CrimLaw Reyes Reviewer.pdf

BY

Luis B. Reyes (Iudfic, Court of Fint I t t a n c e of Mdniia) Profossar of Criminal Law and Criminal Law Review

Bar Reviewer in Criminal Law at the 6 ' Colle~eof Law. Ateneo de Manila University School of Law, Lyceum of the Philimines Institute of Law. Far Eastern University

Revised Second Edition

19F8

Distvibrited Exclusi.ueZy by

PHILAW PUBLISHING

. % , .

.

2103 C. M. Recto Ave., Manila, Philippinss

Philippines Copysight 1868,

" '~: '<

:i

i

by

"

LUIS B. REPES

Any copy of this book not bearingr tlie signalure of the author on this page shall be deemed as having proeieded from an illegal source.

All Rights Reserved

Piinted 1%

R. P. GARCIA PUBLISHING CO. ,311 Quezon Blvd. E*., Quezon City

''

...,*.'

'r

I

1. When did the Revised Penal Code take effect? The Revised Penal Code took effect on the of Ja. a r y , 1932 (Art. 1, R.P.C.).

./

2. B iefly, trace the history of the ILtvised On Sept,ember 4, 1864, by royal decree, Spain ordere that thcPenal Code in force in the Peninsula, as amende in accordance with the recommendation of the code corn mittee, be published and applied in the Philippine Islands. The royal order, d?,ted December 17, 1886, directed ,execation of the royal decree of September 4, 1884. The Penal Code of Spain was published in Gazette of Manila on March 13 and 14, 1887, and be effective four months thereafter. The Penal Code of S took effect in the Philippines on July 14, 1887, and in force up t o December 31,. 1931. By Administrative Order No. 94 of the De Justice, dated October 18, 1927, p committee was cre composed of Aiiacleto Diaz, as chairman, and Qu Paredes, Guillermo Gnevara, ,Alex Ileyes and Maria de Joya, as members, to revise the old Penal Code, into consideration the existing conditions, the special laws, and the rulings laid down by the Supreme The Committee did not undertake the codification Philippines. What the Committee

e extent of the application of the provision the Revised Penal Code? Except as provided in the treaties and Iaws,.,o~fi.. ferential application, the provisions of the Revised”P

1

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

Code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction, . against those who: 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ;,;:~*,,.?< :>, ship or airship: ~. , -, 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin o r currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands; ..,' ',, 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the intro:. '..'duction into these Islands of the obligations and securities .1., '~ mentioned in the preceding number; .," ..., ..,-' 4 . While being public officers or employees, should it an offense in the exercise of their functions; or Should comrpit any of tine crimes against national urity and the law of nations, defined in Title One of k Two of the Revised Penal Code. (Art. 2, R.P.C.) ''ti:--.

.

hat eases may the provisions of the Revised Penal 'be enforced outside of the jurisdiction of the Philip. :pines? s provided in the treaties and laws of prelication, the provisions of the Revised Penal enforced outside of the jurisdiction of the ainst those who: '1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship

, .

committed, as well as the m describe the means. Acts and omissions' punishable by 1 (delitos). Felonies are committed not only, by means' of (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa)., There is deceit when the aet is performed erate intent; and there i s ,fault wben t h e W results from imprudence, negligence, lac

f3act done be klifferent 'from th

Bn impossible crime is one an act-which would be an offens

2. Should forge o r counterfeit any coin or currency te of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities sued by the Government of the Philippine Islands; 3 . Should be liable for acts connected with the introction into these Islands of the obligations and securities n the preceding number; being public officers or employees, should t. an offense in the exercise of their functions; or

2

What is the duty of the whieh should be repressed but which are Whenever a court has knowledife o f , a n may deem proper to repress and which .is

3

CRIMINAL LAW kEVlEWEE . .

/'

, it

shall render the proper decision, and shall rethe Ckief Executive, through the Department of the reasons which induce the court to believe act should be made the subject of penal legisrt. 6, par. 1, R.P.C.).

CRIMINAL LAW REVIETVER

felonies are punishable oiiIy' w h e n with the exception of those:c (Art. '7, R.P.C.). 12.

le duty of the court when a strict enforcement visions of the Revised Penal Code would result osition of a clearly excessive penalty? Irt shall submit to the Chief Executive, through

commit felony and pro mit felony. When are conspiracy and p felony pUni5hdble? A conspiracy exists when two or more p to .an agreement concerning the commi and decide to commit it (Art. E, par. 2, There i s proposal when the person. who h to commit a fdony proposes its execution to person or'.persons (Art. 8, par. 3, R.P.C.)." Conspiracy and proposa,l to comrpit felony die only in the cases in which the law speoifi Jides a penalty therefor (Art. 8, par. 1, R.P.

$2 i

felonies according to their

nd define the stages of execution of a felony. State ges of execution arr punishable.

They are grave felonies, less grave felonies. Grave felonies are those to which'the capital punishment or penalties which periods are afflictive, in accordance with Revised Penal Code. Less grave felonies are those which the law. witk genalkies which in their maximum period rectional, in accordance with the above Light felonies are those infractions of commission. of which the penalty of urresto fine! not exceeding 200 pesos or both, is pr

the elements neces-

e will of the per. . ,.

.

. , , ,;$,,There is an attempt when the offender eohmenees the '~~'compissionof a felony directly by overt acts, and does ., . : not perform all the acts of execution which should produce "" the 'felony . by . reason of .some cause o r accident other than I.,:' .,his. own spontaneous desistance. .ib_ I:. .

. ,

"{

,'i

i*

.;&

~

(Art. 6, R.P.C.)

~

.,:<

..., , XI., . When , are light feldnies punishable? 'ception? .A,'.? .: , ., . .,.

