76785893 Crim Law Preweek

 C R I M I N A L L A W

- 1 -

U P C O L L E G E O F L A W P R E - W E E K N O T E S 

 C R I M I N A L L A W P R E - W E E K N O T E S  Q: What is Criminal Law? A: Criminal law is that branch of public substantive law which defines crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for their punishment. It is prospective in application. Q: What are the different schools of thought or theories in Criminal Law and describe each briefly. To what theory does our Revised Penal Code belong? A: Two schools of thought in Criminal Law (a) CLASSICAL THEORY - which simply means that the basis of criminal liabilities is is human free will, and the purpose of the penalty is retribution which must be proportional to the gravity of the offense; (b) POSITIVIST THEORY - which considers man as a social being and his acts acts are attributable not just to his will but to other forces of society. As such, punishment is not the solution, as he is not entirely to be blamed; law and jurisprudence should not be the yardstick in the imposition of sanction, instead the underlying reasons would be inquired into. We follow the classical school of thought although some provisions of eminently positivist in tendencies, like punishment of impossible crime, Juvenile circumstances, are incorporated in our Code. Q: Differentiate between Mala in se and Mala Prohibita: Prohibita : MALA IN SE Nature wrong from its very nature Use of good faith as defense GF a valid defense, unless the crime crime is the result of culpa Intent as element Intent is an element. Degree of accomplishment Degree of accomplishment is taken into of crime account for the punishment. Mitigating / aggravating They are taken into account in imposing circumstances penalty Degree of participation When there is more than one offender, the degree of participation of each in the commission is taken into account. Stage of accomplishment Penalty is computed on the basis of whether he is a principal offender or merely an accomplice or accessory Laws violated Generally, the RPC.

MALA PROHIBITA Wrong because it is prohibited by law GF is not a defense. Intent is immaterial. The act gives rise to a crime only when consummated. They are not taken into account. Degree of participation is generally not taken into account. All who participated in the act are punished to the same extent. Penalty on offenders is same whether they acted as mere accomplices or accessories Generally, special laws.

Q: What is the rule on the generality of criminal law? A: GENERAL RULE: The penal law of the country is binding on all persons who live or sojourn in Philippine  territory  EXCEPTIONS: 1. Treaty stipulations (Ex. Bases Agreement and VFA) 2. Law of preferential application (Ex. Members of Congress, Ambassadors, chief of states, etc.) 3. Principles of Public International Law (Ex. (Ex. Sovereigns and head head of statees, Ambassadors, etc.) Q: What is the rule on the territoriality of criminal law? A: GENERAL RULE: Penal laws of the country have force and effect only within its territory. EXCEPTION: Extraterritorial crimes (punishable even if committed outside the Philippine territory) 1. Crimes committed aboard Philippine Ship English rule: (followed by Philippines) : the location or situs of the crime  determines jurisdiction UNLESS the crime merely relates to internal management of the vessel. French rule: It is the flag or nationality of the vessel  which determines jurisdiction UNLESS the crime violates the peace and order of the host country EXCEPTION TO EXCEPTION: if the vessel is on the high seas when seas when the crime was committed, the laws of the nationality of the ship will always  will  always apply  apply  2. Forging/Counterfeiting and and Introducing Coins or Currency Currency notes in the Philippines 3. When Public Officer or employees commit an offense in the exercise of their functions 4. Commit any of the crimes against against national security and laws of nations Q: What is the rule on the prospectivity of criminal law? A: GENERAL RULE: Acts or omissions will only be subject to a penal law if they are committed AFTER a penal law had already taken effect. Vice versa, acts or omissions which have been committed before the effectivity of a penal law could not be penalized by such penal law. EXCEPTIONS: 1. Insofar as they favor the persons guilty of guilty of a felony, who is not a not a habitual criminal, EXCEPTION TO THE EXCEPTION:

 C R I M I N A L L A W

1. 2.

- 2 -

U P C O L L E G E O F L A W P R E - W E E K N O T E S 

the new law is expressly made inapplicable to pending actions or existing cause of actions; or actions;  or offender is a habitual criminal habitual criminal

Q: What are the Constitutional Limi tations on the Power of Congress to enact penal laws? A: 1. Equal protection 2. Due Process 3. Non-imposition of cruel and and unusual unusual punishment or excessive excessive fines 4. Bill of attainder 5. Ex post facto law Q: Distinguish between felonies, offense, misdemeanor and crime. A: Felony - refers only to violations of the Revised Penal Code . When the crime is punishable under a special law you do not refer to this as a felony. Offense - a crime punished under a special law is law  is called a statutory offense. Misdemeanor - a minor infraction of the law , such as a violation of an ordinance. Crime - whether the wrongdoing is punished under the RPC OR under a special law, the generic word “crime” can be used. •

