRA 526 (2004) Quinto v. Andres, 453 SCRA 511 (2005)

Heirs of Raymundo Castro v. Bustos, 27 SCRA 327 (1969)

Extinction of civil liability 1.

People v. Bayotas, 236 SCRA 239 (1994)