4

What is the ex-

.i

!

offenses are not subject to the provisions. Offenses which are or in the f

5

I

CRIMINAL LAW REYIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

t way may the Revised Penal Code apply to crimes d by special laws? he Revised Penal Code shall be supplementary to a1 laws, unless the latter should specially provide the ary (Art. 10, second clause, R.P.C.).

are the juqtifying circumstances?, self-defense, ( defense of relatives, cy are efense of stranger, (4) state of necessity, (6) ful.fillment of duty or lawful exercise of a right or o€fice, , ,. and ( 6 ) obedience to a lawful order. ++.. q . ._. . ,., The provisions of the Revised Penal Code on justifying circumstances are, as follows : . . The following do not incur any criminal liability: 1. Anyone who acts in defense of his person or rights, provided that the following circumstances concur: . , . .First. Unlawful aggression; Second. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent o repel it; T h i r c d a c k of sufficient provocation on the part of the pe on defending himself. A n y o n e who acts in defense of the person or rights his spouse, ascendants, descendants, or legitimate, natu, or adopted brothers o r sisters or of his relatives by affinity in the same degrees, and those by consanguinitY urth civil degree, provided that the first and second requisites prescribed in the next preceding circumnce are present, aud the further requisite, in case the as given by the person attacked, that the fense had no part therein. Anyone who acts in defense of t,he person or rights rovided that the first and second requisites first circumstance of this article are the person defending be not induced ment or other evil motive. who, in order t o avoid an evil or inan act which causes damage to another, proowing requisites are present:

a-1/

(6

I

F_(,..

, ,;

,,,.

. .' j_

6

exists; Second. That the injury feare done to avoid it. Third. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it.

. Any

person who acts in obedience to an o

7. What are the requisites of self-defense?

The requisites of self-defense are: First. Unlawful aggression;

The exempting circum insanity, ( W 6 n o r i t y under (@--uncontrollable fear, and (7) failure to p act required by law because of lawful or insuper The provisions of the Revised Penal Code on ing circumstances are, as follows:' The following are exempt from criminal liabili 1. An imbecile or an insane person, unless t has acted during a lucid intertal. an act which the law defines as a felony, court shall order his confinement in one of or asylums established for persons thus ',a?

.

e.

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER .,

CK-IMINAL LAW REVIEWER

,

.

1 not be permitted to leave without first obtaining e permission of the same court. 2 . A person under nine years of age, 3. A person over nine years of age and under fifteen, unless he has acted with discernment, in which case, such hall be proceeded against in accordance with the ns of article 80 of the Revised Penal Code.

,'T

3 . That the offender had no intention to commit grave a wrong as that committed. 4 . That sufficient provocation or threat o n of the offended party immediately preceded the 5. That the act wa cation of a grave offense to the one committing the,fel ( d e l i t o ) , his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitim natural, or adopted brothers or siaters, or .,relatives affinity within the same degrees. 6. That of having acted upon as naturally to have produced passio 7. That the offend self to a person in authority or his agents, :or had voluntarily confessed his guilt before the.eou to the presentation of the evidence 8. That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind; wise suffering some physical defect which thus his means of action, defense, or communication felIow beings. 9. Such illness of the offender 3s would d exercise of the will-power of the offender wi ever depri i6g him of consciousnes d, finally, any other ci natu and analogous to those ab0

court, in conformity with the provisions of this

I

..

mitted to the care of some institution or person mentioned in said article 80. 4. .Any person who, while performing a lawful act with due care, causes an injury by mere accident without .fault or intention of causing it. 5 . Any person who acts under the compulsion of an .irresistible force. 6. Any person who acts under the impulse of a n uncontrollable fear o€ an equal o r greater injury. 7. .Any person who fails to perform an act required plflaw, when prevented by some lawful o r insuperable (Art. 12, B.P.C.)

Whijhaf nro the mllig?ifing circitnistances? The following are mitigating circumstances : 1. Those mentioned in the preceding chapter; when all, the requisites necessary to justify the act or to exempt from criminal liability in the respective cases are not That the offender is under eighteen years of age ' seventy years. I n the case of the minor, he shall ceeded against in accordance with the provisions , ,

.

r:

., ' . .~ .

e.,

. 8

. ,,

I'

.YY7' 2

. What are the aggravating circunistanees? The following are aggravating 1. That advantaae be taken by the offende public position. 2 . That the crime be committed in contemp with insult to the public authorities. 3 . That the act b regard of the respect due the offaided of his rank, age, or sex, or that i t be dwelling of the offended party, if provocation. .. .

e. .,., .,." c.

.. .,,,.

.

.

.1

. ,

.. ~

:,:.,,

.,,

.

~

,.,,.

..,,

.I

'

That the act be committed with abuse of confidence ungratefulness. 6, That the crime be committed in t'le palace of the ief Executive, or in his presence, or where public authorities are engaged in the discharge of their duties or a place dedicated to religious worship. 6. That the crime be committed in the nighttime or in an uninhabited place, o r by a band, whenever such circumstances may facilitate the commission of the offense. Whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have a.cted together in the commission of an offense, it shall be deemed to have been committed by a band. 7. That the crime he committed on the occasion of a conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic, or other calami1.y o r misfortune. 8. That the crime be committed with the @id of armed men or persons who inswe or afford impunity. 9. That the accused is a recidivist. A recidivist is one who, a t the time of his trial for '., . one crime, shall have been previously convictec! by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same title . of the Revised Penal Code. 10. That the offender has been previously punished f a r an offense to which the law attaches an equal or more crimes to which it committed in eonsideratio11 of mitted by means of inundaranding of a vessel or inilment of a locomotive, or ice involving great waste

.!",.I '

.,..

' ~

CRIMINAL LAW REVIZWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

,

i . , ./=

I:

.,,

That the act be committed with evident premeditaThat craft, fraud, or disguise be employed.