• • •

Q: What are the Classifications of Felonies? A: 1) According to manner of Commission a. Intentional felonies or those committed with deliberate intent; and b. Culpable felonies or those resulting from negligence, reckless imprudence, lack of foresight or lack of skill. 2) According to stage of execution a. Attempted b. Frustrated c. Consummated 3) According to gravity a. Grave Felonies – those which the law attaches capital punishment or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive b. Less Grave Felonies - those to which the law punishes with penalties which in their maximum period is correctional c. Light felonies - those infractions of law for the commission of which the penalty is arresto menor, or a fine not exceeding P200, or both. 4) As to count a. Compound crime b. Complex crime c. Composite crime 5) As to nature a. Mala in se b. Mala prohibita Q: What are the elements of criminal liability A: 1. There must be an act or omission  2. That the act or omission must be punishable by the RPC;  3. That the act is performed or the omission incurred by means of dolo or culpa. Q: Can there be liability for acts done without criminal intent? A: YES, there are two exceptions to the requirement of criminal intent. 1. Felonies committed by CULPA 2. Offenses MALA PROHIBITA Q: Is criminal intent presumed? A: GENERAL RULE: YES, presumption arises from the commission of the unlawful act. The general criminal intent is presumed from the criminal act and in the absence of any general intent is relied upon as a defense, such absence must be proved by the accused. (Recuerdo (Recuerdo v People , 2006) EXCEPTION: If the intention is merely an integral element of the crime and therefore has to be proven e.g. in frustrated homicide, specific intent to kill is not presumed but must be proven, otherwise it is merely physical injuries. Q: Distinguish between intent, discernment and motive. INTENT - Determination to do a certain thing, an aim or purpose of the mind. DISCERNMENT - The mental capacity to tell right from wrong MOTIVE - It is the moving power which impels one to do an act (ex. vengeance). • • •

 C R I M I N A L L A W

- 3 -

U P C O L L E G E O F L A W P R E - W E E K N O T E S 

Q: When does motive become material in determining criminal liability? 1. When the act brings about variant crimes e.g. kidnapping v. robbery (People v Puno, 1993) 2. The identity of the accused is doubtful 3. The evidence on the commission of the crime is purely circumstantial. 4. Lack of motive can aid in showing the innocence of the accused. (People v Hassan, 1998) Q: When is discernment necessary? A: Discernment does not indicate the presence of intent, merely intelligence (People v Cordova, 1993). Thus, it is necessary whether the crime is dolo or culpa. Q: What is the effect of “mistake of fact”? A: A mistake of fact destroys the presumption of criminal intent which arises upon the commission of a felonious act. Q: When is mistake of fact not available as a defense? A: When the accused’s action is attended with negligence (People v Oanis , 1988). Q: A special law punishes a certain act as a crime, but it is silent as to the civil liability of one who violates the same. May the court pronounce that a person is civilly liable to the offended party, considering that the special law is silent on this point? A: Yes. Article 100 states that every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. That article shall be applied suppletorily to avoid an injustice that would be caused to the private offended party, if he would not be indemnified for the damages or injuries sustained by him. Q: Can a special law absorb a crime punishable under the RPC? A: In People v Rodriguez  (1960), the Court held that a violation of a special law can NEVER absorb a crime punishable under the RPC, because violations of the RPC are more serious than a violation of a special law. But a crime in the RPC can absorb a crime punishable by a special law if it is a necessary ingredient of the crime in the  Code. Q: How is proximate cause and how does i t relate to criminal liability? A: PROXIMATE CAUSE is that cause, which sets into motion other causes and which unbroken by any efficient supervening cause , produces a felony and without which such felony could not have resulted. GENERAL RULE: The offender is CRIMINALLY LIABLE for ALL the consequences of his felonious act; although not intended, if the felonious act is the proximate cause of the felony or resulting fe lony. Q: What are the punishable omissions in the RPC? Art 116: Misprision of treason Art 275: Abandonment of minors Art 276: Abandonment of helpless persons Art 208: Failure to prosecute, dereliction of duty • • • •

Q: What is an impossible crime? A: Under par. 2, Art. 4, impossible crime is an act which would be an offense only against person or property  were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means . Q: Differentiate between crimes in the attempted and frustrated stages. A: ATTEMPTED FRUSTRATED Acts performed Overt acts of execution are started  All acts of execution are finished  BUT Not all acts of execution are present BUT Crime sought to be committed is not achieved • •

