CRIM2 Amurao Notes - For Distribution

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 114 - TREASON • Who may commit treason? FILIPINO CITIZEN • Where may he commit treason? ANYWHERE • Are those who commit treason abroad criminally liable? YES • Why is it that a Filipino citizen may commit treason even if abroad? - Definition of treason; concept of allegiance • What allegiance is owed by a non-resident alien? • Why are penal laws territorial? • What is the territoriality principle? • Does this violate the principle of territoriality? NO. See Par. 5, Art. 2 of the RPC (crimes committed against national security and the law of the nations; treason is a crime against a national security, therefore it falls within the exceptions) • Where may an alien commit treason? Only in the Philippines; he owes temporary allegiance to the govt. of the Phil. in return for protection he receives • What if he was once a Japanese and then he becomes a naturalized citizen, may he still be liable for treason? YES. There is no distinction made in Art. 114  Supposing during time of war, a Chinese businessman, who has been residing in the Philippines for ten years, decides to visit China. While there, he commits treasonous acts against the Philippines. Is he liable for treason? Supposing during time of war, a Chinese tourist visits the Philippines for three days. On his third day of stay, he commits treasonous acts against the Philippines. Is he liable for treason? • How is treason committed? (1) By levying war against the government • Should there be an actual military encounter with the govt. forces? Not necessarily • Can this be committed by just one person? NO; use of the word MEN in element #1 • Is it necessary that this assembly of men be armed? NO. There is no qualification in the law  Supposing the Phil. Govt. was at war with Japan. We were all unarmed and we were discussing ways and means of effectively delivering the govt. into the hands of foreign power. Liable for treason? YES. Complied with elements of levying war PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

1

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(2) By adhering to the enemies and giving them aid • During the Japanese occupation, certain Filipinos were moving around, convincing the people that the principles of the govt. of Japan are better than that followed by the Phil. Treasonous? NO. there is only adherence in this case (adhering to the enemies and giving aid or comfort must concur)  Suppose that during the Japanese occupation, you were a merchant engaged in the selling of weapons and you were having transactions with the Japanese. Treasonous? YES. Adherence to the enemy may be implied by the nature of the act committed.  Suppose you were engaged in a transportation business; Japanese hired your buses to transport their troops to another province. Liable? YES. It will directly strengthen the enemy’s troops  Suppose you were a rice merchant supplying Japanese with rice. Liable? NO. Does not strengthen enemy; no adherence on your part  Supposing, during time of war, a young Filipina falls in love with a Japanese soldier. Is she liable for treason? What if she supplies names of guerrilla leaders to him?  Supposing a professor, during time of war, lectures about the advantages of having a government similar to the Japanese. Is he liable for treason?  Supposing a class, discuss and volunteer to do different means to help the Japanese (i.e. distribution of weapons, etc.) Are the members liable for treason? • Conviction of Treason (1) Confession of Guilt – plea of guilty Prosecution need not present evidence but may present it only to show the presence of AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE/S (2) Testimony of Two Witnessses with the same overt act • WHY? Because it carries with it penalty of death and it is committed in abnormal circumstance • Testimony of two witnesses to two different acts is not enough for conviction; testimony of two witnesses must be credible and believed by the court • Is it enough that there be two witnesses? –Depends: if testimony points to the same acts, it is enough that there are only two witnesses

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

2

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Is proof beyond reasonable doubt (PBRD) sufficient to convict the accused? NO. There is further requirement of two witnesses who should testify on the same overt act (treason is the only felony in the entire RPC where PBRD is not sufficient) • Extrajudicial confession is not sufficient to convict a person of treason; confession must be made in open court • Prosecution of Treason  Witness #1: saw personally the accused in the company of a Japanese major who went to the house of a guerrilla officer; saw the accused point at the guerrilla, and the latter was tied and dragged. Witness #2: was walking in the farm locate across the brgy. hall; saw the jeep where the guerrilla officer was; saw him being dragged by the Japanese, after which they shot him. Is the 2-witness rule complied with? NO.  Suppose the prosecution presented three witnesses but the court gave credence only to one witness. Acquit or convict? Acquit for non-compliance with the 2-witness rule. • If the common crimes were committed and was in any way connected with the objectives of treason – liability is separate • Accused was charged with treason and 10 acts of kidnapping with ransom: purpose of ransom was to finance their (treasonous) activities. Liability? Treason. ARTICLE 115 - CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT TREASON ARTICLE 116 - MISPRISION OF TREASON • How soon should the disclosure be made? Within a reasonable period which will depend on the judgement of the judge • By any person? NO. refer to element #1 • Does this violate the principle of generality? Yes, it violates BUT this is an express exception by provision of the law  Supposing, accused is prosecuted for MT; alleged in the info that being a Filipino citizen, he owes permanent allegiance and having knowledge of persons who performed acts w/ the view of overthrowing the govt., he should have disclosed the same. Liable? NO. Knowledge was already about treason (in the first manner) and not mere conspiracy  Supposing, accused is resident of a city; has knowledge of conspiracy; refused to disclose the matter to the mayor/fiscal because they are among the most corrupt; disclose the matter directly to the AFP Chief of Staff. Liable for MT? NO. Even if the matter was not disclosed to PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

3

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------the person/s specified in the law, there was no intent on the part of the accused not to disclose the info.  Supposing a witness sees a group of men, all unarmed, discussing means to commit treasonous acts against the government. He does not disclose what he sees to anyone. Liable? ARTICLE 117 - ESPIONAGE • Where may espionage in the first manner be committed (RPC)?  Suppose that the US donated armaments, etc. to the Phil. Govt. to be used for its war against Malaysia; arms were stored in a warehouse in Nueva Ecija; newspaper reporter without authority went inside the warehouse to take photos of the arms; was still 50 meters away from the warehouse when he was accosted. Liable? YES. Elements of first manner of committing the crime were present  Supposing, a newspaper man who was accosted told the military officers that he wanted to take the photos of the modern warfare that he read in Remate (tabloid). Liable? NO because what he intends to obtain is not anymore confidential; the matter has ceased to be confidential because of its previous publication  Supposing, you climbed a tree to photograph confidential information. May you be held liable for espionage under the RPC? No. But you may be liable for violation of CA 616.  May espionage be committed in the National Library? In the Benedictine Abbey?  Supposing you paid the janitor to obtain confidential information for you. Are you liable for espionage under the RPC? How about the janitor? • May espionage in the second manner be committed by a private person (RPC)? No.  Supposing a high ranking military officer discloses confidential matters to a beauty contestant from another nation. Is he liable for espionage? Yes. The law does not distinguish foreign representative. ARTICLE 118 - INCITING TO WAR OR GIVING MOTIVE FOR REPRISALS  Supposing protesters burn the US flag in front of the US embassy, are they liable? Does the act have a tendency to provoke war against US? • Does the raising of troops constitute inciting to war? ARTICLE 119 - VIOLATION OF NEUTRALITY ARTICLE 120 - CORRESPONDENCE WITH HOSTILE COUNTRY PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

4

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing Malaysia is at war with the Philippines. If a Filipina writes a love letter to a Malaysian sweetheart, is she liable for violation of Article 120? Without prohibition by the government? With prohibition by the government? What if the letter contains the drawing of a heart only? ARTICLE 121 - FLIGHT TO ENEMY’S COUNTRY • May this be committed by mere attempt to flee? YES ARTICLE 122 - PIRACY IN GENERAL AND MUTINY ON THE HIGH SEAS OR IN PHILIPPINE WATERS • In what way is piracy under the RPC different from piracy under P.D. 532? Piracy under the RPC if committed by a stranger; Piracy under PD 532 if committed by passenger or member of the crew • Which piracy falls under the law of the nations? • What constitutes high seas? Philippine waters?  May piracy be committed in the Pasig River? Waters under the Mendiola Bridge? Lake in Burnham Park? Floating restaurant?  Supposing you boarded a motor boat and a passenger ordered other passengers to give him their belongings. Is he liable for piracy? • What if persons from another boat commit the act of piracy. Which law will apply, RPC or P. D. 532?  Ship from Manila to Cebu; while waiting for the departure of the ship, a person suddenly boarded the ship, pointed a knife at you, demanded that you give your belongings after which, he got off. Crime committed? Piracy under RPC  What if it was also a passenger of the ship who took your belongings? Piracy under PD 532  Floating casino in Manila Bay; while you were there, a person pointed a revolver at you and demanded that you give your winnings. Crime committed? –Common robbery –floating casino is not within the definition of a vessel RA 6235 ANTI-HIJACKING LAW • Acts Punishable: (a) Aircraft of Phil. registry: (1) change in the course OR destination; (2) seize or usurp control thereof PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

5

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PAL from Manila to Davao: accused compelled the pilot to veer the plane a little to right for a couple of minutes. Violation? Yes –refers to a change in the course  Accused bribed the pilot to veer the plane in exchange for money. Violation? No - there is no compulsion (what is punished is the element of compulsion) • Definition of “in flight”: from the moment external doors are closed following embarkation to the moment they are opened for disembarkation • May a plane be considered in flight when the external doors have been closed but it is still on the ground because of engine problems? YES. • Doors are already closed, passengers were already on board; but the pilot was still waiting for instructions from control tower; accused seized control of the plane. Violation? YES  Suppose the doors have already been opened but the passengers have not come out; accused seized control of the plane. Violation? NO. Plane has seized to be in flight  A group of skydivers on board a Phil. plane about to stage a skydiving exhibition in Luneta; at a latitude of about 15,000 ft., the door of the plane opened and the skydivers jumped out; last person, instead of jumping, seized control of the plane. Violation? NO - legally speaking, the plane is no longer in flight, notwithstanding that it is actually flying (b) aircraft of foreign registry: (1) landing; (2) seize or usurp control thereof • Is it necessary that acts be done while the aircraft is in flight? NO, the law is silent  Japan airlines, after it has landed, external doors were already opened, accused barged into the pilot’s cockpit and seized control of the plane. Liable? YES  Under the same facts, if plane if of Phi. Registry, liable? NO – no longer in flight (c) other acts: • Shipping, loading, carrying in any passenger aircraft operating as a public utility w/in the Philippine any explosive, flammable, corrosive, or poisonous substance or material (Sec.3)  A group of students chartered a PAL passenger plane for their exclusive use from Manila to Zamboanga; on board, they carried with them bottles of cyanide and several sacks of dynamite. Liable? YES  Same facts but the plane was owned by one of the students. Liable? NO – plane is not w/in the contemplation of “public utility” PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

6

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 123 - QUALIFIED PIRACY ARTICLE 124 - ARBITRARY DETENTION • May this be committed by ANY public officer? NO – only by those vested with authority • May this be committed by an officer who arrested and detained a person by virtue of a warrant of arrest issued by the court? NO The moment there is a WOA, no arbitrary detention can be committed • Public officer liable for arbitrary detention may be one who: has duty to make an arrest or detain; may recommend an arrest or detain; or may order an arrest or detain • A private individual may be also be liable for arbitrary detention if he acts either as an accessory, accomplice, principal by inducement, or principal by indispensable cooperation • Legal grounds for detention (1) committed the crime, (2)compulsory confined, (3) violent insanity • Instances when warrantless arrests are lawful: (1) has committed, is actually committing or is attempting to commit an offense in his presence • May a crime be committed in the presence of a public officer who is blind? Yes. Deaf? Yes. Both? (2) personal knowledge of the facts that the person to be arrested actually committed the offense • May a person be arrested based on suspicion? Is suspicion equivalent to actual knowledge?  Suppose the accused stabbed X; there was a commotion after which the accused fled. He was holding a knife and he was already stained with blood. He was being chased by the people. A police officer came. Seeing what was happening, he arrested the accused. Liable? NO –there is personal knowledge of the facts that a crime has been committed and the person being arrested was the one who committed it  Suppose a crime of robbery was committed. All the lights were on when it happened. The members of the household were able to give description of the robbers to the police. Three days later, the officer saw one of the persons who fitted the description given so he arrested him. Valid? No. There is no probable cause to believe that the person committed the crime; he only has hearsay knowledge  Supposing a woman was a victim of rape; together with her parents, she proceeded to the NBI to report the crime. Since there were media present, a task force was organized. The TF PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

7

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------learned rapist was in Bacolod. They search and found him. There is no warrant of arrest. May NBI task force arrest and detain him? NO. They only have hearsay knowledge (3) arrest of a prisoner who escaped ARTICLE 125 - DELAY IN THE DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSONS TO THE PROPER JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES • Distinguish from arbitrary detention • When does detention in delay become illegal? Upon expiration of the periods specified • Reason behind the law: to prevent any abuse that may be committed against the accused so that he can avail of any legal rights available to him. • To whom should the delivery be made? Courts of Justice • Is delivery to fiscal sufficient? No. He doesn’t form part of judicial authority • May this be committed if there is warrant of arrest? NO. Even if you fail to deliver him as required there is already a case in court.  X killed his neighbor in the course of their town fiesta. There was a police officer. Police officer made the arrest because he saw the killing. Within what hours should you be delivered? 36 hours  Supposing you were only delivered on the 7th day. What crime is committed by the police officer? Violation of Art. 125 • What does PO do if he cannot deliver him so he may not be liable? He should release him. • Assuming detention is already illegal does this affect the validity of your arrest? Yes. Detention became illegal. • Does illegal detention affect your crime? No. ARTICLE 126 - DELAYING RELEASe • Is there a period prescribed? Yes. Same as that prescribed in Art 124: 3 – 15 days; 15 days – 6 months; 6 months or more ARTICLE 127 - EXPULSION • May a Filipino be expelled from the Philippines? NO PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

8

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Who can be expelled? ALIENS only • Who can order expulsion? Bureau of Immigration and Deportation to be approved by the Office of the President • Convict has already served the minimum term of his sentenceand ready to be released for parole; condition in his parole fixes his residence even against his will. Is condition valid? YES  Supposing the Mayor of City of Manila, in order to stop prostitution he arrested and sent all prostitutes to Basilan. Is he liable? Yes. • May an alien be deported by the Bureau of Immigration without violating Art 127? Yes because the Bureau of Immigration has the authority to do so. • May court order convict to change the residence by virtue of Probation Law? Yes. There is authority of law; court by final judgment. How about by virtue of ISLAW? Dangerous Drugs Act? Yes to both. Laws; granting authority ARTICLE 128 - VIOLATION OF DOMICILE • Judicial order = search warrant • Search Warrant: an order in writing issued in the name of the People of the Phils, signed by a judge and directed to a peace officer, commanding him to search for personal property described therein and bring it before the court • Requisites: (1) probable cause; (2) for one offense (3) to be determined personally by the judge (4) particular description of place, persons and things • Effect of SW that was not legally obtained: things seized would be inadmissible in evidence  Suppose NBI agents conducted a surveillance operations for 2 weeks, after which they were convinced that there is a shabu lab in a certain compound. The agents applied for the issuance of SW for violation of DDA and for illegal possession of firearms. Armed with the SW, the agents raided the lab. Is the SW issued by the court valid? NO-warrant was issued for two offenses  Warrant was issued for violation of DDA, when agents entered the compound, they saw the warehouse door was open, through which they can see high powered firearms. They seized such firearms. May these be admissible in evidence? NO-not included in SW