15. That advantage be taken of superior stren means be employed to weaken the defense. 16. That the act be committed with tre

.I

There is treachery when the offender commits any Of the crimes a,gainst the person, employing means, methods, o r forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and sneciallv t o insure its execution, without risk, t o .himself arising from the defense which the offended p a r t y , .;:.r ,; might make. 17. That mcans be employed or circumstances brought , ,.a about which add ignominy to the natural effects of the , ,::. .. act. . ,. .. ~ 18. That the crime be committed after an unlawful ,,...;I entry. There is an unlawful entry when an entrance is effected '. by a way not intended for the purpose. 19. That as a means to the commission of a crime .a : wall, roof, floor, door, or window be broken. 20. That the crime be committed with the aid of persons under fifteen years of age, or by means of motor vehicles, airships, or other similar means. 21. That the wrong done in the commission of the crime c deliberately augmented by causing other wrong not ecessazy for its commission.

'1

21. What circumstances are either Or, what are alternative circumstances A!ternetive circumstances are those which taken into consideration a s according t o the nature and e otlier conditions attending its relat!onsbip, intoxication, and the degree of i education of the offender (Art. 1

When shall the alternative e be taken into consideration?

11

I,

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

;,,A'

shall the intoxication of the offender be taken into consideration as a mitigating circumstance? When shall it be considered as an aggravating circumstance? . , The intoxication of the offender shall b e taken into mitigating circumstance when the ofted a felony in a state of intoxication, or subsequent to the plan en the intoxication is habitt shall be considered as an aggravating 15, par. 3, R.P.C.). liable for grave or less grave felonies? y liable for grave and less ,;:,:,," 1

grave felonies:

-

?

::-: of the following circumstances : 1. When the offenders have seized a vessel by board, ing or firing upon the same: .r 2. Whenever the pirates have abandoned, their victims withont means of saving themselves: or *. 3 . Whenever the crime is accompanied by murder, homicide, physical injuries, or rape. (Art. 123, R.P.C.)

.

,

.,

48

2.

4

125. How is the crime of arbitrary detention committed? It is committed by any public officer or employee who, without legal grounds, detains a person (Art. 124, R.P.C.). 126. How is the crime of delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities committed? It is committed by a public officer o r employee who, having detained any person for some legal gr fail to deliver such person to the proper judicial within the period of; six hours, if detained or offenses punishable by light penalties, or their equi-:. valent; nine hours, for crimes or offenses punishable correctional penalties, or their equivalent; and eighte hours, for crimes or offenses punishable by afflictive^ capital penalties, or their equivalent (Art. 125, R.P.C

'427.

Row is the cyime of &laying relase committed?, . It is committed by any public officer or ,employee delays the performance of any judicial or executive of for the release of a prisoner o r detention prisoner,. unduly delays the service of the notice of such order said prisoner, or the proceedings upon any petition the liberation of such person (Art. 126, R.P.C.).

/

Note: The three farms of arbitrary detention are defined:' Arts. 124, 125, and 126.

28. How is the crime of expulsion Committed? It is committed by any public officer OT emvloyee not being thereunto authorized by law, shall expel person from the Philippines or shall compel such person? to change his residence (Art. 127, I1.P.C.).

12s. How is the crime of violation of domicile committed? It is committed by any public officers or em who, not being authorized by judicial order, shall any dwelling again.st ihe will of the owner thereof, papers or other effects found therein without the consent of such owner, or, having surreptitious1 49

.,

.,

'.

,~

I

. ,. .

.

'..

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

said dwelling, and being required to leave the premises, shall refuse to do so (Art. 128, R.P.C.).

~. ,, . . ,

..,

.,;:. ..

;~ ~

It is committed by any public officer or employee who shall prevent or disturb the ceremonies o r mjllifestations' of any religion (Art. 132, par. 1, R.P.C.).

/'

130. How is the crime of search warrants maUeiously obtained, , .

%

CRTXMINAL LAW REVIEWER

~,

..

.'

(2'' :'.,

and abuse in the service of those IegaUy obtained, committed? It is committed by any public officer or employee who shall procure a search warrant without just cause., or., having legally procured the same, shall exceed his authority or use unnecessary severity in executing the same .(Art. 129, R.P.C.).

.. 131. How is the crime of searching domicile without witnesses '. committed? .*v . It is committed by any public officer or employee who, , in cases where a search is proper, shall search the douecile, papers, or other belongings of any person, in the absence of thc latter, any mcmber of his family, or in their de;. fault, without the presence of two witnesses i'efiiding in . ., &.$&,. the same locality (Art. 130, R.P,C.). ,, ..

Jdk. Hmitted? o:v is the crime of offending the religious feelings corn-

,

I

$.

.,' ~

,,(i_

'$

.

.

:,

.I

The three P o m s of violation of domicile are defined in Act& 128, 129 and 130. Note:

132. What are the acts punished in connection y i t h peaceful . meetings$, association, and petition? 1. By prohibiting o r by interrupting, without legal groaad, ike holding of a peaceful meeting, or by dissolv. ' ing the same, 9. .: 2. By hindering any person from joining any lawful ' ' association or from attending any of its meetings. ,. , . :. ,,.., 3. BY prohibiting or hindering any person from addressing, either alone or together with others, any peti. ~ ,'. tion to the authorities for the correction of abuses or redress of grievances. . . 7, , (Art. 131, R.P.C.) ( .. ..A*

;,$,Z __j

s !

00. What' are the crimes against decency and good customs?

,.

By selling or distributing the same without connivance with the importer. (Art. 196, R.P.C.)

.

197. How is the crime of betling in sports contests committed? It is committed by any person who shsll bet money or any object or article of value or representative of value ."-.-,: ,. upon f i e remlt of any boxing or other sports contest ., .. (Art. 197, R.P.C.). ,..

j

;:. i

. 8. What are the acts punishable in illegal betting on horse races?

.

, .

?&aziting on horse races during the periods not allowe by law. 2 B y maintaining or employing a totalizer or other device or scheme for betting on races or realizing profit therefrom, during the period not allowed by law. (Art. 198, R.P.C.)