Reason for interruption Position in the timeline

Due to reasons other than the spontaneous desistance of the perpetrator Offender still in subjective phase because he still has control of his acts

Due to intervening causes independent of the will of the perpetrator Offender is already in the objective phase  because all acts of execution are already present and the cause of its nonaccomplishment is other than the offender’s will

Q: What is the effect of the accused’ voluntary desistance? A: It is an absolutory cause which negates criminal liability because the law encourages a person to desist from committing a crime. BUT not necessarily ALL criminal liability, if the desistance was made when acts done by him already resulted to a felony, offender will still be criminally liable for the felony brought about his act. What is negated is only the attempted stage, but there may be other felonies constituting his act. Desistance is true only in the attempted stage of the felony. Q: Elements of the frustrated stage.

 C R I M I N A L L A W

- 4 -

U P C O L L E G E O F L A W P R E - W E E K N O T E S 

A: a. b. c. d.

The offender performs all the acts of execution; All the acts performed would produce the felony as a consequence; But the felony is not produced ; By reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator .

Q: Elements of attempted stage A: a. The offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt acts; b. He does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony; c. The non-performance of all acts of execution was due to cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. Q: When does conspiracy exist? A: Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. Q: What is meant by proposal to commit a felony? A: When the person who has decided to commit a felony proposes its execution to some other person or persons. However, there is no criminal proposal when: 1. The person who proposes is not determined to commit the felony; 2. There is no decided, concrete and formal proposal; 3. It is not the execution of a felony that is proposed. Q: How is conspiracy established? A: Since conspiracy is predominantly a state of mind, it must be established by direct proof (People v. Bello, 2004). The prosecution must prove conspiracy by the same quantum of evidence as the felony charged itself although, proof of previous agreement among the malefactors to commit the crime is not essential to prove conspiracy (People v. Bulan, 2005). A conviction premised on a finding of conspiracy must be founded on facts, not on mere inferences and presumption (Li v People, 2001). However, it may be proved by circumstantial evidence, through the collective acts of the accused before, during  and after the commission of a fe lony that all the accused aimed at the same object, one performing one part and the other performing another for the attainment of the same objective (People v Talaogan, 2008). Q: What are the legal effects of implied conspiracy? A: In People v Pangilinan , 2003: Not all those present at the crime scene will be considered conspirators; Only those who participated in the criminal acts during the commission of the crime will be considered coconspirators Mere acquiescence to or approval of the commission of the crime, without any act of criminal participation, shall not render one criminally liable as co-conspirator. • •

•

Q: Is mere knowledge, acquiescence to, or approval of the act, without cooperation at least, agreement to cooperate enough to constitute a conspiracy? A: No, there must be an intentional participation in the crime with a view to further the common felonious objective (Taer v. CA, 1990 ). Q: Is conspiracy possible even when participants are not known to each other? A: When several persons who do not know each other simultaneously attack the victim, the act of one is the act of all, regardless of the degree of injury inflicted by any one of them. All will be liable for the consequences. Do not think that participants are always known to each other. Q: Multiple Offenders A: Habitual Delinquency Art. 62 (5) Crimes committed

Period of time the crimes are committed

Specified: (a) less serious or serious physical injuries (b) robbery (c) theft (d) estafa (e) falsification Within 10 years from his last release or conviction

Recidivism Art. 14 (9) Sufficient that the offender have been previously convicted by final judgment for another crime embraced in the same title of the Code on the date of his trial

No period of time

Habituality/ Reiteracion/ Repetition Art. 14 (10) Necessary that the offender shall have served out his sentence for the first offense

 C R I M I N A L L A W

- 5 -

U P C O L L E G E O F L A W P R E - W E E K N O T E S 

Number of crimes committed

Guilty the third time or oftener

The second conviction for an offense embraced in the same title of this Code

Their effects

An additional penalty shall be imposed

If not offset by any mitigating circumstance, increase the penalty only to the maximum

The previous and subsequent offenses must NOT be embraced in the same title of the Code Not always an aggravating circumstance

Q: What is meant by plurality of crimes? A: It is the successive execution, by the same individual, of different criminal acts upon any of which no conviction has yet been declared.