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

9

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Suppose court issued a SW for the seizure of equipment used in the production of shabu; location of shabu lab is in a compound: white house, blue gate. Valid? NO – place was not particularly described  Suppose the SW was issued for illegal possession of firearms, ordering the officers to seize high-powered firearms in the condo unit of the accused located in the 5th floor; agents saw that there were several units in said floor so they inquired; raided the condo unit after the inquiry. Valid? NO – place not particularly described  Suppose the court issued a SW against the accused for violation of the internal revenue law, ordering the seizure of ALL documents contained inside the 2 cabinets in the office of the accused; agents implemented the warrant; got all the documents. Prosecutor only presented those material and relevant to the offense. Valid? NO – things seized were not particularly described therein  NBI agents applied for SW against the house said to be a shabu lab. It was almost 5pm when thy arrived at the office of the judge; judge was in a hurry so he instructed the clerk to receive the evidence the agents may present in support of their application, draft the order and bring it tot the judge. Everything was done by the clerk. Order was brought to the judge who signed it. Agents implemented the warrant. Valid? NO – probable cause was not determined personally by the judge • May judge delegate such duty? NO. It is personal. • How is violation of domicile committed? (1) by entering… -dwelling: a place that satisfies the requisites of domestic life Is it enough that there is no consent? NO-entry must be against the will of the owner  Police major who is your neighbour saw the door of your house slightly opened; he entered your house. Violation? NO  There was a sign that said “Do not enter at all times” but the door is slightly opened. Violation? YES-there is express prohibition  Suppose the door was locked, which the police major opened and he entered the house. Liable? YES - locked door is implied prohibition  Sign says “no trespassing”, police entered. Liable? YES – express prohibition  Door was open, sign says “Beware of dogs!” Police entered. Liable? NO.  Sign says enter at your own risk. Police entered. Liable? NO. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

10

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(2) by searching… is it necessary that the entry be done against the will of the owner? NO – it is sufficient that the entry is without the consent of the owner. (3) by refusing to leave… - surreptitious entry: secretly entering the house  Police entered the house through the closed back door which he opened. Once inside, owner saw him and asked him to leave. Officer left. Liable? YES, under the first manner – closed door constitutes prohibition • What consummates the crime? Refusal to leave the premises  Supposing a police officer, with the intention of searching the premises of your house, entered through the slightly opened front door without your consent. However, before he began his search, his attention was caught by the picture of a beautiful woman posted on your wall. While he was intently staring at the picture, you catch him inside your house and order him to leave, which he immediately does. Is he liable for violation of domicile? No. He is not liable because he did not commit any of the three acts under Article 128. There is no implied prohibition because the door was slightly opened; he did conduct any search; he did not refuse to leave the house after having been required to do so. ARTICLE 129 - SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED, AND ABUSE IN THE SERVICE OF THOSE LEGALLY OBTAINED • Is perjury necessary in maliciously obtaining a search warrant? • What if an illegal firearm was actually found based on a maliciously obtained search warrant for illegal possession of firearm? • Manner of Commission (1) maliciously obtaining  Suppose you have a persistent suitor whom you don’t like so you rejected him. He turned out to be an NBI officer and he ensued an application for SW against your father for keeping firearms in you house, which is not true. The warrant was issued. What crime/s may he be liable for? Perjury and procurement of SW w/o just cause  Suppose he came to you and told you that unless you answer him, he will implement the warrant. In order to save your father, you answered him. Is he liable for procuring SW w/o just cause? YES. The crime is consummated by the mere act of obtaining the SW; it need not be implemented. (2) abuse in the service PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

11

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Does the law require that for abuse to be committed, the SW must be lawfully obtained? The warrant enjoys the presumption of validity since it was issued by the court. If the warrant turns out to be unlawfully issued, the agents would only be liable for maliciously obtaining SW. ARTICLE 130 - SEARCHING DOMICILE WITHOUT WITNESSES  Supposing a raiding team conducted the search of a dwelling in the presence of two maids only. Are the members of the raiding team liable for violation of Article 130?  Supposing the raid was conducted in the presence of two members of the raiding team who were also residents of the same locality. Are the members of the raiding team liable for violation of Article 130?  Supposing the raid was witnessed by the twon children residing in the house who were both 8 years old; may the members of the raiding team be liable? Yes. The children are not valid witnesses. ARTICLE 131 - PROHIBITION, INTERRUPTION, AND DISSOLUTION OF PEACEFUL MEETING • How committed? (1) by prohibiting or by interrupting, w/o legal ground, the holding of a peaceful meeting, or by dissolving the same • What constitutional right is safeguarded? Right to peaceful assembly • During a rally and while certain people were speaking, somebody threw an explosive in the middle of the crowd. May the police lawfully disperse the assembly? YES it has ceased to be peaceful. (2) By hindering any person from joining any lawful association or from attending any of its meetings  Suppose an officer prevented you, through force or threat from joining the NPA. Liable? No – what is contemplated is the joining of a lawful org; NPA is not a lawful org (3) By prohibiting or hindering any person from addressing, either alone or together with others, any petition to the authorities for the correction of abuses or redress of grievances • What right is safeguarded? Right of the people to redress grievances ARTICLE 132 - INTERRUPTION OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP • Committed only by public officers or employees PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

12

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Is it necessary that the act be committed inside a place of religious worship? NO. • Is it necessary that it be done in a church? No. What is important is that what is interrupted is a ceremony. ARTICLE 133 - OFFENDING THE RELIGIOUS FEELINGS • Whose point of view should be considered to determine the act as notoriously offensive? The worshippers.  Supposing accused placed the statute of the Virgin Mary in the altar and chopped it in pieces. He claimed that the Virgin Mary was only made of wood. May he be liable for violation of Article 133? Yes. ARTICLE 134 - REBELLION OR INSURRECTION • Can it be committed by only one person? NO. It is a crime of the masses • Manner of conviction: proof beyond reasonable doubt (2-witness rule is not necessary) • Is it necessary that they engage the government forces in actual combat? NO.  Supposing common crimes are committed. What crime is committed? If the common crime was committed in furtherance of the objectives of rebellion, the common crime is absorbed in the crime of rebellion  Supposing an NPA commander had an encounter in Mindoro. They ambushed the military. What crimes are committed? Rebellion only. May they be prosecuted for murder? No. It is absorbed in rebellion.  Supposing they raped the daughter of the Barangay Captain? Liable also for rape as it is not connected with any political purpose.  Supposing the NPA commander ambushed the governor for being corrupt. What crime is committed? Rebellion  Suppose an NPA asked you to encash some of their checks and to deliver them. Liable? NO mere adherence to the enemy by giving them aid or comfort is not punishable under rebellion  Members of the NPA kidnapped a Chinese merchant and demanded a ransom. Upon payment, the Chinese was released and the ransom was given to the officers of the NPA for its finances. Crime committed? Rebellion only.  Suppose the kidnappers distributed the ransom among themselves. Crime? Kidnapping PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

13

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 134 - A COUP D’ETAT • Offender: military, police, or public officer or employee • Difference between rebellion and coup: 1. as to persons criminally liable: Rebellion – public persons and private persons Coup de etat – public persons, military or police officers 2. as to manner of commission: Rebellion – rising publicly and taking arms against the government Coup de etat – swift attack accompanied by violenece, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth 3. as to purpose: Rebellion – Section 134 Coup de etat – Section 134-A 4. target of the attack: Rebellion – government Coup de etat – authorities of the Philippines, military camp, installation, communication networks, public utilities or other facilities • May coup d’ etat be committed by one person? YES. ARTICLE 135 PENALTY FOR REBELLION, INSURRECTION, OR COUP D’ ETAT ARTICLE 136 CONSPIRACY AND PROPOSAL TO COMMIT COUP D’ ETAT, INSURRECTION, OR REBELLION • Conspiracy to commit Coup de etat  Supposing, military officers met outside the Philippines and they agreed and decided to seize the power from the present administration; upon arrival, they were arrested and prosecuted for committing conspiracy to commit coup de etat, are they liable? NO, because it was committed outside Philippine territory; it cannot be prosecuted here because it was not among the exceptions provided for in Article of the RPC (Conspiracy to commit coup de etat is a crime against public order) ARTICLE 137 DISLOYALTY OF PUBLIC OFFICER OR EMPLOYEES ARTICLE 138 INCITING TO REBELLION OR INSURRECTION  Supposing, a member of the NPA was going around recruiting members by inciting them. Crime committed? Rebellion, because one element is missing; that the offender does not take PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

14

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------arms against, or is not in open hostility with the government; offender in this case was already a member of the NPA  Supposing, an ordinary barangay leader who was fed up with the Arroyo administration, thorugh speeches, persuaded and convinced people to join him in the fight against the government, what crime was committed? Inciting to rebellion  Suppose the audience before whom he spoke were finally induced and persuaded by him to join the movement and overthrow the government, what crime was committed? Rebellion, because the persons induced would be principals by direct participation; person who induced would be a principal by inducement  Using the same facts, if they were not convinced, what crime was committed? Inciting to rebellion ARTICLE 139 - SEDITION – HOW COMMITTED • When is public uprising deemed to be tumultuous? Article 163 – if it is caused by more than three (3) persons who are armed or are provided with means of violence  Supposing, ten (10) persons who are armed purpose is to prevent the holding of a referendum through force, etc., are they liable? NO, referendum is different from an election  Supposing, several members in the barangay, during the elctions, armed themselves and proceeded to the precincts and prevented the elections officers; inspectors, etc. from performing their duties, what crime was committed? Sedition, under the 1st purpose  Using the same facts, but the officers were prevented from performing their duties during a referendum, are they liable for sedition? YES, under the 2nd purpose ARTICLE 140 - PENALTY FOR SEDITION ARTICLE 141 - CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT SEDITION ARTICLE 142 - INCITING TO SEDITION • How committed? (1) inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, emblems, etc. (2) uttering seditious words or speeches which tend to disturb the public peace - clear and present danger rule - dangerous tendency rule PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

15

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(3) writing, publishing, or circulating scurrilous libels against the government or any of the duly constituted authorities thereof which tend to disturb the public peace  Supposing X incited others to commit sedition and they commit sedition. What crime may X be liable for? Sedition for principal by inducement because Sedition was committed. • May the crime of inciting to sedition be committed by mere silence? YES, by knowingly concealing such evil practices (one of the ways of committing inciting to sedition) ARTICLE 143 - ACTS TENDING TO PREVENT THE MEETING OF THE ASSEMBLY AND SIMILAR BODIES ARTICLE 144 - DISTURBANCE OF PROCEEDINGS • May an accused put double jeopardy as a defense? No. Separate power of Congress. ARTICLE 145 - VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY (1) By using force or intimidation - preventing a member from attending a meeting  Supposing, there is an investigation in Basilan to find out how some members of the Abu Sayyaf were able to escape; a military officer abducted a member of the Congress who was always taking an antagonistic position against them, what crime was committed? May the military officer be held for kidnapping? Did the single act of the military officer give rise to two (2) felonies (kidnapping and violation of parliamentary immunity)? Crimes are COMPLEXED under Article 48, 1st part, of the RPC (when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies) (2) By arresting or searching  Supposing, a congressman committed the crime of homicide (penalty is reclusion temporal) and he was arrested while he was on his way to the session hall of Congress, was the arrest lawful? YES  Supposing, Congress was in session for 3 months, starting July 1; the Congressman was arrested on August 28 while he was at home; penalty for the crime he committed was 5 years, was the arrest lawful? NO, refer to the definition of “session” ARTICLE 146 - ILLEGAL ASSEMBLIES • First form of illegal assembly

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

16

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing, there was a meeting attended by several persons, the purpose of which is to devise ways and means of kidnapping; not one of those who attended the meeting was armed, is this illegal assembly? NO, a meeting, to be illegal, must be attended by armed persons  Supposing, there were 10 persons, all armed, had a meeting, the purpose of which was to commit illegal logging, liable? NO, it is not an offense punishable under the RPC • Second form of illegal assembly • Is it necessary that they be armed? NO • Is it necessary that the members of the audience be incited? YES ARTICLE 147 - ILLEGAL ASSOCIATIONS  Supposing, a group formed an association, Cheats Unlimited, the purpose of which is to devise ways and means to cheat without being discovered, are they liable? YES, contrary to public morals  Supposing, by force, a friend prevented you from attending the meeting of cheats; is your friend liable under Article 131? NO, association is unlawful; what is prohibited in Article 131 is preventing someone from attending a meeting of a lawful organization ARTICLE 148 - DIRECT ASSAULTS • How committed? (1) By employing force, intimidation... - public uprising + tumultuous + political purpose = SEDITION - force or intimidation + objectives of rebellion or sedition + public uprising – (minus) public uprising = DIRECT ASSAULT in the first form (2) By attacking, by employing force...  Supposing, a governor who recommended his niece to be a member of the staff of the mayor but the positions were already filled hence she was not accommodated; the governor went to the office of the mayor where he inflicted where he inflicted fist blows upon the mayor, what crime was committed by the governor?  Using the same facts, supposing, they met at a wedding and there, the governor assaulted the mayor, what crime was committed? By reason of past performance of duties  Supposing, in a criminal case, the lawyer cross-examined the witness of the other side and practically destroyed his testimony; the other party waited for the lawyer outside where they PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

17

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------inflicted harm on him, what crime was committed? Direct Assault, lawyers are considered persons in authority, and he was attacked by reason of the performance of his official duties as a lawyer  Supposing a professor was in the middle of discussing lessons in class when his neighbor, who had a long time personal grudge against him, through a stone at the professor, which hit him on the head and killed him. May the offender be liable for direct assault? YES. The Reason for attack immaterial if done in the actual performance if duty  What if the killing was done while the professor was walking on his way home? No – there is no direct assault.  What if the neighbor was actually a former student and he killed the professor while on his way home because the latter failed him in class. May the offender be liable for direct assault? Yes – the attack was done connected with performance of official duty  May a person in authority be liable fro direct assault committed against subordinate? YES. Qualified assault – It is an aggravating circumstance when an offender s a public officer/employee  Supposing a provincial governor violated the traffic rules and regulations. A traffic enforcer stopped him and gave him a ticket. The governor got mad and shot the traffic enforcer. May the governor be liable for direct assault? YES. Position is immaterial. ARTICLE 149 - INDIRECT ASSAULTS • Can only be committed in the occasion of direct assault • Does acquittal in DA also mean an acquittal in IA? It depends on the ground of acquittal. If acquitted because the act does not constitute direct assault it also means the person shall be acquitted for indirect assault; if acquitted for reasons which are personal only to the accused, it shall not mean acquittal in IA. This includes being acquitted because of insanity or minority. If acquitted because there is no guilt beyond reasonable doubt, not acquitted in IA. This would mean that there is a crime of DA however guilt of accused was not sufficiently proven • It is necessary that the offender has knowledge that the person assaulted is a person in authority or his agent? Yes. Absence of knowledge may constitute a defense of good faith ARTICLE 150 - DISOBEDIENCE TO SUMMONS ISSUED BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, ITS COMMITTEES AND SUBCOMMITTEES, BY THE CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSIONS, ITS COMMITTEES, SUBCOMMITTEES OR DIVISIONS ARTICLE 151 - RESISTANCE AND DISOBEDIENCE TO A PERSON IN AUTHORITY OR THE AGENTS OF SUCH PERSON PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