P

,

What are the acts punishable in illegal cockfighting? money or other valuable things in cockother than .that permitted by law. cockfights at which bets are made, .,.~. , J, other than that permitted by law. By betting money or other valuable things in cockf + fights hdd at a place other than a licensed cockpit.

,~. . :..s

. *

74

Immoral doctrines, obscene publications and exhibitions. g d a g r a n c y and prostitution. / 28i. How is the crime of grave scandal committed? It is committed by any person who shall offend against decency or good customs by any highly scandalous conduct ., not expressly falling within any other article of the Revised Penal Code (Art. 200, R.P.C.).

'How is the crime of immoral doctrines, obscene publications, exhibitions committed? d d m i t t e d by: p d o s e who shall publicly expound or proclaim doctrines cpenly contrary to public morals; authors of obscene literature, published with t h lr knowledge in any form, and the editors publishin such p f a t u r e ; A. Those who in theaters, fairs, cinematographs, 0 open to public view, shall exhibit inplays, scenes, acts, o r shows; and sell, give awa,y, or exhibit prink, engravings, sculptores, or literature which are offensive to morals. (Art. 201, R.P.C.) /

,'

200. who a m ,&rants?

following are vagrants: Any person having no apparent means of subs' ence, who has the physical ability to work and who negle to apply himself or herself to some lawful calling;, '~.,

75 .,

'

I

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

2. Any person found loitering about public or semipublic buildings or places, o r tramping or wandering about the country or the streets without visible means of support; 3 . Any idle or dissolute person who lodges in houses of ill-fame; ruffians or pimps and those who habitually associate with prostitntes; . 4 . Any person who, not being included in the provisions of other articles of the Revised Penal Code, shall be found loitering in any inhabited or uninhabited place belonging to another without any lawful or justifiable purpose. G. Prostitutes. (Art. 202, I1.P.C.)

, "

.. .

.?.

.

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

.

04. Who are prostitutes?

j$

Women who, for money or profit, habitually indulge sexual intercourse o r lascivious conduct, are deemed t o be prostitutes (Art. 202, R.P.C.).

' i.n

&..;

6,;

205.. Who are public officers for the purpose of applying eert~ ain provisions of the Revised Penal Code?

4.

,

. ,,.

.,

.,/

' $, . tion towards the administration of justice or other public ., ., ,.. , , '..., service, such failure resulting in damage to public in .: ." interest (Art. 233, R.P.C.).

.. ~ . .' ,." ... . :

ployment, or commission, beyond the period pro law, regulations, or special provisions applicabl ,&e (Art. 237, R.P.C.).

&

"~

~

..,,r > :+.:*,,.

,

:,,, .

. ,scrr It is committed by any public officer who shall croach upon the powers of the legislative branch of Government, either by making general rules or regulations beyond the scope of his authority, or by attempting t o repeal a law or suspending the execution thereof (A 239, R.P.C.).

*

84

86

I

CRIMINAL LAW REVlEWER

941.~. Ho+ is the crime of usimpation of executive functions

-

c:;

committed? I t is committed by any judge who shall assume any power pertaining t o the executive authorities, 01" shall . obstruct the latter in the lawful exercise of their powers .'(Art. 240, R.P.C.).

.

.:

shall, against the latter's will, retain him in his seririee (Art. 273, R.F.G.) 280. How is the crime of services rendered under compulsion' in payment of debts committed? It is committed by any person who, in order to require or enforce the payment of a debt, shall compel the debtor to work f o r him, against his will, as household servant or farm laborer (Art. 274, R.P.C.).

" .'

,

,*

I.

281. How is the crime of abaiidonment of persons in d a n g a and abaudcniuent of one's own victim committed? It is committed by: 1. Anyone who shall fail to render assistance to any person whom he shall find in an uninhabited place wounded or in danger of dying, when he can render such assistance without detriment t o himself, unless such omission shall constitute a more serious offense; . 2. Anyone who shall fail to help or render assistance to another whom he has accidentally wounded or injured; 3. Anyone who, having found an abandoned child under Seven years of age, shall fail to deliver said child t o the authorities or t o his family, or shall fail to take him t o a safe place. (AI-$. 275, R.P.C.)

.

282. How is the crime of abandoning a minor committed? It is committed by anyone who shall abandon a child under seven years of age, the custody of which is incumbent upon him. The same crime is committed even if the death of the minor shall have resulted or even if the life of the minor shall have been in danger, provided that the offender has " no intent to kill the minor. (Art. 276, R.P.C 283. How is the erinie of abandonment of minor by per entrusted with his custody commitl~ed?

97 .,

.

:I

.

.* ,-i

'1

...3

I

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

. .

It is committed by anyone who, having charge of the rearing or education of a minor, shall deliver said minor to a public institution or .other persons, without the consent of the one who entrusted such child to Itis care or, in the absence of the latter, without the consent of the proper authorities (Art. 277, par. 1, R.P.C.).

284. IIoiv is the crime of indifference of parents Committed? It is committed by the parents who shall neglect their children by not giving them the education which their stal.ion in life requires and financial condition permits (Art. 277, par. 2, R.P.C.). 285. Wh80 are liable for exploitation of minors? They are: 1. Any person who shall cause any boy or girl under sixteen years of age to perform any dangerous feat of balancing, physical strength, or contortion. 2 . Any person who, being an acrobat, gymnast, ropewalker, diver, wild-animal tamer or circus manager, or engaged in a similar calling, shall employ in exhibitions of t.hese kinds, children under sixteen years of age who are not his children or descendants. 3. Any person engaged in any of the callings enumerated in the next preceding paragraph who shall em, ploy any descendant of his under twelve years of age in such dangerous exhibitions. 4. Any ascendant, guardian, teacher, or person entrmted in any capacity with the care of a child under sixteen years of age, who shall deliver such child gratuitously to any person following any of the callings enumer'ated in paragraph 2 hereof, or to Any habitual vagrant o r heggar. 5 . Any person whg shall induce any child under six. teen years of age to abandon the home of its ascendants, guardians, curators, or teachers t o follow any person en98

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

gaged in any of the callings mentioned in paragraph 2 hereof, or t o accompany any habitual vagrant or beggar. (Art. 278, R.P.C.) 286. How is the crime of qualified trespass to dwelling committed? It is committed by any private person who shall enter the dwelling of another against the latter's will. It may be committed by means of violence or intimidation, in which case the penalty is higher.