Q: What is the difference between plurality of crimes and recidivism? A: PLURALITY OF CRIMES RECIDIVISM There is no conviction of any of the crimes There must be conviction by final judgment of the first or prior committed. offense. Q: What is a complex crime? A: Under Art. 48, it exist when at least 2 or more GRAVE or LESS GRAVE felonies are committed, as a result of a SINGLE ACT or an offense must be a NECESSARY MEANS for committing the other. Q: What are the two kinds of complex crimes and what are their requisites? A: a) Compound Crime - A single act results in two or more grave or less grave felonies REQUISITES: (1) That only a single act is performed by the offender (2) That the single acts produces (i) 2 or more grave felonies, or (ii) 1 or more grave and 1 or more less grave felonies, or (iii) 2 or more less grave felonies b)

Complex Crime Proper - An offense is a necessary means for committing the other; BASIS is the “singleness of the impulse”; necessary ≠ indispensable REQUISITES: (1) That at least two offenses are committed (2) That one or some of the offenses must be necessary to commit the other  (3) That both or all the offenses must be punished under the same statute. Q: What is the penalty to be applied in case of complex crimes? A: The penalty for complex crime is the penalty for the most serious crime , the same to be applied in its maximum period. Q: What is a special complex crime? A: The substance is made up of more than one crime but which in the eyes of the law is only a single indivisible offense. All those acts done in pursuance of the crime agreed upon are acts which constitute a single crime. Q: What are the special complex crimes? A: Robbery with Homicide (Art. 294 (1)) Robbery with Rape (Art. 294 (2)) Kidnapping with serious physical injuries (Art. 267 (3)) Rape with Homicide (Art. 335) • • • •

Q: What are the five circumstances affecting criminal liability and how do they affect it? A:

Is there a crime? Criminal liability?

Civil liability?

Justifying none, act is not unlawful none; limited free will, voluntariness in mens rea none, except when in state of necessity (Art.

Exempting yes

Mitigating yes

Aggravating yes

Alternative yes

none, no knowledge nor malicious intent in mens rea yes, except when by accident or insuperable

decreased

increased

increased or decreased

yes

yes

 C R I M I N A L L A W

- 6 -

11, Par. 4 borne by the persons benefited by the act)

U P C O L L E G E O F L A W P R E - W E E K N O T E S 

cause

Q: What are the six types of justifying circumstances and what are the elements of each? A: A. Defense of self (Par. 1, Art. 11) 1) unlawful aggression 2) reasonable necessity of the means employed 3) lack of sufficient provocation B. Defense of relatives (Par. 2, Art. 11) 1) spouse 2) ascendants 3) descendants 4) legitimate and blood brothers and sisters 5) relatives by affinity in the same degree (parents-, brothers-, sisters-in-law) 6) relatives by consanguinity within the fourth degree C. Defense of stranger (Par. 3, Art. 11) 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. D. Avoidance of greater evil or injury (Par. 4, Art. 11) 1) evil actually exists, aggression is not deliberate 2) injury feared is greater than what is done to avoid it 3) no other practical and less harmful means of prevention D. Fulfillment of duty (Par. 5, Art. 11) 1) while in performance of duty of a lawful exercise of a right to office 2) injury or offense was a necessary consequence of due performance or exercise NB: If first condition is present, but the second is NOT because the offender acted with culpa, the offender will be entitled to a privileged mitigating circumstance. the penalty would be reduced by one or two degrees. • •

E. Obedience to lawful order (Par. 6, Art. 11) 1) order was issued by superior 2) order is for a lawful purpose 3) means used by the subordinate is lawful NB: A subordinate is NOT liable for carrying out an illegal order of his superior if he is not aware of the illegality of the order and he is not negligent. • •

Q: Distinguish between justifying and exempting circumstances. A: JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE It affects the act, not the actor. It affects the actor, not the act. The act is considered to have been done within the The act complained of is actually wrongful, but the actor bounds of law; hence, legitimate and lawful in the eyes of is not liable. the law. Since the act is considered lawful, there is no crime. Since the act complained of is actually wrong, there is a crime but since the actor acted without voluntariness, there is no dolo or culpa. There is no criminal or civil liability. There is a crime, although there is no criminal, so there is civil liability (Except: Art. 12, par. 4 and 7 where there is no civil liability. Q: What are the six exempting circumstances and their requisites? A: A. Insanity or Imbecility (Par. 1, Art. 12) 1) offender is an imbecile; or 2) offender was insane at the time of the commission of the crime NB:

 C R I M I N A L L A W

- 7 -

U P C O L L E G E O F L A W P R E - W E E K N O T E S 

Insanity is a defense in the nature of confession and avoidance AND must be proved beyond reasonable doubt Evidence of insanity must refer to  the time preceding the act under prosecution OR  at the very moment of its execution. Insanity subsequent to commission of crime is NOT exempting. B. Minority (Par. 2 and 3, Art. 12; repealed by Sec. 6, RA 9344) 1)