18

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 152 - PERSONS IN AUTHORITY AND AGENTS OF PERSONS IN AUTHORITY – WHO SHALL BE DEEMED AS SUCH • Persons in Authority - directly vested with jurisdiction - Examples: mayor, judge, congressman, members of the board of directors, teachers, administrators (dean, rector, Chaplain), lawyers if in actual performance of professional duty or attacked because of such reason • Agent of person in authority - not vested with jurisdiction - duty is the protection of persons and property - maintenance of public order - Examples: policeman, barangay tanod, members of the military ARTICLE 153 - TUMULTS AND OTHER DISTURBANCES OF PUBLIC ORDER ARTICLE 154 - UNLAWFUL MEANS OF PUBLICATION AND UNLAWFUL UTTERANCES • How Committed 1st Manner: Essence is publication of false news which causes damage to the interest of the state  Supposing X published that half of Mindanao under control of MILF. But it is false. Will X be liable? Yes. Prejudicial to the interest of the state 2nd Manner:  Supposing X made a film about the life of Abu Sabaya. In the film, he made him a hero. May X be liable? Yes. Praising, justifying, extolling an act punished by law 3rd Manner:  Supposing X prematurely published a PIATCO Contract investigated by Blue Ribbon Committee? May X be liable? Yes – he has no official authority to publish the contract ARTICLE 155 - ALARMS AND SCANDALS • Will the firing of a gun be punishable? Yes, provided the gun is not pointed at any one in particular. If pointed at another, the crime is discharge of firearm or grave threat, provided there is no intent to kill. If there is intent to kill, the crime is either attempted homicide/murder if the wound is not mortal; frustrated homicide/murder if the wound is mortal ARTICLE 156 - DELIVERY PRISONERS FROM JAIL PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

19

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing, the one who escaped is a detention prisoner, if another person assists in the escape of such detention prisoner, is he liable? YES  Supposing, a youthful offender was committed inside a reformatory institution, and an officer assisted in the escape of such youthful offender, what crime was committed? Infidelity  Supposing, a jail officer whose duty is from 7am-7pm, then he assisted in the escape of a prisoner at around 3pm, what crime was committed? Infidelity  Supposing, using the previous case, he assisted in the escape at around 10pm, what crime was committed? Delivering Prisoners from Jail, because he is already off-duty, and the prisoner is not anymore under his custody ARTICLE 157 - EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE  Supposing, there is a prisoner against whom a judgment of conviction has been rendered; he appealed such judgment to the CA, and while pending, he escaped, is he liable under this article? NO, the judgment of conviction is not yet final  Supposed a youthful offender who is committed in a reformatory institution escapes. What crime may he be prosecuted for? No crime, he is not yet convicted by final judgment  Youthful offender who is incorrigible in a reformatory institution. The court pronounced judgment. He escaped in Bilibid. May he be liable? Yes.  Supposing the accused is prohibited to enter manila. His mother gets sick in manila. The accused went to Manila. Will he be liable? Yes. What is the remedy is available to him to be able to visit his sick mother during the service of his sentence? Executive clemency ARTICLE 158 - EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE ON THE OCCASION OF DISORDERS, CONFLAGRATIONS, EARTHQUAKES, OR OTHER CALAMITIES • Failure to return 48 hours within the proclamation = addition of 1/5 of the unexpired term to the sentence; if he returned a deduction of 1/5 of the entire sentence shall take place • Accused must be a convict not a detention prisoner ARTICLE 159 - OTHER CASES OF EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE (VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON)  Supposing, the accused was convicted of homicide and was sentenced to a penalty of 10 years, after 6 years, he was granted a conditional pardon; 2 years after, he was found guilty of frustrated homicide. May the President order his re-arrest even without waiting for conviction of the second crime? May he still be prosecuted separately for violation of conditional pardon? PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

20

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing, accused was convicted, sentenced to 10 years; he already served for 8 years, was granted a conditional pardon thereafter and it was expressly provided that the convict should observe the terms and conditions of the conditional pardon for 7 years; is the condition valid? YES, the conditional pardon is in the nature of a private contract between the President and the convict; the convict is free to accept or reject the offered conditions of the contract in the pardon ARTICLE 160 – QUASI-RECIDIVISM  Supposing the accused was convicted of attempted rape; while serving his sentence, he committed and was found guilty of illegal possession of shabu, is he a quasi-recidivist? NO, the second offense committed by him was a violation of a special law; to be liable, the second crime must be a felony  Supposing, accused was already serving sentence for violation of a special law, while serving the same, he attempted to take the life of his co-prisoner, is he liable? YES, the first offense need not be a felony ARTICLE 161 - COUNTERFEITING THE GREAT SEAL OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, FORGING THE SIGNATURE OR STAMP OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE ARTICLE 162 - USING FORGED SIGNATURE OR COUNTERFEIT SEAL OR STAMP  Supposing, the accused has a pending shipment, which is kept by the customs and cannot be released because of failure to complete the payment of customs duties; asked his friend from Malacanang to get an endorsement from the President; his friend forged the President’s signature and gave the endorsement to the accused; shipment was then released. Can the accused be held liable under this Article? NO, there was no knowledge on his part that the signature of the President on the endorsement was forged • Is this an act of accessory? Yes but if accused is punished as principal of Article 162 he is not an accessory of Article 161. ARTICLE 163 - MAKING AND IMPORTING AND UTTERING FALSE COINS ARTICLE 164 - MUTILATION OF COINS • Is mere possession of counterfeited coins with knowledge make one liable? No, there must be actual uttering and intent ARTICLE 165 - SELLING OF FALSE OR MUTILATED COIN, WITHOUT CONNIVANCE ARTICLE 166 - FORGING TREASURY OR BANK NOTES OR OTHER DOCUMENTS PAYABLE TO BEARER; IMPORTING, AND UTTERING SUCH FALSE OR FORGED NOTES AND DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

21

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• What may be the subject of forgery? Does this include treasury or circular notes issued by a foreign bank be subject? How about those issued by the Philippines? ARTICLE 167 COUNTERFEITING, IMPORTING, AND UTTERING INSTRUMENTS NOT PAYABLE TO BEARER ARTICLE 168 ILLEGAL POSSESSION AND THE USE OF FALSE TREASURY OR BANK NOTES AND OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF CREDIT  Supposing X used false bank note to pay for his the groceries; he did not know that it is fake, may he be liable for possession? • What is the presumption? Accused is the author of the forgery when he is found in possession of false treasury notes, etc. It is presumed there is intention to utter. ARTICLE 169 - HOW FORGERY IS COMMITTED  Supposing X was in the possession of a sweepstakes ticket. Only the last number is different from the winning combination so he changed it and presented it as the winning ticket. May X be held liable? • How would you classify the lottery ticket, is it payable to bearer or order? It is payable to bearer ARTICLE 170 - FALSIFICATION OF LEGISLATIVE DOCUMENTS ARTICLE 171 - FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER, EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER • Differentiate Article 170 from Article 171: Determine the nature of the document falsified, if it is legislative regardless of offender it is under Art 170. If it is not legislative and falsified by a public officer who takes advantage of his position/office it falls under Art 171. • An ecclesiastical minister is liable only when the falsification affects civil status of persons and not ones religion • Under fourth manner commission, the entry falsified must be a fact not an opinion  Supposing a prisoner was arrested on January 2, 2001 but the arresting officer failed to deliver within 36 hours to proper authorities, thus making him liable under Article 125. To avoid being reprimanded, the officer changed the date of arrest to January 3, 2002 – date of turnover. Is he liable under the fifth manner of commission? YES. Date is essential.

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

22

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What if the date of arrest was on January 2, 2001 and the prisoner was delivered on January 3, 2001. The officer placed the date as January 5, 2001 as date of arrest. Is he liable under the fifth manner of commission? NO. Date was not essential.  Supposing the Secretary of PRC is in charge with keeping the grades of board examinees. She changed the grade of one examinee from 71 to 77. May she be liable under the sixth manner of commission? Yes.  Supposing the Local Civil Registrar issued a birth certificate to show you were born earlier so X can run for mayor. Is the LCR liable? Yes. ARTICLE 172 - FALSIFICATION BY PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS AND THE USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS • May there be a crime of estafa through falsification of public, official or commercial documents? Yes. There is no complex crime of estafa through falsification of a private document since both have the same element – damage. Determine which crime was first committed by the accused. The first crime committed is his first liability.  Supposing X used a falsified document in an administrative proceeding? What crime may he be liable for? Use of falsified documents for other transaction  What if he was applying for a loan in a bank, and he used a false document, what crime may he be liable for? Use of falsified documents for other transaction ARTICLE 173 - FALSIFICATION OF WIRELESS, CABLE, TELEGRAPH, AND TELEPHONE MESSAGES, AND USE OF SAID FALSIFIED MESSAGE ARTICLE 174 - FALSE MEDICAL CERTIFICATES, CERTIFICATE OF MERIT OR SERVICE, AND THE LIKE  Supposing A asked his father, a doctor, to a medical certificate to excuse him from classes. The father issued the certificate stating that X was recovering from fever and had to rest for three days when in fact, X was never ill. Who may be liable under Article 174? The father.  What if it was X’s mother who issued mother the certificate, who is liable? The mother.  Supposing X presented it to his professor. May he be liable for the commission of a crime? Yes he is liable under Article 175 using false certificates.  Supposing X wanted to apply for a position in a company, which requires at least seven years of work experience. X only had two years of work experience so he asked a former superior to issue a certificate stating that he has had 10 years of work experience. May his superior be liable? Yes for issuing a false certificate of service ARTICLE 175 - USING FALSE CERTIFICATES PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

23

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 176 - MANUFACTURING AND POSSESSION OF INSTRUMENTS OR IMPLEMENTS FOR FALSIFICATION  Supposing a raid in the house of E. The raiding team confiscated an equipment used in the making of falsified Philippine money. May E be liable for possession? No, there must be intent to use. ARTICLE 177 - USURPATION OF AUTHORITY • In usurpation of authority, is it necessary to actually perform the duty? NO  Supposing the accused was in a party and he wanted to impress a girl. He introduce yourself as a PNP officer. May he be liable? YES.  Supposing A went to a Chinese Store. He introduced himself as an agent from BIR when in fact he was not. He claimed that he wanted to inspect the store’s book of accounts. What crime is committed? Usurpation of Authority.  What if the owner acceded and A was able to inspect the book of accounts. What is A’s criminal liability? Usurpation of official function  Supposing an MMDA traffic enforcer was suspended for 6 months. During his suspension, he continued to wear his uniform and directed traffic in a major intersection. What crime may he be liable for? Usurpation of official function ARTICLE 178 - USING FICTITIOUS NAME AND CONCEALING TRUE NAME  Supposing X told Y he is single so that he can court the latter. Y later discovered that X is married. Liability? Is one’s status an essential part of his identity? ARTICLE 179 - ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS OR INSIGNIA  Supposing a PNP officer who was dismissed from service wore his uniform and went to a public function. May he be liable? Yes. He is no longer authorized to wear the uniform.  Supposing P went to a whore house. He went to a room with many girls wearing different uniforms including those of a nun, a nurse, a student, and a fire fighter. May the girls be liable? Yes. ARTICLE 180 - FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A DEFENDANT  Supposing C falsely testified in a criminal case against his neighbor. Testimony was not given credence. May he still be liable for Article 180? Yes. What the law punishes is the mere act of giving false testimony in a case. Whether it is believed by the court or not is immaterial as it has the tendency to degrade the administration of justice and mislead justice. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

24

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 181 - FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENDANT  Supposing M was a defendant in a criminal case. He falsely testified in court in his favor. May he be prosecuted for false testimony in favorable to the defendant? Yes - while he has the right to testify in his behalf, this right do not carry with it the right to testify falsely. ARTICLE 182 - FALSE TESTIMONY IN CIVIL CASES ARTICLE 183 - FALSE TESTIMONY IN OTHER CASES AND PERJURY IN SOLEMN AFFIRMATION  Suppose a person died. The heirs cannot agree extrajudicially. In the course of the judicial settlement, one of the heirs testified falsely. Is he liable? Yes. The judicial settlement is neither a criminal nor civil case  Supposing a guardianship proceeding is pending in court. In order that this be approved, X testified falsely in his favor. Is a guardianship proceeding a civil case? No. It is a special proceeding. What crime is he liable for? Perjury  Supposing an employee files an illegal dismissal proceeding. He executed a false affidavit. What crime may he be liable for? Perjury • May perjury be committed thru negligence, imprudence? No. There must be a wilful and deliberate assertion of falsehood • Is good faith a defense? Yes. Assertion must be deliberate or intentional  Supposing X needed to present driver’s license for his application. He executed an affidavit of loss which stated that his license got lost when wallet was snatched. Truth is license was confiscated for a traffic violation. What crime is he liable for? Perjury • What is a material matter? It is the main fact which is the subject of the inquiry or any circumstance which tends to prove that fact, or any fact or circumstance which tends to corroborate or strengthen the testimony relative to the subject of inquiry, or which legitimately affects the credit of any witness who testifies  Supposing G and B applied for a marriage license. B stated in his application that he was single when truth was married but legally separated from his ex-wife. Assuming the application was sworn before an authorized officer. Is B liable for perjury? Yes. His status is material matter  What if B indicated that he is 30 years old when in truth he is 45 years old. Is he liable for perjury? No, age is not a material matter since in either case B is still capacitated to contract marriage. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

25

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What if B indicated that he is 21 years old when in truth he is only 17 years old. Is he liable for perjury? Yes, age is a material matter because he doe not possess legal capacity to contract marriage  Supposing after finishing law, X applied to take the bar before the SC. He said he was never convicted truth is he was previously convicted of theft. Is perjury committed? Yes, material matter. • Will a false statement of an opinion under oath make accused liable for perjury. No  Supposing a woman was involved in case of immorality. In the course of investigation she falsely testified under oath that she is single when in fact she was already married. Is she liable for perjury? No. Not material matter. Status does not have a legal effect in immorality charge  Supposing H was courting his officemate, W. She suspects he is married and has a wife in the province. H executes an affidavit under oath stating he is single but the truth is was already married for five years. H gives it to W although she never asked him to submit such. May H be liable for perjury? Yes. It is not necessary that the executed affidavit is required by law. It is enough that it is authorized by law. ARTICLE 184 - OFFERING FALSE TESTIMONY IN EVIDENCE -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------RA 9165 DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002 • Difference between Dangerous Drugs (DD) and Controlled Precursors and Essential Chemicals (CP/EC) • Punishable Acts: 1. Importation (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: manager, organizer, financier, protector/coddler 2. Sale, Trading, Administration, Dispensation, Delivery, Distribution and Transportation (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: manager, organizer, financier, protector/coddler, broker  Max Penalty: -minors/mentally incapacitated persons used as couriers or messengers; -victim is minor/mentally incapacitated; PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