''

i?

.

289. What are the three .forms of threats?

They are: 1. Grave threats.

!

-'-: ,...

287. What are the ahsolutory causes in trespass to dwelling? The penalty for trespass to dwelling shall not be im-. posed upon any person who shall enter another's dwelling for the purpose of preventing some r;erious harm to hi& self, the occupants of the dwelling, or a third person, nor shall it be imposed upon any person who aha11 enter 'a dweiling for the purpose of rendering some service @ humanity or justice, nor upon anyone who shall enter cafbs, taverns, inns, and other public houses, while the sam,e are open (Art. 280, par. 3, 1L.P.C.). 288. What is other forms of trespass? It is a crime committed by any p,erson who shall e the clcsed premises or the fenced es either of them is uninhabited, if th be manifest and the trespasser has mission of the owner or the caretaker thereof (Art. R.P.C.).

~'

:

I

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

290. How is the crime of grave threats committed? I:t is committed1. By threatening another with the infliction upon his penon, honor or property or that of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime and demanding money or imposing any other condition, even tl,o?gh not unlawful, . and the offender attained his purposz; 2 . By making such threat without the offender attaining his purpose. 3. By threatening another with t h t infliction upon his person, honor or property or that of his family of any wrong amounting to a crime which is not subject to a condition. (Art. 282, R..P.C.) 291. How is the crime of light threats committed? Tt is committed by making a threat to commit a wrong not constituting a crime, demanding money or imposing any other condition, even though not unlawful, the offender attaining or not attaining his purpose (Art. 283, R.P.C.). 292. What is bond for good behavior? In all cases of grave threats and light threats, the person making the threats may also be required to give bail not t o molest the person threatened, or if he shall fail to give such bail, he shall be sentenced to destierro (Art. 284, R.P.C.). I,

293. What are other light threats? They are: I. By threatening another with a weapon, or by drawing such weapon in a quarrel, unless it be in lawful selfdefense. r!. By orally threatening another, in the heat of anger, with some harm constituting a crime, without persisting in the idea involved in his threat.

100

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWl3R

3 . By orally threatening t o do another any harm not constituting a felony. (Art. 285, R.P.C.) 294. How is the crime of grave coercion committed? It is committed by any person who, without authority of law, shall, by means of violence, prevent another from doing something not prohibited by law or compel him to do something against his will, whether it be right or wrong (Art. 286, R.P.C.). 295, Mow is the crime of light coercion committed? It is committed by any person who, by means of viclence, shall ssize any thing belonging to his debtor for .,, the purpose of applying the same to the payment of the ~' debt (Art. 287, R.P.C.). 296. How is the crime of other similar coercions committed? It is committed by any person, agent, or officer of any association or corporation who shall force or compel, directly or indirectly, or shall knowingly permit any laborer or employee employed by him or by such firm or corporation t o be forced or compelled, to purchase merchan. dise or commodities of any kind; or by any person who shall pay the wages due a laborer or employee employed by him, by means of tokens or objects other than the' legal tender currency of the Philippines, unless expressly requested by the laborer or employee (Art. 288, R.P.C.).

297. How is the crime of formation, maintenance, and prohid bition of combination of capital or labor through violence 0.r threats committed? It is committed by any person who, for the purpos of organizing, maintaining, or preventing coalitions o capital or labor, strike of laborers, or lockout of emplo shall employ violence or threats in such a degree compel or lorce the laborers o r employers in the f r e legal exercise of thei.1. industry or work, if the act

101 . .

.

I

I

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

E: .X,.

'?

not constitute a more serious o-Cfense in accordance with the provisions of the Revised Penal Code (Art. 289,

R.P.C.)

:. ; 298.

Wha.t arc the three kinds of discovery and revelation of secrets? They are: 1. Discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence. 2:. Revealing secrets with abuse of office. 3,. Revealing of industrial secrets.

299. How is the crime of discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence committed?

It is committed by any private individual who, in order to discover secrets of another, shall seize his papers or letters and reveal the contents thereof (Art. 290, R.P.C.). Tba penalty is lower if the offender does not reveal the secrets. . 300. Who are not liable for discovering secrets through seizure of correspondence?

The parents, guardians, or persons entrusted with the custody of minors, with respect to the papers or letters of the children or minors placed under their care or custody, and the spouses, with respect to the papers or letters of either of them (Art. 290, par. 3, R.P.C.). Row is the crime of revealing secrets with abuse of office committed? It is committed by any manager, employee, or servant who, in such capacity, shall learn the secrets of his principal or master and shall reveal such secrets (Art. 291, R.P.C.) .

How is the crime of revelation of industrial secrets committ8ed?

?$\

s"

J

It is committed by the person in charge, employee, or workman of any manufaeturicg or industrial establishment who, to the prejudice of the owner thereof, shall reveal the secrets of the industry of the latter (Art. 292, R.P.C.).

303. Who are guilty OP robbery? Any person who, wifn intent to gain, shall take any personal proverty belonging t o another, by means of violence against, or intimidation of any person, or using force upon anything, shall be guilty of robbery (Art. 293, R.P.C.).

.' -';

304. What are the two classes of robbery? .. . , They are: I 1. Robbery with violence against, or intimidation o f . '

.,I

1

persons. 2. Robbery with force upon things. 305. What are the provisions of the Revised Penal robbery with violence against, or intimidation of persons? " Specifically, the acts punished as robbery with violence against or intimidation of persons are: 1. By committing homicide by reason or on the occasion of the robbery (taking personal property belonging' to another). 2. By committing rape or intentional mutilation accompanying the robbery; or by committing physical injuries by reason or on t'ne oc~zairmof the robbery, where th? offended party becomes insane, imbecile, impotent,'or blind (Subdivision 1 of Art. 263). 3. By inflicting physical injuries by reason or on. occasion vi the robbery, where the offended party lost use of speech or the power t o hear o r to smell, or an .eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg o r lost the. of any such member or became incapacitated f o r the in which he was theretofore habitually engaged division 2, Art. 263).