26

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------proximate cause of death is DD/CP/EC; -committed w/in 100m from school 3. Maintenance of Den, Dive or Resort (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: (same as 1) Max Penalty: -DD is sold/administered to minor -proximate cause of death is DD  Escheat (legal proceeding for forfeiture of private property in favour of the State) 4. Employment in and Visiting Den, Dive or Resort (DD and CP/EC) 5. Illegal Manufacture (DD and CP/EC)  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: (same as 1)  Presumption: presence of CP/EC or Lab Equipment is prima facie proof of manufacture  Max Penalty: - committed w/ help of minors - committed w/in 100m residential, business, school or church premises - employment of alien, public officer, chemical engineer or practitioner - lab is protected by booby traps - lab is concealed w/ legitimate business operations 6. Illegal Chemical Diversion (CP/EC) 7. Manufacture/Delivery of Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus or other Paraphernalia (DD and CP/EC)  Max Penalty: minor/mentally incapacitated is used to deliver 8. Possession of Dangerous Drugs (DD) 9. Possession of Equipment, Instrument, etc. (DD)  intended for consuming, ingesting, or introduction to the human body of substance  presumption: possession shall be prima facie evidence that possessor has introduced into his body the DD and shall be presumed to have violated Section 15 10. Possession during Parties, Social Gatherings, Meetings or in the proximate company of at least 2 Persons (DD) 11. Possession of Equipment, Instrument, etc. during Parties, Social Gatherings, etc. (DD) PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

27

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------12. Use of Dangerous Drugs (Section 15)  1st apprehension: 6 months rehabilitation  2nd apprehension: 6 years and 1 day to 12 years  Not applicable if offender is also found to have in his possession such quantity of any drug; in such a case, provision of Section 11 shall apply  Disqualified from Probation Law 13. Cultivation and Culture of Plants classified as Dangerous Drugs or Sources thereof  mere conspiracy or attempt is punishable  persons liable: same 14. Failure to Maintain or Keep Records of Transactions (DD and CP/EC)  Records of sales, dispositions, etc. of DD/CP/EC 15. Unnecessary Prescription (DD) 16. Unlawful Prescription (DD) 17. Misappropriation, Misapplication or Failure to Account (DD and CP/EC)  seized, confiscated, or surrendered DD, plants, equipment, proceeds and property  become property of the State 18. Benefiting from Proceeds (DD) 19. Receiving Financial or Material Contributions from Persons found Guilty of Trafficking Dangerous Drugs (DD) 20. Planting Evidence 21. Consenting or Knowingly Tolerating any Violation of DDA  applies to public officers 22. Consenting or Tolerating Use of Vehicle or Equipment  as an instrument for commission of violation of DDA 23. Violating Rules or Regulations Issued by DDB 24. Issuance of False or Fraudulent Dangerous Drugs Test Result 25. Violation of Confidentiality Rule  voluntary submission program 26. Failure or Refusal to Appear as Witness for any Violation of DDA PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

28

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------27. Delay or Bungling in the Prosecution of Drug Related Cases Fundamental Concepts  No Plea-bargaining Rule - for any person charged with the violation of DDA under any provision  Non applicability of the Probation Law - for drug pushers and drug traffickers  Influence of Dangerous Drugs during commission of another crime - qualifying aggravating circumstance (changes the nature of the crime)  Public Officials found guilty of violation of DDA -Maximum Penalty is always imposed -no amount of ordinary mitigating circumstance will offset (lower) penalty Immunity from Criminal Prosecution and Punishment  does not refer to all provisions of the DDA • Requirements: 1) Person violated Sections 7 (employment in den); 11 (Possession of DD); 12 (Possession of Paraphernalia); 14 (Possession of Paraphernalia during parties); 15 (use of DD); and 19 (unlawful prescription) 2) He voluntarily gives information about any of the following violations: Section 4 (Importation); 5 (Sale, etc.); 6 (Maintenance of Den); 8 (Manufacture); 10 (Manufacture of Equipment); 13 (Possession of DD during Party); 16 (Cultivation or Culture); or any act if committed by a syndicate 3) He willingly testifies against persons who violated above provisions 4) Information/testimony must comply with the ff conditions: a) it is necessary for conviction b) it is not yet in the possession of the State c) it can be substantially corroborated on its material points d) informant has not yet been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude except when no other evidence is available PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

29

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------e) informant shall strictly comply with condition imposed by the State f) Informant does not appear to be the most guilty g) No direct evidence available to state except testimony of informant • Termination of Immunity 1) If information/testimony is false, malicious, or made only to harass or prejudice the accused 2) failure or refusal to testify w/o just cause 3) violation of condition of immunity • Effects of Termination of Immunity -immunity shall cease and informant shall be prosecuted for the crime committed and cited for contempt Submission of Drug Dependent to Confinement/Treatment or Rehabilitation  refers only to use of DD under Section 15  Drug dependent may either submit voluntarily or compulsorily • Voluntary Submission a) application with the DDB by drug dependent, parents, spouse or any relative w/in 4th civil degree of consanguinity or affinity b) DDB files petition in court c) Court issues examination of drug dependent d) If positive, court issues order for rehabilitation in a center: not less than 6 months but not more than 1 year e) Final discharge of drug dependent from the center  discharge shall exempt him from criminal prosecution or liability under Section 15  Provided: 1) he complied with regulations of the center, Board, and after-care and follow-up treatment (at least 18 months); (2) he has never been charged or convicted for any offense under the DDA, RPC, or any special law; 3) he has no record of escape or if he has escaped, he surrenders within one week from date of escape; and 4) he poses no danger to himself, to his family, or to the community. * Drug dependent who is not rehabilitated after 2nd confinement and upon recommendation of the Board shall be charged under Section 15; if convicted, he shall be given full credit for his stay in confinement * Judicial and medical records of drug dependents under VSP shall be confidential and shall not be used against him for any purpose except to determine how many times he has voluntarily submitted himself for the program PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

30

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Compulsory Submission 1) drug dependent who refuses to submit himself to VSP a) petition is filed by DDB in RTC b) RTC conducts a hearing c) Order by the court for examination of drug dependent by at least 2 physicians - if physicians conclude that he is not a drug dependent, DDB shall order his release - if either physician finds him dependent on drugs, court will consider all other evidence - if court finds him a drug dependent, court shall order his commitment 2) in the course of hearing a case, one of the parties is found to be a drug dependent a) person is charged w/ offense punishable by imprisonment of less than 6 years and 1 day and is found by court to be a drug dependent b) Board files petition in RTC for confinement in Center c) Hearing is conducted by the court d) If RTC finds him a drug dependent, it shall issue an order for commitment e) If rehabilitated as certified, he shall be returned to the court for discharge from the center f) Continuation of his prosecution; if found guilty, his commitment in Center shall be credited in full g) If he is prosecuted under Section 15, and is not a recidivist, penalty is deemed served in center upon his release and upon certification by the Board and the center * Period of prescription of offense charged shall be suspended while he is confined in rehab * Judicial and medical records of drug dependents under CSP or those charged for violation of Section 15 shall be confidential and shall not be used against him for any purpose; records of drug dependents who are not rehabilitated or who escaped and did not surrender shall be forwarded to the court who shall determine their use •

Suspension of Sentence  for first-time minor offenders above 15 years of age but not over 18 years

Conditions: a) has not been previously convicted of violation of DDA, RPC, or other special laws b) has not been previously committed to a center or care of a DOH accredited physician c) Board favorably recommends suspension of sentence  Republic Act 9344 supersedes the provisions of the DDA PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

31

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• 15 years and below: exempted from criminal liability; while not criminally liable, minor shall be subjected to intervention programs • above 15 and under 18: find out if minor acted w/ or w/o discernment • reformed minor can deny that he was charged with a crime or convicted thereof (justified misrepresentation; not liable for perjury or falsification) * The DOJ shall keep a confidential record of proceedings on suspension of sentence and shall not be used for any purpose other than to determine whether or not person accused is a first-time minor offender • Disposition of Confiscated, Seized, or Surrendered DD, etc. 1) Physical inventory and photograph -in presence of counsel of accused, representative from the media, DOJ, and elected public official who shall sign a copy of the inventory 2) Items submitted w/in 24 hours to PDEA Forensic Laboratory for qualitative and quantitative examination 3) Certification of results w/in 24 hours -if time is not sufficient, partial certification may be issued; full certification w/in next 24 hours 4) Filing of criminal case in court 5) Ocular inspection by court w/in 72 hours from filing 6) Within next 24 hours, burning or destroying of items -in presence of accused or his counsel, representative from the media, DOJ, civil society, and any elected public official 7) Sworn certification of burning is issued by the Board 8) Submission to the court of certificate 9) After promulgation of judgment, the representative sample with leave of court (approval) shall be turned over to the PDEA w/c shall destroy the same w/in 24 hours from receipt; court is informed of termination of the case -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

32

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------PD 1602 – ANTI-GAMBLING LAW • May the inspector be criminally liable? NO • In any of the games specified, is it necessary that there be bets involving money or other object? • Sports; mere act of playing them, punishable? NO • Conductor – person who manages or carries on the gambling game or scheme • Maintainer – person who sets up and furnishes the means with which to carry on the gambling game or scheme  Supposing, you are the owner of a boat, and there is gambling going on, are you liable? It depends, if you can prove that you have NO knowledge of such gambling taking place, NOT liable, otherwise, you are liable.  Supposing, in a certain mall, for every purchase worth P100, you will be entitled to a ticket for a raffle, prize of which is MB, is it lottery? • Do you get the full value of the money? YES • Is the prize merely incidental? YES ARTICLE 200 - GRAVE SCANDAL • How committed?  Supposing, the act was committed in the privacy of one’s room, is it grave scandal? NO, because the 4th element is missing (that the act complained of be committed in a public place or within the public knowledge or view) ARTICLE 201 - IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS AND INDECENT SHOWS • Who are liable? • TEST OF OBSCENITY – whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscene is to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influence and into whose hands such a publication may fall, and whether or not such publication or act shocks the ordinary and common sense of men as an indecency

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

33

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• TEST OF OBSCENITY OF NUDE PICTURES – whether the motive of the picture, as indicated by it is pure or impure, or whether it is naturally calculated to excite impure imaginations. • MERE nudity in pictures or paintings is NOT obscenity ARTICLE 202 - VAGRANTS AND PROSTITUTES •

Who are vagrants?

(1) Any person having no apparent means of subsistence, who has the physical ability to work and who neglects to apply himself/herself to some lawful calling - “batugan” (2) Any person found loitering about public or semi-public buildings or places, or trampling or wandering about the country or the streets without visible means of support  Supposing, X is an able-bodied man, almost always seen in public places; means of support is through his mother who is a laundrywoman, is he a vagrant? YES  Supposing, the mother is employed, and can provide for the support of her son, is X still a vagrant? YES (3) Any idle or dissolute person who lodges in houses of ill-fame; ruffians or pimps, and those who habitually associate with prostitutes (4) Any person who, not being included in the provisions of other articles of this Code, shall be found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited place belonging to another without any lawful or justifiable purpose (5) Prostitutes  May a woman who has been in the prostitution business for the last 20 years still remain a virgin? YES, the definition of prostitutes – women who, for money or profit, habitually indulge to sexual intercourse OR lascivious conduct • A man cannot be a prostitute from the legal point of view, instead he is liable as a principal by indispensible cooperation  Supposing, a woman engages in sexual intercourse at least two times a week, and does not ask her customers for money, is she a prostitute? NO  Supposing, a woman engages in sexual intercourse once a year, and asks for money, is she a prostitute? NO, there is no element of habituality PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

34

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing, it was done with only one man but regularly, is she a prostitute? YES  Supposing, it was done with a man for 6 months, during those acts, the man did not pay although he kept on promising to give her money. May the woman be considered a prostitute? Yes. • Is it necessary that money is actually received? No.  Supposing for every sexual act, the woman was given jewellery, may she be considered as a prostitute? Yes - the act was still done for profit  Supposing a squad conducted a raid in a house in Binondo known to be a prostitution house; raiders opened a cubicle and found a woman having sexual intercourse with a man. The squad apprehended the woman. Is she liable? No – element of habituality was not established.  Under the same facts, what if there was proof that the woman has been engaged in sexual intercourse with different men for money or profit. Will she be liable? Yes. Will the man be criminally liable? Yes – as principal by indispensable cooperation. ARTICLE 203 WHO ARE PUBLIC OFFICERS • Any person who, by direct provision of the law, popular election, or appointment by competent authority, shall take part in the performance of public functions in the government of the Philippines, or shall perform in said government or any of its branches, public duties as an employee, agent, or subordinate official, of any rank or class.  Supposing the City Government of Manila entered into a contract with XYX Corp. to maintain the cleanliness of the city hall of Manila. The contract provided that the corp. would deploy its men to clean the premises of the building. Are these people deployed by XYX Corp. considered public officers? NO. • Is their work a public function? Yes. • Are they appointed by the city government itself? NO – which means they do not fall under any of the 3 ways by which a person can be considered a public officer ARTICLE 204 KNOWINGLY RENDERING UNJUST JUDGMENT ARTICLE 205 JUDGMENT RENDERED THROUGH NEGLIGENCE • Will any degree of negligence make the judge liable? No – the negligence must be inexcusable. ARTICLE 206 UNJUST INTERLOCUTORY ORDER ARTICLE 207 MALICIOUS DELAY IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

35

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 208 PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES, NEGLIGENCE AND TOLERANCE • Manner of Commission: (1) maliciously refraining from instituting prosecution against violators of the law • Who may commit? Public officer who has the duty to prosecute offender • May this be committed negligently? No. (2) maliciously tolerating the commission of offenses  Supposing a smuggler, knowing that an illegal shipment will be unloaded, talked to a police officer and told him not to assign any men in the area where the shipment would be unloaded and where it would pass while being transported, to which the police agreed. May the police officer be liable? Yes. ARTICLE 209 - BETRAYAL OF TRUST BY AN ATTORNEY OR SOLICITOR ARTICLE 210 - DIRECT BRIBERY • Manner of Commission (1) By agreeing to perform, or by performing, in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present an act constituting a crime, in connection with the performance of official duties. • What consummates the crime? MERE AGREEMENT to give a gift, etc. and to do the act (between the bribe-giver and the officer) • Is it necessary that the officer actually receives the gift? NO • Is it necessary that the act constituting the crime to be committed be actually done by the officer? NO  Supposing, the bribe-giver promised the officer a gift, but after he got what he wanted, he did not give the give anymore, liable for direct bribery? YES  Suppose in one case, there was an extensive cross-exam done by the opposing counsel; the testimony of the witness for the prosecution came to a point that it was damaging the theory of his own case and unless corrected, the prosecution would lose the case; the lawyer for the prosecution asked the stenographer to change certain portions of the transcript, and he would give him P50,000; he agreed that the changed transcript must be ready within a week; the transcript was already available but before it could be given to the lawyer, he was arrested by NBI agents. Liable? YES, because mere agreement is enough to constitute the crime of direct bribery PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

36

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What if the stenographer actually changed the transcript and handed it to the lawyer but the latter had no enough cash and just said he’d be coming back. May the stenographer be criminally liable? What crime/s? Yes. The stenographer is liable for direct bribery and falsification.  What if the lawyer never came back? Is the stenographer still liable? YES  What if the lawyer came back and gave a check which was later dishonored for lack of funds. Still liable? Yes.  Supposing X approached a judge and told him that if he could render a decision favorable to him (X), he will give him two nights with a sexy dancer of his choice; the decision was rendered in favor of X but he was not able to produce the promised dancers. May the judge be liable? IT DEPENDS – if during trial, there is insufficient evidence from X but the decision was still rendered in his favor, the judge may be liable for unjust judgment under Article 204. (2) By accepting a gift in consideration of the execution of an act, which does not constitute a crime, in connection with the performance of his official duty. • What consummates the crime? Acceptance – mere agreement to accept the bribe does not constitute a crime  Supposing X, who was frustrated by the long line in getting his driver’s license, gave one of the employees of LTO P500 pesos to allow him to get ahead of the line. The LTO employee accepted the amount but just the same, he did not allow X to get ahead of the others. May the LTO employee still be liable for direct bribery? YES – the bribe was already accepted  What if X merely promised to give the LTO employee P500. The employee agreed. X was able to get ahead in the line and his license was released. It turns out that X does not have the money. He told the LTO employee that he would just return to pay him but he never did. Is the LTO employee liable? No. (3) By agreeing to refrain, or by refraining from doing something which it its his official duty to do, in consideration of a gift or promise. • What consummates the crime? Mere Agreement.  Supposing A was applying for a driver’s license and he was supposed to take a written exam. He placed money in the drawer of the examiner so the latter agreed to take the exam for A. Is the examiner liable? YES.  What if A passed the written exams but he had to wait for the results before taking the practical exam. He did not want to wait so he dropped P1000 in the examiner’s drawer. The latter immediately told A to proceed to the practical exam. Liable? YES. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

37

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing a smuggler talked to the chief of police at the time the ship will be unloading his illegal goods. He told the chief that he will give him a large amount of money if he will refrain from deploying his men at the pier. The chief agreed and did not deploy his men. Is the chief of police liable for direct bribery? YES – under the first manner of commission; refraining from deploying his men is already a crime in itself (Article 208 dereliction of duty) • Who else may be liable for direct bribery? (a) private persons who conspire with the officers (b) accessories and accomplices (c) principal by indispensable cooperation * No principal by inducement – they fall under Article 212 corruption of public officials ARTICLE 211 - INDIRECT BRIBERY  Supposing X is the owner of a taxi company and he gave a car to the newly appointed LTFRB chairman. The chairman accepted. Is he liable? YES. • When a public officer is prosecuted for either direct bribery or indirect bribery, may he likewise be prosecuted for violation of RA 3019? YES. ARTICLE 211 - A QUALIFIED BRIBERY ARTICLE 212 - CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS PD 749 - GRANTING IMMUNITY TO GIVER OF BRIBE • Conditions for grant of immunity to a witness: (1) his testimony must refer to consummated violations (2) his testimony must be necessary for the conviction of the accused (3) his testimony must not yet be in the possession of the state (4) his testimony may be corroborated on its material points (5) witness has not been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude  Supposing a witness testified against a public officer and availed of this immunity. After doing so, he refused to continue testifying. What is the legal effect? Immunity will no longer attach. May the witness be included in the information and be prosecuted? YES.  Supposing he testified but the testimony was false. Legal effect? Immunity will not attach; witness may be prosecuted  What if he testified but the court disregarded his testimony and acquitted the officer, is the witness still immune? No – the testimony must be necessary for conviction. ARTICLE 213 - FRAUDS AGAINST THE PUBLIC TREASURY AND SIMILAR OFFENSES PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

38

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Manner of Commission: (1) by entering into an agreement with any interested party or speculator or making use of any other scheme to defraud the government, in dealing with any person with regard to furnishing supplies, the making of contracts, or the adjustment or settlement of accounts relating to public property or funds  Supposing the DOH appropriated P100M for medicine to be distributed; instead of the medicine specified, in connivance with the officer, the manufacturer distributed only medicine of inferior quality. Liable? YES.  Supposing a contract was executed between DPWH and a private contractor; DPWH purchased 100 trucks of gravel, 200 trucks of sand, and 5000 bags of cement. DPWH paid the contractor the corresponding amount for the materials but in connivance with the officer, the contractor delivered only 10 trucks of gravel, 10 trucks of sand, and 1000 bags of cement. Liable? YES. Liable for violation of RA 3019? YES. (2) by demanding, directly or indirectly, the payment of sums different from or larger than those authorized by law in the collection of taxes, licenses, fees, and other imposts  Supposing an official asked a Chinese merchant to pay for P700 thousand delinquency taxes when in fact only P500 thousand is to be paid. Liable? YES – demanded a larger sum than that authorized by law  What if he asked for the payment of only P200 thousand. Still liable? YES – demanded payment different from that authorized by law (3) by failing voluntarily to issue a receipt, as provided by law, for any sum of money collected by him officially, in the collection of taxes, licenses, fees, and other imposts (4) by collecting or receiving, directly or indirectly, by way of payment or otherwise, things or objects of a nature different from that provided by law, in the collection of taxes, licenses. Fees, and other imposts ARTICLE 214 - OTHER FRAUDS ARTICLE 215 - PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS  Supposing an RTC judge, whose jurisdiction is the national capital judicial region, purchased stocks in Ortigas. Liable? YES.  What if the RTC judge purchased stocks in Cebu. Liable? No. ARTICLE 216 - PROHIBITED INTEREST PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

39

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing a minor was hospitalized and his guardian had to sell some of the properties. With the approval of the court, the guardian sold a property to a company where he is a majority stockholder. Liable? YES.  Supposing the regional director of the DENR had to approve logging concessions. An application by a company where his wife is a majority stockholder was approved. Liable? YES – there is indirect benefit  What if there was a pre-nuptial agreement between them, still liable? Not anymore. ARTICLE 217 - MALVERSATION • Who may commit? Public officers • Any public officer? No. • Is it enough that he has the physical charge of the fund or property to be held liable? No – he must be an accountable public officer  Supposing the Director of Manila Zoo has a zoo caretaker who works for him. The latter sold the animals in the zoo. Is the caretaker liable for malversation? No – he only has qualified charge over the animals. In this case, the Director of the Manila Zoo is the accountable officer.  Supposing a van was ordered confiscated for having been used in the commission of a certain crime. However, the custodian sold the car. Is he liable for malversation? YES – the car has become public property already.  Supposing the car was used in the transporting of shabu. Upon conviction of the accused, the car was forfeited. The PDEA chair sold the car. What crime may he be liable for? Violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act  Supposing heroin was confiscated; PDEA agents sold the prohibited drug to other. Crime? Violation of Dangerous Drugs Act.  Supposing a SWAT member was given a modern assault rifle to be used in the performance of his job. He committed irregularities, for which he was dismissed. He was ordered to return the rifle but he refused and instead sold it. What crime may he be liable for? Malversation – even though he has been dismissed, he is still considered an accountable officer.  The property custodian of DPWH for the construction of roads let the equipment and materials idle. As a consequence of which, the residents got hold of the same. What crime may the property custodian be liable for? Malversation through negligence/abandonment

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

40

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing there was a demand made to an accountable public officer to pay within 10 days; 10 days had lapsed but he still failed to account for the shortage. Liable? YES – the presumption applies  What if there has been a criminal case filed against the officer; thereafter, he returned the amount he misappropriated. Still liable? YES, but the return mitigates the liability (criminal liability attaches the moment all the elements are present and cannot be extinguished by the return of the malversed money, which is not one of the grounds for extinguishment of criminal liability provided for under Article 89) ARTICLE 218 - FAILURE OF ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS • Is demand necessary? No – as long as there is a law requiring the officer to render accounts ARTICLE 219 - FAILURE OF A RESPONSIBLE PUBLIC OFFICER TO RENDER ACCOUNTS BEFORE LEAVING THE COUNTRY ARTICLE 220 - ILLEGAL USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY  What constitutes the crime of technical malversation? The fact that the officer applies the public funds or property to a public use other than that for which such fund or property has been appropriated by law or ordinance ARTICLE 221 - FAILURE TO MAKE DELIVERY OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY  Supposing the AFP issued a check to a supplier but the disbursing officer refused to deliver the check. Liable? YES – under the first manner (failing to make payment by a public officer who is under obligation to make such payment from the government funds in his possession) ARTICLE 222 - OFFICERS INCLUDED IN THE PRECEDING PROVISIONS ARTICLE 223 - CONNIVING WITH OR CONSENTING TO EVASION  Supposing there is a prisoner who requested if he could go home sine his house is just near the jail. The officer consented. Is the officer liable? YES. ARTICLE 224 - EVASION THROUGH NEGLIGENCE ARTICLE 225 - ESCAPE OF PRISONER UNDER THE CUSTODY OF A PERSON NOT A PUBLIC OFFICER ARTICLE 226 - REMOVAL, CONCEALMENT, OR DESTRUCTION OF DOCUMENTS • The removal should be for an illicit purpose

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

41

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing the building where the RTC is, is leaking. The stenographer removes the papers/documents to save them. Is he liable? No. • In concealment and destruction, the mere act of it is punishable; lack of illicit purpose or illegal motive is not a valid defense  Supposing there are several blank application forms in the DPWH office. One day, a personnel set it on fire. Is he liable for infidelity? No – forms are not documents  Supposing during trial, prosecution presented P100 thousand which were used in an entrapment operation. It was kept as evidence. One day, the clerk ran out of cash so he got P20 thousand from the exhibit. What crime may he be liable for? Infidelity of documents. The money bills partake the nature of a document which was used to prove the fact of the entrapment and bribery (not to be used for disbursing). ARTICLE 227 - OFFICER BREAKING SEAL ARTICLE 228 - OPENING OF CLOSED DOCUMENTS ARTICLE 229 - REVELATION OF SECRETS BY AN OFFICER ARTICLE 230 - PUBLIC OFFICER REVEALING SECRETS OF PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS  Supposing an employee of the BIR disclosed your income to another employee. Is he liable? YES – a person’s income is his secret ARTICLE 231 - OPEN DISOBEDIENCE ARTICLE 232 - DISOBEDIENCE TO ORDER OF SUPERIOR OFFICER, WHEN SAID ORDER WAS SUSPENDED BY INFERIOR OFFICER ARTICLE 233 - REFUSAL OF ASSISTANCE  Suppose there was no demand, may the officer to whom the assistance was expected be liable for refusal? NO – Demand must be made; it is necessary because without demand, there can be no refusal ARTICLE 234 - REFUSAL TO DISCHARGE ELECTIVE OFFICE ARTICLE 235 - MALTREATMENT OF PRISONERS • Who are the prisoners contemplated? Prisoners (by final judgment) and detention prisoners • May it be committed by any public officer? NO – only those who have direct charge of the prisoners or detention prisoners PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

42

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Manner of Commission: (1) by overdoing himself in the correction and handling of a prisoner or detention prisoner under his charge either (a) by imposition of punishments no authorized by the regulations, or (b) by inflicting such punishments in a cruel humiliating manner  Supposing a detention prisoner was being suspected of having been involved in kidnapping; one of the policemen inflicted injuries and the detention prisoner suffered mortal wounds, which might have caused his death were it not for the timely medical assistance. What crime/s may the police officer be liable for? Maltreatment of prisoners and frustrated homicide. The offenses are to be treated as separate crimes by virtue of the provision which states “in addition to any other liability for physical injuries or damage caused…” (2) by maltreating such prisoner t extort a confession or to obtain some information from the prisoner ARTICLE 236 - ANTICIPATION OF DUTIES OF A PUBLIC OFFICE ARTICLE 237 - PROLONGING PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES AND POWERS ARTICLE 238 - ABANDONMENT OF OFFICE OR POSITION ARTICLE 239 - USURPATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS ARTICLE 240 - USURPATION OF EXECUTIVE FUNCTIONS ARTICLE 241 - USURPATION OF JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS ARTICLE 242 - DISOBEYING REQUEST FOR DISQUALIFICATION ARTICLE 243 - ORDERS OR REQUESTS BY EXECUTIVE OFFICERS TO ANY JUDICIAL AUTHORITY • What is the purpose of this provision? To prevent executive officers from influencing judicial authorities  Supposing the Deputy Executive Secretary has a connection with a strong political leader who has a pending case before a judge. The Deputy Sec. prepares a letter addressed to the judge, which states that any legal assistance given to the political leader will be appreciated. Is the Deputy Sec. liable? NO. There was no order, no suggestion, to the judge on what to do. ARTICLE 244 - UNLAWFUL APPOINTMENTS ARTICLE 245 - ABUSES AGAINST CHASTITY PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

43

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Against who may it committed? Women only.  Supposing a female public officer made advances to a male prisoner. May she be liable? Under the RPC, she may not be liable but she may be held liable for violation of the Anti-graft and Corrupt Practices Act.  Supposing a judge said that he will render a decision in favor of a woman with a pending case before her provided that she would be his sweetheart. Liable? NO – the proposal is neither indecent nor immoral (even if the judge is married) • The term “wife” in the third manner is misplaced. The third manner is in reference to the second manner of commission. A woman in custody cannot have a “wife.”  Supposing a judge invites a woman interested with a pending case before him, talk to him in a motel. Is he liable? No. The invitation is neither indecent nor immoral. The invitation is merely for them to talk.  Supposing, under the same facts, he invites her to be his “lover.” The public officer is already married. Is he liable? No. loving is neither immoral nor indecent.  Supposing a warden and a woman detainee, both single, fall in love and have a relationship, which resulted in the latter’s pregnancy. Is warden liable? YES. Sexual intercourse outside of marriage is immoral. ARTICLE 246 - PARRICIDE • Who may be the offended party? Legitimate or illegitimate father, mother or child; legitimate other ascendant or other descendant; legitimate spouse  Supposing an illegitimate grandson killed his grandfather. Crime committed? Murder or homicide, as the case may be • Spouses include those with defective or flawed marriages. Presumption of validity of marriage applies until it is terminated by final judicial declaration.  Supposing H and W were married; at the time of their marriage. W was a minor whose consent was obtained through force. After three years, W killed H. What crime did W commit? Parricide. There is a presumption of validity of marriage.  H and W, both Filipinos, were married in Hong Kong without a valid marriage license. When they went home to the Philippines, W killed H. What crime may W be liable for? Parricide.  W filed a case for the declaration of nullity of her marriage to H. Judgment was rendered but H appealed the case. While appeal was pending, W killed H. Crime committed? Parricide. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

44

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing the judgment has already become final when W killed H. Crime? Homicide or murder, as the case may be. ARTICLE 247 - DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES  Supposing H surprised W in the act of intercourse with another man. H fired his gun at the two of them; W was hit but according to the doctor, the injuries W sustained were only less serious ones. Liable? No. • When should the killing or the infliction of injuries take place? In the act or immediately thereafter.  When H came home one night, he saw a man, wearing only underwear, jump out of the window of H’s room. Convinced that the man has had sexual intercourse his wife, H ran after him and kills him. Can he avail of the benefits of Article 243? NO – killing should be committed after having one’s spouse in the act of sexual intercourse with another.  H saw W and her paramour both naked; H shot them. Can he avail of the benefits of Article 243? No. He did not see them in the act of sexual intercourse.  H saw W naked with P; both were doing lascivious acts preparatory to the intercourse; H shot them both. May H avail of the benefits under Article 234? No. • What does “immediately thereafter mean”? The discovery, the escape, the pursuit, and the killing should all form part of a single act; there should be no interruption  Supposing H already has a suspicion of W’s infidelity so he told her that he was going to the province for a week when in fact, he was not. H left home, waited for an hour and returned. H then saw W and P in the act of intercourse. H went to the kitchen to look for a knife but he couldn’t find any; he remembered that he has a revolver in the neighbor’s house so he went there. When he got his gun, P was already playing billiards at a nearby place. H shot P dead. Is H entitled to benefits? YES. The death of P is still the proximate result of the outrage of H, who caught him having sexual intercourse with his wife.  H surprised W in the act with P; H shot P and the bullet also hit the houseboy who was peeping through a slightly opened window. May H be held liable for the injuries sustained by or even the death of the houseboy? YES. Article 247 is still a felony because it provides a penalty. As such, H is liable for the direct, natural, and logical consequences of his act pursuant to Article 4 of the RPC. ARTICLE 248 - MURDER • In the absence of qualified aggravating circumstance (QAC), how would you classify the killing of a person? Homicide. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