102

103 _.

.i

I

,a ..

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

". I

'

*. ,

r,

. .

.,: . .< '.* , . , ._.,,,. ,...,

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER %,'I

',

... .+>,. ....* ....

., %

% , ,.

+*:;:. and took therefrom personal property, how many crimes. ..,.: ., , were comm,itted by them? Why? -.::i~ , . , There would be six different robberies with force won. .:.' ' t h i n g s , b s a i s e the six houses are e&elv distinct & fm one another and the culnrits have different criminal r a & k " w a s they &d e&and m r k 2 m of the six houses ,.:; r & b z in the six There was no general Dlan to r'.. / houses.'. (See People vs. Enguero, et al., 64 0. G . 8230' . 8231.) ;k$%l. _/r

j

.

.

I

1 ~

!

e

a common motive to run amok. They k.&d e&!n persons and seriously wounded t&&J!.Akrpersons. l,t appears that the killing and the i n j u r h g ,:.;!:, of other persons were the =It of a single imDulse b rim amok and n o t & x r & i n mk m .~~~ ~.that A and B did -~ '... '., ' , any particular individual. How nmny crimes were committed by A and B? why? The ldlilof eleven persons and the injuring of twenty other pemons should be consideEd as resulting a s u e c3ninal impulse &nd constituting a sine'le offense . ., . 13477-R, Jan. 1956). .. *(People vs. Emit, C 740. A and B

'

.

.

~

l ~ ; .

.. -

741. X entered a church and began firing with his .45 caliber pistol at a crowd. Tyo persons were ki.kbmd.another seriously injured. One r m ~ t h r e bull& e woJlLdS; t h e 'other, two; and the third, one. How many crimes were committed by X? X committed tJwee crimes. Since the three victims were nptot by and the ggdldkk the three crimes were not nroduced by a single act (People vs. Basarain, .G;R. L-6690, May 24, 1956).

286

742. Art. prnvides that "if the penalty prescribed for thr., .s . felony c m n ! be liigliec than that corresponding to the offense which the a c a i n t e n d e d to c t h e time of the commission of the crime that the principal by direct participation committed the crime with treachery~’ or that he purposely sought nighttime to facilitate t h e commission of the crime, because they consist in the material execution of the act or in the means employed to.: accomplish it. Under Art. 62, par. 4, of the Revised Penal Code; offender is not affected by the aggravating circumsta of nighttime unless he knew that it would be’availed

303

.u. .~-

,.

~

,

I

CRIMSNAL LAW REVIEWER

by the other offender in accomplishing the offense (People vs. Villanueva, 52 O.G. 5865).

' /

.". '.

,

'

,

,' /me

,

is a habitual delinquent? A habitual delinquent is one who, within a period of ten years from the date of hi8 release or last conviction of the crime of (1) serious or (2) less serious physical injuries, (3.) robbery, (4) theft, (5) estafa, or (6) falsification, or ofkner. is found guilty of any of said crimes a third

''

'

,

',

,

,.. . ..,

.s.,.a+

.~.I

because when he committed the cril;l$of *. y&ifi&&: tion he Was not yet convicted of the crimes of thefta~andj estafa. Moreover, since he only admitted-the co&'ssio$ of theft and estafa on cross-exanination and. there 'gap no allegation of habitual delinquency in the i i x f o F t i $ n l he is not a habitual delinquent. . *'.:., ,. ,:!g

'

;.

, ,,;a Note: In order that a person may he a habitual de '.''''_'+ it iS necessary that the second crime was committed after conviction of, or .after service of ,sentence for, t crime; the third crime was committed by him after 6 of, o r a f t e r service of sentence for, the second crime, The reason for this rule is that the additional. fixed by law for habitual delinquency are reformatory in acter and that their agplication should he gradual, and can be carried out only when the second crime is'co after conviction of the first crime or after service of f a r the first crime etc.

7. How many penalties are imposed on a habitual delin-

..

195.2, he was prosecuted for an information alleging only tho commission of &&gi of fakification in 1952. During the trial, A , aainit *'"on cross-examination that he committed theft in I@ and estafa In 951. After trial, A was convjcte_&& f a l s i f i c a t i o n . d A a habitual delinquent? ', Explain your ., answer. . .I. *;;; ,~, NO,

' N o t e : R,Emember the six crimes specified in the, dafinitian. Slight physical injuries is not inchtded. Homicide 1s not also included. The stage of execution of any of those crimes need not be consummated. The offender may he only an accomplice or neces:;ory in any of those crimes.

A committed theft. *,In 1951, he

779.

.1

quent? Illustrate. q'wo pcinalties: that is, the penalty for the crime Of which he is found guilty and an additional penalty for being a habitual delinquent. ~&&i-~tio?t: A was previously punished for theft and within ten years; and five years after his last release, &- committed falsification. If after trial and within ten years from his last conviction or release, A is found guilty of falsification, he shall be sentenced to the following penalties : " . (1) p&ion coweccional and fine, for falsification (Art. 172) : and ( 2 ) prision correctional in its medium and maximum , periods for being a habitual delinquent for the first time (Art. 62, par. 5 ) .

The information must allege: (1) the dates 'of th mission of the previous crimes: (2) the date af the la victim or release; and (3) the dates of the other convictions o r releaser. The ten-year period is complted from last conviction or release. The law does not require that all the three or mom: victims should take place within & lperiod' of ten years.,: the period hetween each eonvietion or release and the.: conviction should not exceed ten yevears. The ten-year period is not counted in relation to the of commission, but to the date of conviction, of subs;

. In&, determining the proper period of the additional penare aggravating and mitigating circumstances to be

crime.

considered by the court? Why? . Yes, hedause it would be arbitrary to apply it in any :of its periods without regard to the attending circumstances. :.:(See People vs. De Jesus, 63 Phil. 761.) .. '

In other words, the ten-year period should be e tween convictions or hetween release and convieti tween conviction or release and commission of su last offense.