45

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing only a generic aggravating circumstance (GAC) is present, how would you classify the killing of a person? Homicide. • Qualified Aggravating Circumstance v. Generic Aggravating Circumstance (1) QAC – cannot be offset by any mitigating circumstance GAC – may be offset by an ordinary mitigating circumstance (2) QAC – changes the nature of the crime GAC – does not change the nature of the crime; only increases the penalty by period (3) QAC - must be alleged in the information GAC – need not be alleged as long as it is proven during the trial • If a QAC is not alleged but the prosecution introduced a witness or presented evidence proving the existence of such QAC to which the defense counsel did not object, and such QAC was actually proven, it still does not change the nature of the crime but only increases the penalty. • If a person was killed and the accused was under the influence of liquor, what crime may he be liable for? Homicide. Intoxication is an alternative circumstance. • What if the accused was under the influence of a prohibited drug, what crime may he be liable for? Murder – influence of drugs in the commission of a crime is considered a QAC under Section 25 of the Dangerous Drugs Act. ARTICLE 249 - HOMICIDE ARTICLE 250 - PENALTY FOR FRUSTRATED PARRICIDE, MURDER OR HOMICIDE ARTICLE 251 - DEATH CAUSED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY  Supposing the person who gave the fatal blow was identified, what crime is committed? Homicide or murder, as the case may be; the situation is no longer contemplated under Article 251. ARTICLE 252 - PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY  Supposing the person who inflicted the physical injuries can be identified, what crime may he be liable for? Physical injuries, depending on the nature of the injuries inflicted. ARTICLE 253 - GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE ARTICLE 254 - DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS  Supposing the accused aimed his gun at the house of his neighbor, is he liable for discharge of firearms? No, he is only liable for alarms and scandals. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

46

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing C aimed his gun at A, but at the time it was discharged , it was no longer aimed t A. Crime committed? Illegal discharge. ARTICLE 255 - INFANTICIDE  Supposing a stranger killed a two-day old child with the use of poison. Crime? Infanticide.  Supposing a mother killed her two-day old child. Crime? Infanticide ARTICLE 256 - INTENTIONAL ABORTION ARTICLE 257 - UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION • May there be a crime of unintentional abortion through reckless imprudence? No. The violence exerted against the pregnant woman must be intentional.  Supposing a jeepney driver who was driving recklessly, hit a pregnant woman. The impact threw the woman several meters away, as a result of which, she suffered an abortion. Crime? At most, physical injuries. The violence exerted was not intended. ARTICLE 258 - ABORTION PRACTICED BY THE WOMAN HERSELF OR BY HER PARENTS • Any mitigating circumstance? YES, if the purpose was to conceal dishonor; only the pregnant woman is entitled to avail of such mitigating circumstance. ARTICLE 259 - ABORTION PRACTICED BY A PHYSICIAN OR MIDWIFE AND DISPENSING OF ABORTIVES ARTICLE 260 - RESPONSIBILITY OF PARTICIPANTS IN A DUEL  Supposing in the course of the duel, no one was injured or harmed, may the combatants still be liable? YES, under the third manner .of commission of duel: by making a combat although no physical injuries have been inflicted.  What if one of the combatants was seriously injured but survived, may he still be liable for duel? YES. ARTICLE 261 - CHALLENGING TO A DUEL ARTICLE 262 - MUTILATION • As distinguished from physical injuries, in mutilation, there is an intention to deprive the offended party of the use of any part his body

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

47

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Differentiate mutilation from attempted/frustrated parricide, infanticide, homicide or murder. In the mutilation, there is merely an intent to deprive the offended party of the use of any part of his body; in PMHI, there is an intent to kill ARTICLE 263 - SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES • Manner of commission: (1) by wounding (2) by beating (3) by assaulting (4) by administering injurious substance (Art. 264) • Differentiate SPI from frustrated parricide, infanticide, homicide or murder. In SPI, while the injury inflicted may be mortal or sufficient to cause the death of a person, if there is no intention to kill, the crime will remain SPL; in frustrated PMHI, there is an intent to kill ARTICLE 264 - ADMINISTERING INJURIOUS SUBSTANCES OR BEVERAGES ARTICLE 265 - LESS SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES ARTICLE 266 - SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES AND MALTREATMENT RA 9262 - ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN ACT • Define sexual, psychological, physical, and economic abuse. • Define stalking. • Define Battered Woman Syndrome. Does it have the same effect as a justifying circumstance? • Who are the women protected by the law?  Supposing the offender and the woman were only phone pals and had never met each other in person. May the man be liable under this law? No. They victim and offender did not have a “dating relationship.”  Supposing that the victim was a prostitute who had sexual intercourse with the offender for the first time. May the offender be liable under the law? YES. There is sexual relationship between them. RA

Anti-Hazing Law

• What is hazing? How is it committed? • Who are the persons liable and what are their liabilities? PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

48

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Which physical, mental, and psychological tests or training of the AFP, PNP, PMA, and CAT are not considered as hazing? Those approved by the NAPOLCOM and Secretary of National Defense. • What physical injuries are contemplated under this statute? Those enumerated under the RPC (serious, less serious and slight physical injuries). Abortion is not included. ARTICLE 266-A TO 266-D RAPE • How is rape classified? As a public crime. (rape can be prosecuted de officio, w/c means authorities can initiate the filing of the complaint) • Manner of commission: (1) sexual act (carnal knowledge of a woman by a man) • Is it sufficient that a man has carnal knowledge of a woman? NO – it must be accompanied or attended by any of the circumstances enumerated • May a woman be criminally liable for rape under the first manner? - As principal by inducement? YES. - As principal by indispensable cooperation? YES. - As principal by direct participation? YES. ONLY if there is conspiracy - As an accomplice or accessory? YES. • Attendant circumstances: (a) through force, threat or intimidation • Is it necessary for the crime to be consummated that there be full penetration? No – partial is sufficient • In the event that force was used, what degree of resistance must be put up by the offended party? Same as if she was defending her life  Supposing the woman did not offer any resistance; she was simply reluctant. Is the man liable? No. (b) when the offended party is deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious  Supposing the offended party was asleep. When she woke up, she saw a man on top of her and she just let him be. Is the man still liable? It depends. If there was already penetration before she woke up, the man would be liable since the woman’s resistance is unnecessary considering the crime had already been consummated; if there was no penetration yet and the woman did not resist, there is no rape. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

49

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing a tablet, which has the effect of arousing a woman sexually, was secretly dropped by a man into his date’s drink. After the effect kicks in, he invites her to his place and has sexual intercourse with her. Is he liable? No. There were no attendant circumstances present. The woman was simply made to loosen her inhibitions (c) by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority • Is it necessary that there be force, threat, or intimidation? No. • May the offender still be liable even if there is consent of the woman? YES. • Fraudulent machinations include promise to marriage in order to secure a woman’s consent to sexual intercourse  Supposing through a promise of marriage, A agreed to have sexual intercourse with her boyfriend; but when she became pregnant, he disappeared. Crime committed? Rape.  Supposing a man had sexual intercourse with the daughter of his common-law wife. The girl is 19 years old. Is he liable? YES. There is grave abuse of authority. Also applies to professor having sexual intercourse with student, guardian with ward, adopting father with his adopted daughter. (d) when the offended party is under 12 years old or is demented • If victim is a minor, the charge of rape is always accompanied by violation of R. A. 7610  Supposing a girl worked as a prostitute who agreed to have sexual intercourse with the accused in exchange for a certain amount of money. She was 11 years, 11months, and 29 days old at the time of the commission of the offense. May the accused be held liable for rape? YES – regardless of the consent of the offended party, sexual intercourse with a child under 12 years old is always rape. (2) sexual assault • How committed? By inserting one’s penis into another’s mouth or anal orifice or by inserting any instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person; both must be attended by any of the circumstances enumerated in the first manner • May the offended party be male? YES.  Supposing in a rape case, there is one principal by direct participation and 2 principals by indispensable cooperation. The principal by direct participation marries the victim. Who benefits from the pardon provided by the law? The principal by direct participation. Does the pardon extend to his co-accused? R. A. 8353 is silent. There is no official interpretation by the Supreme Court. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

50

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 267 - KIDNAPPING AND SERIOUS ILLEGAL DETENTION • Is it necessary that there be physical deprivation of liberty for a person to be considered detained? No.  Supposing a person was detained in a building; he was free to roam around but offenders did not allow him to go out of the building’s premises. Detention? YES.  Supposing he was allowed to go out but he chose to stay inside the building for security purposes. Detention? No. • Attendant circumstances: (a) if the detention lasts for more than three days  Supposing the offended party is detained for only one day but is a minor. Kidnapping? YES – this would fall under the 4th circumstance  Supposing the offended party is 45 years old and is a barangay tanod. He was detained for two days. Kidnapping? YES – this would fall under the 4th circumstance (b) when the detention is committed by simulating public authority (c)when serious physical injuries are inflicted or threats to kill offended party are made  Supposing the infliction of physical injuries was only incidental, may offenders still be liable? YES – the law does not make distinction as to whether the injuries were inflicted intentionally or accidentally. (d) when the victim is a minor, a female, or a public officer • Kidnapping for ransom - What does ransom mean? Ransom is money, price or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a captured person or persons; a payment that releases one from captivity  Supposing A was courting B, female friend, but she neglected his proposals. A kidnapped B’s sister; the condition for her release was for B to agree to become A’s girlfriend. B agreed and A released her sister. What crime did A commit? Kidnapping for ransom  Is the crime of grave threats absorbed in kidnapping? YES.  Supposing A owes X P50,000; A cannot pay so X kidnapped his mother and would only release her if A pays his debt. What crime may X be liable for? Kidnapping for ransom. Notwithstanding the fact that the amount asked of is legally due to X? YES.

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

51

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A borrowed a car from X but refused to return it so X kidnapped A’s brother; the car was returned and the brother was released. What crime did X commit? Kidnapping for ransom the car was considered ransom.  Supposing A kidnapped X and brought him to Cavite. On the same night, A was killed. Crime committed? Murder – there was no indication of A’s intention to detain X. kidnapping was only incidental.  Supposing X was kidnapped and was brought to Laguna. Ransom was demanded but not forthcoming so X was killed. Crime committed? Special complex crime of kidnapping with homicide ARTICLE 269 - UNLAWFUL ARREST  Supposing A saw B in the act of committing theft so he arrested B. A kept him for 2-3 hours after which, he brought B to the proper authorities. Is a liable? No - the arrest falls under valid warrantless arrests  Supposing a police officer has been suspecting that his houseboy has been stealing the jewellery of his wife so he took the houseboy into custody and brought him to the municipal hall for proper action. Liable? YES but for the crime of arbitrary detention since the offender is a public officer.  What if there was already an order for the suspension of the police officer at the time he arrested his houseboy. Still liable? YES, this time for unlawful arrest.  Supposing X suspected that his maid has been taking the jewellery of his mother so X took his maid to the police. Liable? YES. There is only mere suspicion. Arrest is not a valid warrantless arrest. ARTICLE 270 - KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A MINOR • May the parents be criminally liable for this crime? YES, if they are separated and one of them fails to return the child to the other’s custody  Supposing H and W were legally separated; custody of the child from Monday-Friday is with W while it was with H during the weekends. One weekend, H brought the child to the province, and after five days, they still had not returned. Is H liable? YES.  Supposing in a judicial proceeding, the mother was deprived of the custody of her children which was granted to the DSWD. The mother took her children and did not allow DSWD to take them. Liable? ARTICLE 271 - INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS HOME PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

52

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing the accused assembled some minors in the province and told them about Manila. The minors were mesmerized by his stories of the life in the city. That evening, when the accused was about to leave for Manila, he saw three minors who wanted to go with him. He took them with him to Manila. Liable? No.  Supposing the accused persuaded the minors to go with him to Manila with the promise of giving them lucrative jobs. The minors went with the accused. Liable? YES. ARTICLE 272 - SLAVERY ARTICLE 273 - EXPLOITATION OF CHILD LABOR ARTICLE 274 - SERVICES RENDERED UNDER COMPULSION IN PAYMENT OF DEBT ARTICLE 275 - ABANDONMENT OF PERSONS IN DANGER AND ABANDONMENT OF ONE’S OWN VICTIM • Manner of commission: (1) by failing to render assistance to any person whom the offender finds in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying  Supposing the person X found did not have a wound but just fainted and lost consciousness; X did not give him any assistance. Liable? No.  What if he was unconscious because of starvation, is X liable if he did not render assistance? YES. (2) by failing to help or render assistance to another whom the offender has accidentally wounded or injured  Supposing X intentionally injured somebody in an isolated place and left him there. Is X liable? No. (3) by failing to deliver a child, under 7 years of age, whom the offender has found abandoned to the authorities or to his family, or by failing to take him to a safe place • Is it necessary that the minor be wounded? No, but the minor must be found in an unsafe place. ARTICLE 276 - ABANDONING A MINOR • The purpose of abandonment is to avoid the obligation of taking care of such minor ARTICLE 277 - ABANDONMENT OF MINOR BY PERSON ENTRUSTED WITH HIS CUSTODY; INDIFFERENCE OF PARENTS PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

53

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• In indifference of parents, may the parents also be liable for violation of RA 7610(Anti-Child Abuse Law)? YES. ARTICLE 278 - EXPLOITATION OF MINORS ARTICLE 279 - ADDITIONAL PENALTIES FOR OTHER OFFENSES ARTICLE 280 - QUALIFIED TRESPASS TO DWELLING  Supposing the offender was a public officer. What crime may he be liable for? Violation of domicile.  Supposing the back door was open, accused entered through the said door. The owner saw him and told him to leave but he did not. Liable? No. Entry was not against the will of the owner. • Possible defenses in trespass to dwelling: (1) purpose was to prevent harm on the accused, the owner of the dwelling, or third person (2) purpose is to render some service to humanity or justice (3) place is a café, tavern, inn, and other public house, while the same is open ARTICLE 281 - OTHER FORMS OF TRESPASS ARTICLE 282 - GRAVE THREATS  Supposing the threat was made and it was relayed to the person after three hours. Is offender still liable? YES. • If the threat was used as a means to commit another crime, the threat is absorbed in such crime. ARTICLE 283 - LIGHT THREATS  Supposing X made the following threat to Y: - “If you don’t lend me your book, I will be forced to cheat.” What crime may X be liable for? Light threats - “If you don’t allow me to cheat, I will take your book and sell it.” What crime may X be liable for? Grave threats - “If you don’t lend me your book, I not pay my debt.” What crime may X be liable for? Light threats ARTICLE 284 - BOND FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

54

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 285 - OTHER LIGHT THREATS ARTICLE 286 - GRAVE COERCIONS  Supposing a police officer, through violence, prevented X from joining the NPA. May the police officer be liable? No – the police officer is justified.  Several armed men surrounded the farm in a certain area. Because of their fear, the farmers did not go out of their house to harvest palay. What crime may the armed men be liable for? Grave threats.  Supposing A boarded a taxi and the taxi brought you somewhere despite your efforts to stop the driver. Liable? No. ARTICLE 287 - LIGHT COERCIONS  Supposing the purpose of the seizure by offender was to sell the properties seized and not to apply to the debt. Crime committed? Robbery – there was intent to gain (assuming there was violence in the seizure) • Distinguish from services rendered under compulsion of debt under Article 274. Under Article 274, suppose X is indebted to A but he cannot pay. A asked X to work as a janitor in his office as payment for his debt. Liable? No – he must have been made to work as a household servant or far laborer. ARTICLE 288 & ARTICLE 289 • Articles 288 and 289 are now covered by the provisions of the Labor Code. • ROBBERY  Supposing a person was divested of his cell phone. As the robbers were fleeing, they were in turn, divested of the cell phone they took from you. Are the robbers liable? YES.  When the thing taken is a motor vehicle, crime committed is always carnapping, whether it was taken with or without force, violence, etc. What is essential is the subject matter of the crime. Same is true with violation of Anti-cattle rustling law. The subject taken is large cattle.  Supposing A stole a car with jewellery and money inside. What crime is he liable for? Carnapping.  Supposing an offender has taken possession of the object but offended party fought back and was able to retrieve his stolen property. Is offender still liable? YES. The crime is consummated by the mere act of taking. It is not necessary that offender has had sufficient time to dispose of the object or property. Its return does not preclude the existence of robbery. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

55

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing you threaten another person to retrieve your personal property. Are you liable for robbery? No. There is no intent to gain. • ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF PERSONS:  Supposing A, B, and C wanted to rob the wealthiest family in the barangay. On their way to the house, they saw one of its residents and killed him in order there will be no opposition during the robbery. They then proceeded to the house and robbed it. What crime are they liable for? Robbery with homicide.  Supposing during a robbery a shoot-out ensues between the robbers and the son of the owner of the house. One of the robbers is killed. What crime are they liable for? Robbery with homicide. So long as a person is killed by reason or on occasion of the robbery.  Supposing that while fleeing, robbers saw a person who witnessed the crime and killed him. Crime? Robbery with homicide.  If during the robbery, a policemen responded and was killed during the shoot-out. What crime are the robbers liable for? Robbery with homicide.  Supposing robbers escaped and policemen were able to catch up with them in another province. During the shoot-out, one robber was killed while two policemen were injured. What crime are they liable for? Robbery with homicide and physical injuries. • Homicide is given a generic meaning; it contemplates parricide, murder, and infanticide.  Supposing a robber accidentally pulled the trigger of his gun and killed another robber who was his son. Crime committed? Robbery with homicide; not parricide.  Supposing a maid was hogtied and killed by robbers. Crime? Robbery with homicide even if there is treachery.  Supposing a robber stepped on a two-day old child instantly killing the latter. Crime? Robbery with homicide; not infanticide. • Distinguish robbery from direct bribery: In both, there is intimidation. If threat of prosecution was used to make a person part from his money and person actually committed a crime and was intimidated to part with his money – there is bribery. However, if charges were merely concocted, the crime committed is robbery.  Supposing there is a restaurant which was inspected by sanitary officers and thereafter a violation of cleanliness ordinance was discovered. The sanitation officers intimidated the Chinese owner with threats of legal cases and asked for P50,000 in exchange for their silence. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

56

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Chinese owner gives them the said amount. What crime are the sanitation officers liable for? Direct Bribery.  Under the same facts, if there is actually no violation of cleanliness ordinance and threats of prosecution are based on concocted facts, the crime committed by the sanitary officers is robbery.  Supposing five robbers agreed to commit crime of robbery of Bank X only. The bank manager was shot dead by one of the robbers. Who is/are liable for the killing of the bank manager? All members of the band shall be equally liable as principals. Unless, being present in the scene of the crime, they attempted to prevent the killing or assault of another person by their co-robber (except if there is an agreement to kill all those who get in their way.)  Supposing A, B, and C conspired to rob the house of X; C took a woman out of the house and raped her. Liability? A and B – robbery only; C – robbery with rape. A and B were not present when C raped the woman so they were not in the position to prevent C from committing the rape. • ROBBERY WITH FORCE UPON THINGS:  Supposing a man slashes the bag of a passer-by and takes her cell phone and wallet. What crime is committed? Theft. The use of force upon things must be used as a means to gain entry to a building or house.  Supposing a part of the house was set on fire by the accused in order to divert the attention of the household members while his co-accused robbed the house. Crime committed? Robbery with arson.  Supposing after a robbery was committed in a public bus, the vehicle was set on fire. Is the crime committed a special complex crime of robbery with arson? No. the robbery was already consummated when the bus was set on fire. • The concept of dependencies –  Supposing there is a house; adjacent to it is a grocery and there is a door connecting the two. The offender destroys the door of the grocery and enters thru the connecting door and robbed the house. Liable? YES. Robbery with force upon things. • Manner of commission: 1) in an inhabited house, public building, or edifice devoted to worship a) unlawful entry (effected through opening not made for entrance)  Supposing offender entered through the window of a house and stole valuables. Crime committed? Robbery. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

57

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing owners use the window for entering the house. Offender entered through the window and stole valuables. Crime committed? Theft. If offender entered through the door the crime committed is robbery.  Supposing the offender, after breaking the window, “reaches” for valuables inside the house. Crime committed? Theft. Force upon things was not used as a means to enter the house.  Supposing accused broke the window of a car and took valuables within his arm’s reach. Crime committed? Theft.  Supposing there is a warehouse. Accused entered through the slide opening and took 50 cavans of rice. Crime committed? Robbery. There is unlawful entry b) breaking door (external), wall, window, roof, floor  Supposing accused entered through the door of a house. After taking valuables, offender breaks the window in order to escape. Crime committed? Theft. The window was not broken to effect entrance  Supposing a carport is enclosed with a gate. Accused broke the gate and took the vehicle inside the carport. Crime committed? Carnapping. If offenders took valuables inside, the crime is robbery.  Supposing offender took the stolen car to a nearby street, removed its stereo and fled leaving the car behind. Crime committed? Carnapping. There is material possession of the car c) through the use of picklocks or false keys • Picklock: used solely for the commission of the crime; mere possession is punishable. • False key: includes a genuine key stolen from owner  Supposing A used a false key to open the door of their neighbor’s house; when he opened the door, he saw a motorcycle in the sala and took it. What crime may A be liable for? Carnapping d) by simulating or pretending to be a public authority  Supposing a Meralco lineman asked permission to conduct electrical inspection inside your house. Upon entry, he takes your property. It turns out, he was merely purporting himself to be Meralce lineman. Is he liable for robbery? No. A Meralco lineman is not a person in authority. e) use of fictitious name PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

58

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing X pretended to be a long lost relative to gain your permission to sleep in your house for the night. Once inside, he takes your valuable items. Crime committed? Theft. There is no use of fictitious name. f) by breaking door (internal), wardrobe, chest, locked or sealed furniture or receptacle  Supposing a husband and wife locked the door of the master’s bedroom when they left for work. The offender broke the door and took the couple’s jewellery. Crime commited? Robbery.  Supposing the door of the master’s bedroom was not closed. Offender entered and took a locked jewellery box. He then destroyed the lock and took the valuables. Crime committed? Robbery.  Supposing the said jewellery box is not locked or sealed but merely closed. The offender, thinking it was locked, destroyed the box and took the jewellery. Crime committed? Theft. g) by removing or taking away such locked or sealed furniture, chest, receptacle to be broken or forced open outside the place of robbery  Supposing the offender took a sealed jewellery box from an inhabited house and brought it outside and broke it open. What crime did he commit? Robbery. If what he broke outside the inhabited house was a closed jewellery box, what crime did he commit? Theft.  Supposing offender took a sealed jewellery box from an inhabited house with the intention to break it outside. However, the son of the owner catches him with the box while he was on his way out. Crime committed? Consummated robbery. The box need not be broken. The crime is consummated by the mere act of taking. 2) in an uninhabited house or public building a) unlawful entry (effected through opening not made for entrance) b) breaking door (external), wall, window, roof, floor c) through the use of picklocks or false keys d) by breaking door (internal), wardrobe, chest, sealed or closed furniture or receptacle  Supposing the offender breaks open a locked receptacle from an uninhabited house. Crime committed? Theft. If the receptacle was sealed or closed, the crime committed is robbery with force upon things. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

59

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing a passer-by saw a locked jewellery box inside a parked car. He breaks the window of the car and takes the jewellery box home where he planned to force it open. Crime committed? Theft. e) by removing or taking away such sealed or closed furniture, chest, receptacle to be broken or forced open outside the place of robbery ARTICLE 310 - QUALIFIED THEFT • When theft is committed by a domestic servant; or act is committed with grave abuse of confidence; or taking of coconut from a coconut farm or plantation; or taking of fish from a fishpond or fishery. PD 1612 - ANTI-FENCING LAW • Can be prosecuted concurrently with theft or robbery under the RPC • Fence: any person who buys, sells, acquires, possesses, keeps, conceals, or disposes of stolen items (subject of robbery and theft) and knows that such items were stolen. • Purchasing unlicensed car parts may make the buyer liable for violation of the Anti-Fencing Law. The seller is required to acquire license before selling such second-hand items. PD 532 - ANTI-PIRACY AND ANTI-HIGHWAY ROBBERY LAW • If a crime of robbery is committed on the streets, or on any highway, road, or bridge indiscriminately – it is highway robbery under P. D. 532. If it is committed through a solitary act, the crime is simple robbery only.  Supposing offenders rode a bus and, while it was travelling along EDSA, divested the other passengers of their valuables. Crime committed? Simple robbery only. Act is solitary. • Offender benefiting from the proceeds of crime committed punishable under P.D. 532 is punished as a co-principal. ARTICLE 315 - SWINDLING • Theft v. Estafa - THEFT = Material Possession + Misappropriation - ESTAFA = Juridical Possession + Material Possession + Misappropriation - NO CRIME (only civil liability) = Ownership + Juridical Possession + Material Possession + Misappropriation PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

60

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Material Possession (MP): there is only actual, physical possession of the property; owner has better right than possessor; also called physical possession • Juridical Possession (JP): is present when possession arises from lawful transactions either by a contract of agreement, expressed or implied, written or verbal; or by virtue of a provision of the law • Ownership of property: There is ownership when there is no more obligation to return exactly the same property given or lent to the accused; ownership is transferred to him  Supposing a professor owns a criminal law book. A Student approaches him and borrows the book knowing it contains personal notations by the professor. The professor lends the book until March 17.  Is there MP? YES.  Is there JP? YES, based on the verbal agreement (there is a contract)  Does the student have a better right over the book than the professor? YES. There is lawful transfer of possession based on the contract.  Supposing the following day, the professor asks for the book. May the student refuse to return it? YES. Student has better right over it.  Supposing on March 17, the professor asks for the book but student tells him that he could no longer return it because he sold it to another student. What crime is committed? Estafa. (MP + JP + Mis)  Supposing a professor asks his student to bring the book to his office in Makati. Student takes the book to Recto instead and sells it to a bookstore. What crime is committed? THEFT. (MP + Mis) There is no JP since there is no agreement nor contract between them to give student better right over the book.  Supposing after an hour, the professor changes his mind asks the student for the return of the book. May he do so? YES. The professor still has better right over the book and may ask for its return at any time. Only MP was given to the student. • In ordinary cases of theft, property is taken. In estafa, with abuse of confidence, property is voluntarily lent or given to the offender.  Supposing the professor lends his book to his student and asks about what will happen if the latter cannot return the book. The student suggests that if he loses the book he will give the professor the latest edition of the book to take its place. The professor agrees.  Is student bound to return the exact same book? No. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

61

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- MP? YES. JP? YES. Ownership? YES – student is no longer obliged to return the borrowed item.  Supposing the student sold the book. What crime did he commit? No crime. He is civilly liable only.  Supposing A borrows his neighbor’s bike for five days. On the sixth day, A is unable to return the bike because he sold it to another person. What crime may A be liable for? Estafa. (MP + JP + Mis)  If A was merely asked by his neighbor to bring the bike to a shop for repair, but A sells it instead, what crime may A be liable for? Theft (MP + Mis)  If A was told to return the bike on the sixth day from the day it was borrowed but both he and the neighbor agreed that if it cannot be returned, A will give his neighbor a new bike instead, what crime may A be liable for if he misappropriates the bike? No crime. But A is civilly liable.  Supposing S has been keeping a 1,000 peso bill in his wallet for 25 years. G borrows the bill. Just to be sure that G returns the exact bill, S issues a receipt which states the serial number of the bill. G fails to return the bill and spends it for himself. What crime? Estafa. (MP + JP + Mis)  Supposing G borrows P500 from S. S give the student 1,000 pesos instructing the student to have it denominated to two P500 bills, take one of the bills and return the other to him. G never returns the P500. What crime may he be liable for? Theft. (MP + Mis)  G borrows a P1,000 bill from S, subject to the condition that if in case it cannot be returned, G will give S twice the amount plus interest instead. S agrees. If G misappropriates the amount borrowed, what crime may he be liable for? No crime. There is ownership already.  Supposing F approaches Y to borrow the latter’s car and to use it as a bridal vehicle for his cousin’s wedding. Y lends it to be returned on Monday. If F does not return the car and sells it to another person, what crime is he liable for? Estafa. (MP + JP + Mis)  Supposing Y lends his car to F with the agreement to return it on the day after the wedding. Both agreed that if the car was not returned, F will give a better and newer model instead. If F misappropriates the car, what crime is he liable for? No crime. Ownership was already given since F was not obliged to return the same car to Y.  Supposing P gives his car keys to his driver and instructs him to fill up his car with gas. Driver never returns and sells the car to his friend. What crime may the driver be liable for? Carnapping. Subject of theft is a motor vehicle (MP + Mis)

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

62

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- What kind of possession does a bank teller have over the money deposited by the bank’s clients? Material possession only.  Supposing bank teller takes the money deposited by a client. What crime may the teller be liable for? Qualified Theft. The crime of theft is committed with abuse of confidence.  Supposing the accused, a public officer in charge of purchasing supplies, was given the money to purchase high quality rice; he made an agreement with the supplier of to provide for 50 sacks of rice at half the price. Crime committed? Frauds against the public treasury under Article 213.  Supposing a school asks for deposit in case of breakages. At the end of the school year, the student asks for the deposit arguing that no breakages occurred. The school refuses to return the amount deposited. May the school be liable for estafa? No. The school is not bound to return the exact money bills paid by the student. Ownership is transferred to the school.  Supposing a sales representative of an appliance company approached X as a prospective customer, explained the benefits of the appliance he was selling. Not convinced, he gave X a trial period of one week, after which, if the product is not returned, it would be considered sold. X no longer returned the product because he had sold it to another. Was there misappropriation? YES. But could X be liable for estafa? No. • If a particular property is given to another through a contract of deposit and depository misappropriates it and cannot return the same, the depository is liable for estafa.  Supposing a company was bound to deliver a package to X but the package was delivered to M instead. It turns out, M and X had the same name. M takes possession of the property in trust for the true owner (based on the provision of the law). If M misappropriates the contents of the package, is he liable for estafa? YES. • Conversion: disposing of property and acting as if one is the owner of a property; acting in violation of a condition agreed or imposed upon. Determine if there is a violation of the terms and conditions by the agent against the principal. If there is, conversion exists because the agent acted beyond authority given to him.  Supposing when the pieces of jewellery were given to X. he was merely instructed by Y to sell it within 30 days, and if not sold, to return the same. X sold the items on credit. Was the sale on credit within the scope of the authority of X? YES. May he be liable for estafa? No.  What if instead of selling it, X gave the jewellery to a sub-agent who sold it to Z, who could not pay. Is X liable for estafa? No - there was no express prohibition for X to give the items to a sub-agent; if there is an express prohibition, X is liable for estafa because there would be conversion in that case.