305

304

/ '

f

I

,.:.w

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

," ,... ..

CRIXINAL LAW REVIEWIER

780. In the preceding question, can A be declared a recidivis{? . ....^I_.

No, because even in recidivism, the offender at the time O f his trial for one offense must be convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of the Code. Moreover, his previous crimes of theft and estafa and the crime of falsification for which he was on trial are not embraced in the same title of the Code. Theft and estafa are embraced in the title of crimes against 'property, while falsification is embraced in the title of crimes against public interest.

;&l. What is the duration of each of the three periods of ;.'F, prision correecional maximum to prision mayor mkimum? ,*ST, Make and explain the computation. ,,:,~ .. Min. - 4 Yrs., 2 mos. & 1 da. to 5 yrs., 5 mos. g, P. 1 0 das. ...:',,.,i;, , Med. 5 yrs., 5 mos. & I1 das. to 6 yrs., 8 nios. &. . i.~ . 20 das. Max. 6 yrs., 8 mos. & 21 das. to 3 yrs. I. Computation: 6 rnos. '& 1 da. to 6 yrs. is the d u r a tion of pTision correecional. 6 yrs. o r 5 yrs. & 12 mos. 6 mos. (eliminate "1 da.") = 5 rrs. Br G mos: + 3 = 1 yr. & 10 mos. Min. 6 mos. & 1 da. to 2 yrs. & 4 moa. 2 yrs., 4 mos. & 1 da. to 4 yrs. & 2 mos. Med. Max. 4 yrs., 2 mas. & 1 da. to 6 yrs. 11. COVLputation: 6 Yrs. & 1 dn. to 12 yrs. is the duration of Prision mazJo?. 12 yrs. - F yrs. (eliminate "1 da.") = 6 yrs. + 3 = 2 yrs. Min. - 6 yrs. & 1 da. to Med. 8 yrs. 83 I da. to 10 JTS. Max. - 10 yrs. & 1 da. to 12 yrs. 111. Computation: 8 yrs. 4 yrs. & 2 rnos. = 3 yrs. & 1 0 mos. + 3 = 1 yr., 3 mas. & 10 ~ Z S . The minimom period: the minimum oP the maximum of prision coireccional, as the minimum; and such minimum plus the quotient of 1 yr., 3 mos. & 10 das., as the maximum '. of the minimum period. %

j

-

-

-

-

-

~

306

. ,.,.I. ..:..>x* ,.?.,.>$, ~#+ 1

:,>,,>: ,,

:, .. .

~

"

'94.'-A, a minor 15 years and 6 months old, was convicted , ..", of the crime of damage to property through reckless im-

.:

It is discretionary to the court to impose any amount not exceeding Ihe maximum of the fine provided by law (Art. 6 6 ) .

?93.: Suppozie A, in the problem given, wmmitted the crime . .. with grave abuse of confidence and that under the Ian the crime the penalty has to be raised by one ., punishing degree, what amount of the fine should be imposed? Ex;,~.. ' plain your answer. The fine should be from P200 to 82,600, because whenii

:$$

Note.: Art. 114, R.P.C., as amended by Executive Order No. 44, punishes an alien, residing in the Philippines, who commits act8 of treason.

1

pines is involved.

,L

I

4

341

,.

. I

,

I

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

to the enemies must be to Xender assistance to them as enemies and not..merely as individuals and, in addition, be directly in furtherance of the enemies‘ hostile designs.

territory over to the advancing Japanese troops. Before they could carry out their purpose, they were surrounded by the, policemen and arrested. However, the Japanese release$ them when they obtained control of the place. Wh ’n prosecuted for treason aftcir the liberation, they. , con ended that they could not have levied war against the government at that time, because their weapons were inadequate and it was impossible for them to succeed. They further contended that assumling that they committed a crime against the national security, it was at most conspiracy to commit treason. IIow would you dispose of these contentions if YOU were the judge trying them? If I were the judge, I would convict them o f treason. It is not necessary that those attempting to overthrow the government by force of arms should have the -a =ex, to succeed in their design in .whole or in part (U.S. vs. Lagnason). ~ ~ ~ ~ a I . . c l a s h ~ aisf n~-ssa~rym s . in treason by lwying war. Actual assemblage of men which .~ is present in the case isLYicient. Moreover, their .wry PO+. if to_Eeecute a trsscnable desip>x force.

~~

1

~s

Note: Thus, to give^ mpney to m enemy soldier ~a ~f&ld or o!it of charity to him so that ha may buy peraonal necessities is to assist him as an individual.-.But if the money iS given to enable him to, buy arms t o m e them in piaging war against the giver’s country, the givci. is yuilty of treason. In the first ewe, the element of treason by giving aid or comfort which is not ,present is: Giving tho enemies aid or comfort, or adhering t o the enemies, or bnth.

$3.

:/

.:

86

l-

*.

IC during the war, a citizen made speeches critical to his own government, or opposed its measures, or engaged in profil.eering or headed and promoted strikes in defense plants, thereby diminishing the strength of his own eountry, is that citizen liable for treason? Why? No, because &id or c o m w t x!!bhguJ adll:rence..ip not treason. Thus, in the case of Cramer vs. U.S., it was said that “a citizen may take actions that do aid and comfort to the enemy, as making speeches critical to the government, or opposing its measures, profiteering, staging strike8 in defense plants or essential works and other things which impair our cohesion and diminish our strength, but if there is no adherence to the enemy, if there is no intent to betray, there is no treason.” Note: The element of treason by giving nid or comfort, which is not present is: The offerider adheres to Lhc enemies.