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

63

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing A owns a jewellery worth P100,000. A gives it to B for the latter to sell it at a price less than 100K. They agree that if B succeeds, he shall receive 10% commission. B goes to C and asks him to sell the property on the same condition with a commission of 5%. C does not sell the jewellery and keeps it for himself. May B be liable for estafa? No. Owner gave the jewellery to the agent for the latter to sell it. The agent in turn gives it to a sub-agent also for the jewellery to be sold. Therefore, the agent, B, acted within authority given to him by the owner. There is no conversion.  Under the same facts but A tells B that he is prohibited from giving it to a sub-agent. B gives it to a sub-agent who misappropriates the jewellery. May B be liable for estafa? YES. B acted beyond the authority given to him. There is conversion committed by B  A tells B to sell the jewellery based on cash basis but B sells the jewellery on instalment basis to his officemate. After few days, the officemate loses her job and could no longer pay the instalments agreed upon. Is B liable for estafa? YES. There is conversion. B acted in violation of prior agreement.  Supposing an importer receives goods in trust. The ownership of the goods remains with the bank who fully paid such goods. The importer is bound to pay the bank the proceeds of the sale of the goods or to return the same to the bank. If importer fails to pay the bank and to return the goods, is he liable for estafa? YES. The importer is guilty of estafa by misappropriation. • Estafa cannot be committed by a partner in a partnership; by a co-owner or by a joint owner of a property. However, if partner, joint owner, or co-owner misappropriates property which is already separated or given to a third person or entirely to the other partner, the misappropriator may be held liable for estafa.  Supposing D, a partner to a business, was tasked to pay taxes for the business. Istead of paying the taxes, D used the money to play in the casino and lost all of it. May D be liable for estafa? YES. The money was misappropriated. It was given for a specific purpose.  Supposing the administrator of the estate of deceased L, misappropriated certain properties of L. May L be liable for estafa? YES. The property was given to him in trust.  Supposing A pawned his cell phone but the pawnshop did not return the item even after A’s redemption of the same. May the pawnshop be liable for estafa? YES. The cell phone was given to them in trust. • Novation of the contract or obligation: Is novation a ground to extinguish criminal liability? No. The grounds for the extinguishment of criminal liability are enumerated in Article 89 of the RPC. Novation is not one of the grounds stated therein. Moreover, novation is a change or amendment of terms or conditions agreed upon by the parties who are private individuals. It is not within the power of private individuals to extinguish criminal liability. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

64

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing ABC Corp. employs collection agents around the country who are obliged to collect amounts within their jurisdiction for the company. ABC Corp has a policy that collections are to be remitted within 30 days from collection. J, a Cebu collecting agent, collected P500,000 on December 1, 2008 giving him until December 31 to remit the amount collected.  Supposing one night, J played in the casino with his girlfriend and her family. In the course of their stay, J lost the entire amount. Assuming it was December 10, 2008, is J liable for estafa? No. There is no obligation until December 31.  Supposing that on December 31, J failed to remit the amount, is he liable for estafa? YES. J was holding the amount in trust and he already has the obligation to return it to its rightful owner.  Supposing after December 31, the company gives J a demand letter for the money giving him five days to turn it over. On January 5, J made no payment. Two days later, J executes a promissory note to assuring payment of the amount through monthly instalments. The president accepts the condition. After three months, J defaults in payment. May J be charged of estafa? YES. The criminal liability of J has already attached since his obligation to pay arose on December 31. There is a presumption of misappropriation when he failed to remit the amount collected. Even if the promissory note was a valid novation of his initial obligation, this does not bear any effect to his criminal liability.  Supposing on December 23, J went to Manila and confessed to the president of ABC Corp that he had misappropriated the money. J asked for forgiveness and suggested that he will repay the amount through salary deduction every month. On the same day, J signs a promissory note prepared by the company’s lawyer, upon the approval of the president. After two months, J was fired and could no longer pay the balance. May the company charge J with estafa? No. There was no crime since the obligation does not arise until December 31. The promissory note executed on December 23 is a valid novation of the initial obligation. Since there is no obligation, there is no estafa committed. It does not extinguish criminal liability because there is no criminal liability to speak of. • Postdating of the check should be prior to or simultaneous with the contracting of the obligation. If it is issued in payment of a pre-existing debt, there is only civil liability.  Supposing one afternoon, E purchases grocery items worth P10,000 from V. Since E does not have enough cash at that time, he issues a check in payment of the items bought. V agrees and allows E to take the grocery items home. If the check bounce, may E be liable for estafa? YES. The check was issued simultaneously with the contracting of the debt.  Supposing before the check was encashed, E takes it back and issues a different check. When the later check was encashed, it turned out that the account did not have sufficient funds. May E be liable for estafa? No. The later check was issued for payment of a pre-existing debt. May E be liable for violation of B.P. 22? YES. PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

65

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Infidelity in the custody of papers v. estafa - In infidelity, the offender must be a public officer in charge with the custody of documents removed, concealed or destroyed; in estafa, the crime may be committed by any person. In infidelity, the intent to defraud is not needed while in estafa, the act must be done with intent to defraud.  Supposing a client destroys the documents of a bank to conceal fact of the existence of a loan. What crime is he liable for? Estafa. There is intent to defraud. BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 22 - ANTI-BOUNCING CHECKS LAW • Good faith and honest intention are not defenses in a prosecution for violation of B.P. 22. since it follows general principles of malum prohibitum; it does not punish a person for non-payment of contractual debt but for issuing a bum check; it was enacted to protect the interest of people in checks as a substitute for money; a worthless check is detrimental if placed in circulation • Manner of Commission (1) Making or drawing and issuing any check to apply on account or for value (Maker, issuer, drawer are punished but endorser is not; the co-conspirators are also liable) • 1st Requisite – person issues, makes or draws check in payment of account or for value - Even if check is issued as a guarantee for the obligation of another or only as collateral or security for the monetary obligation of another, the issuer is still liable under B.P. 22  Supposing A issues a check to B, anticipating that in the following week, funds were coming in from payments to be made by his other clients. The check is postdated for the following week. When B encashed the check, it was dishonored for lack of funds. A sets up good faith as a defense and honest belief that his other clients would be paying him in the amount that would suffice payment of his obligation on time. Is A liable for violating B.P. 22? YES.  Supposing A issued a check as evidence of a long time agreement with B. On the back of the check, A indicated that the check is not intended for payment but merely to evidence an existing obligation. If the check bounces, may A be liable for violation of B.P. 22? No. The check is not issued as payment of obligation or for value. • 2nd Requisite – check is dishonoured by the bank for lack of funds, insufficiency of funds, or that account is closed • If the check is dishonored for any other reason, there is no violation of B.P. 22, provided that the account of the issuer had sufficient funds

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

66

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing at the time A issued a check for P100,000, he had P200,000 in the bank. Before the presentation of the check, A gave notice to the bank to stop payment because the payee did not comply with his obligation. May A be liable for violation of B.P. 22 if the check is dishonored by the bank? No. A had sufficient funds and reason for the dishonor was the stop payment notice.  Supposing A did not have enough money to pay the debt and he knew of the insufficiency of the fund. May he be liable for violation of B.P. 22? YES. The check would have been dishonored just the same for insufficiency of funds. • 3rd Requisite – Payee or holder gives notice of dishonor and demands the value of the check • A verbal demand is not acceptable; there should be a formal, written demand of payment • 4th Requisite – the maker, drawer, or issuer, having seen the notice of dishonor or demand of payment, fails to pay the amount of the check within five banking days • All of the requisites must concur • Will the mere issuance of a bum check make a person liable for violation of B.P. 22? No. Issuance of a worthless check is not a crime. • Will the dishonor by the bank of the check make the issuer liable? No. • Is the mere evidence of notice sufficient? No. There must be evidence of receipt of the notice of dishonour or demand of payment. • Upon receipt of the notice of dishonor, is issuer already liable? No. He is still given five banking days to pay. Failure to pay after such period will make the person liable. After such period, presumption of knowledge of the insufficiency of funds on the part of the accused sets in. (2) Failure to maintain sufficient funds to cover the value of the check in the event the check is presented for payment • B.P. 22 gives the issuer the obligation to maintain in his account sufficient value to cover the amount of the check issued for a period of 90 days counted from the date appearing on the check (date of issuance.)  Supposing A issues a check and at that time, A had more than enough funds to cover the value of the check. Before the 90-day period elapsed, A withdrew the amount sufficient to cover the value of the check. May he be liable for violation of B.P. 22? YES.

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

67

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Supposing B presented to the bank a check issued to him by A beyond 90 days from the date of issuance. The check was dishonored for lack of funds. May he be liable for violation of B.P. 22? According to a decision of the Supreme Court – YES the issuer is still liable. • The law requires banks and financial institutions to indicate on the face of the check or on its back, the reason for dishonoring the same. • Is it necessary to have a testimony from a bank employee to back up the claim of presumption of knowledge? No. If the requisites concur, there is already a prima facie evidence of violation of B.P. 22. • Penalty is a fine twice the amount of the value of the check but not exceeding P200,000 or imprisonment of one year or both. SC issued a circular instructing lower courts to impose only the penalty of a fine. This is o because unless the accused is a blatant violator of B.P. 22, the court adopts a liberal view against the accused. ARTICLE 316 - OTHER FORMS OF SWINDLING  Supposing A runs out of cash so he pledges his cell phone to B for P5,000. Their agreement was for A to pay back the amount within 30 days and for B to return the cell phone. After a week, B leaves the cell phone on his table. A sees it lying around so he takes it. Is A liable? YES. A is liable for other forms of swindling under Article 316. At the time of the taking, B, by virtue of the agreement, has the lawful possession of the cell phone even if A is the owner. The taking is wrongful. ARTICLE 320 - ARSON  Supposing X, with intent to kill, intentionally burned T to death what crime did X commit? Murder.  Supposing N burned the body of O. O was already dead. What crime? Arson. ARTICLE 327 - WHO ARE LIABLE FOR MALICIOUS MISCHIEF • It cannot be committed negligently; it must be deliberate. ARTICLE 332 - PERSONS EXEMPT FROM CRIMINAL LIABILITY • Applies only when the crime of either theft, estafa, or malicious mischief is committed or mutually caused by: 1) spouses, ascendants or descendants, or relatives by affinity within the same line 2) widowed spouse with respect to the property of deceased spousebefore the same has been distributed PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

68

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3) brothers, sisters, brothers-in-law and sisters-in-law who are living together  Supposing A’s brother-in-law loses his cell phone to a snatcher. One week after, he finds it in A’s possession. The brother-in-law charges A with violation of the Anti-Fencing Law. Assuming that A lives with his brother-in-law, will the case prosper? YES. A is not exempt from criminal liability under Article 332. It applies only when crime committed is theft, estafa, or malicious mischief. • CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY • Private crimes - can be initiated by the offended party only or by his parents, grandparents, or guardians if offended party is incapacitated.  Supposing a 19 year old woman refuses to file a case of acts of lasciviousness. Her father signs the complaint. May the court take jurisdiction of the case? No. The victim is already legally capacitated. Supposing the woman is only 10 years old? YES, the court may take cognizance of the case. ARTICLE 333 - WHO ARE GUILTY OF ADULTERY • Is committed by a married woman having sexual intercourse with a man not her husband AND by the man knowing her to be married • Marriage contemplated may have defects but there must not be a judicial declaration of nullity or decree of annulment issued by the court • Is the presentation of an eyewitness necessary to prove the sexual intercourse? No. Presentation of evidence of opportunity to have sexual intercourse between the accused is sufficient  Supposing the prosecution presented evidence that W, a married woman, and K, her neighbor, checked-in to a motel room at 1:00 p.m. and checked-out at 10:00p.m. Is the evidence enough to warrant conviction for adultery? YES. ARTICLE 334 - CONCUBINAGE • A single act of sexual intercourse between a married man and a woman not his wife is not punishable. Sexual intercourse is punishable under any of the following circumstances: 1) maintaining a concubine or mistress in the conjugal home or dwelling 2) cohabitation in any other place (living together as husband and wife) 3) sexual intercourse with another woman under scandalous circumstances (open to public) ARTICLE 336 - ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

69

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------• Had there been sexual intercourse, the offender would be liable for rape ARTICLE 337 - QUALIFIED SEDUCTION • Seduction: act of sexual intercourse • If both elements of R. A. 8353 and qualified seduction are present, accused may be charged of the higher crime (rape); if victim is below 18, accused may be charged of violation of R. A. 7610.  Supposing, a high school teacher fell in love with a 17-year old female student and the student fell in love with him also. The student becomes pregnant with her and the teacher’s child. What crime may the teacher be charged with? Rape through grave abuse of authority and violation of R.A. 7610. ARTICLE 338 - SIMPLE SEDUCTION • The offended party may not be prostitute; woman has to be of good reputation • Committed by means of deceit - this includes a false promise of marriage. ARTICLE 339 - CONSENTED ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS • Had there been sexual intercourse, the man would be liable for qualified seduction or simple seduction ARTICLE 342 - FORCIBLE ABDUCTION • Taking of a woman against her will with the presence of lewd designs or lascivious intent; age of offended party is immaterial • If there is no lewd design, the crime committed is kidnapping; lewd design can only be proven by the actual physical acts of the offender ARTICLE 343 - CONSENTED ABDUCTION • Victim is a woman over 12 years old and under 18 and is a virgin; she is taken with her consent • Also known in ordinary parlance as tanan ARTICLE 349 - BIGAMY • Contracting a subsequent marriage before the 1st marriage is dissolved • The offender will not incur criminal liability if there is a judicial decree of dissolution of first marriage or judicial declaration of presumption of death PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

70

LECTURE

AND RECITATION NOTES ON WITH UPDATED

CRIMINAL LAW II

SPECIAL PENAL LAWS

(ATTY. MAXIMO P. AMURAO) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ARTICLE 351 - PREMATURE MARRIAGE • Can be committed only by woman who contracts marriage within 301 days after the death of her husband or separation from the same; or before giving birth if she is pregnant, at the time of her husband’s death • The reason for the provision is to prevent doubtful paternity ARTICLE 359 - SLANDER BY DEED • The difference of slander by deed from acts of lasciviousness is that in the latter, there is presence of lewd design. This depends upon the circumstance of time, place, or manner of commission  Supposing C wanted to take revenge against his officemate Z for a prank she committed against him. In the presence of their other co-workers, C confronted Z and grabbed her breasts. What crime may C be liable for? Slander by deed. There is no lewd design. C only wanted to embarrass Z.

PREPARED BY: Dyann Kristi Catapang & Katheri Ann Charcos UPDATED BY: Katrina Ayn Ayza Cue, Louresse Patricia Jane Soriaso & Ezekiel Joshua Villena

71