Ole: The two requisites of treason hy levying war are present: 8 1 ) actual assemblage of men; and (2) the purpose is to

execute a treasonable design by force.

866.

,

is

I

,/’ hat

/

/

. What the usual form of aid and comfort that constitutes treason upon proof of adherence? Furnishing the enemy with arms, supplies, troops, information, or means of transportation is the usual f o r m of aid and comfort.

*

in your opinion is the justification for punishing resident alien who commit treason against the Philippines? Resident aliens have the gbliaatiog of fidelity and obediecce-to our Government under which they live. While they o t OiiFGovernment, they are here under the pro:ection should reir-in from taking active part in any attempt to to weaken the power of this counor t o attack the enemy.

.i

i 865. During the invasion of the Philippines by the Japanese,

/

a group of Filip’ o citizens whose weapons were inadequate gathered together in the plaza of the town for the purpose of a tacking the officials and policbmen in the municipal b ilding and, if successful, to turn the

I

I

!

with treason for giving,aid and comfort hy assisting the soldiers in the capture of named X. B and C are witnesses that he saw A with a nnmber Japanse soldiers on their way to the house of X on ;.

,~

4

342

343

:

I

I I

I

C R I ~ I N A LLAW REVIEWER

* '

Augost 13, 1942.' C testified that on the same day he gaw A in the house of X, while A was tying the hands of X. Can A be convicted on the basis of the testimony of B .kd C? 0, because the two-witness rule requires t h a t there must tie twq~xitnessesto each-part ,of the overt act. Tho overt act which is the subject of the prosecution is the giving of assistance to the enemy by A, leading to the capture of X. One part of the overt act is A'S going with the Japanese.soldiers to the house of X. The other part of the overt act is the tying of the hands of X by A in the house of the former. Only B'testified to the first part of the overt act of A, and only C testified to the second part of his overt act.

-

CRIMINAL,,LAW -REVIEWER

1

!

4

..

,

';

'86

*.

~~

c,,

Note: In this jurisdiction, w e fallow the zeverely .restrictive rule, as .distinguished from the eommosite theory. Under the composite theory, it is, not necessary that two witnesses testify to each part of tho overt act or cireumstanoe, as long as the parts OY circumstances constitute B single, ecntinvaus, and eomfinsite overt act.

;c ,

.

. arraignment. Charged with treason, A was brought to th6 court for The clerk of court read to him the in-

%

Note: Had A made a confession nf guilt, that'g, he pleaded guilty w&houLexplanation, A could have been lawfully ,convicted.

344

,

TG

formation which alleged that A was a Filipino citizen who joined the NIakapili organization which fought on the side of the Japanese Imperial Army against the, Philippines :inn the United States and took part in the exeeet1, . tion of guerilla suspects. When asked if he was plead, guilty or not, A ad~nitt.edall the facts allege$ in the ... - .in&! 'information but that he had to do them because he was kfraid of the Japanese. Can he be convicted of treason . ..... on' the hasis of his said admission? Why? NO. The statement of the accused is tantamount- to p l e a d i u a g u i l t .y. .. - -. The confession mentioned in the law meanS a 1 L E n A s i d g u i l t i ! . I C&rcession and avoidance is not _a confession of guilt. ::

.

a complex crime of treason with murder or serious physical injuries? Explain your answer, giving. a n iE lustration. No. In a case, the accused was a Japanese spy. He also took part i n the execution of some of the guerilla suspects and in the infliction of physical injuries'on the ' 1 others. In that case, it was held that murders and phwwa injuries were inherent .. in the crime of treason' characterized by-gNnx.&id aidcomfor t .to_thunemy. The murders and physical injuries committed, although criminal .dffenses in themselves separately punished by, the Revised Penal are the very acts of giving. aid 'and comfort to the In the nature of things, the giving of aid and comfort can be accomplished only by some kind of act. Its very nature partakes of a deed or physical activity as opposed to a mental operation (People vs. Prieto). ,,. . . B agreed and decided to commit treason.,: Then, they proposed the commission of the crime. t o several other .persons who were also deterntined lo dommit treason. .._ Thereafter, all -of them committed treason. how many ' , cfimes were committed by them? ., . . Only one, and that is treason.' conspiracy to commit treason between A and B and the proposal to commit treason made by them to several persons ,are absorbed in the crime of treason which they later committed.', N q t e : In conspiracy to commit treason and in .proposal to commit treason: the crime of treason $->E' be a&?& e ~ ~ ~ i i m i t t e d ~ p r o p to o s acommit l treason, the -s.al n-ae _*Led by the person, !O-&~?LP the proposal is made. If the p p o ~ s d . i s ~ e & s d , and t4ere is a decision t o commit the Arne of treason, it would he pnspiracy to commit 'treason.

e

I

,

'i ! I

'871. How, is conspiracy to commit treason ' committed? Conspiracy to commit treason is committed when k o . : . o r more persons come to a n agreement concerning the of treason aud c!ed&xi to commit it. (Arts. and 115, R.P.C.)

to commit treason committed?

345

I

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWEIt

Proposal to commit treason is committed when the person who has decided to commit treason prcposes its execution to some other person or persons. (Arts. 8 and 116, R.P.C.)

favored emotionally and intellectually. A did not report it to the governor or fiscal where he was residing and where the act of treason was committed. Is A criminally liable? Explain your answer. No. In this case, there is no misprision of treason, because the crime of treason was already committed. Art. 116 sags “having knowledge of any conspiracy against” the Government of the Philippines, which means that there is only conspiracy to commit treason. When treason is ?ctuallg committed, m$?.csilence of one who knows of ita commission d9e3 not make him criminally liable, either as princigal, accomplice o r accessory.

9

873. Is misprision of felony punishable? A t common law, misprision of felony is a criminal . Meet either (1) to prevent a felony from being committed or (2) to bring the offender to justice a.fter its commiz:sion. Our penal law does not consider misprision of felony as a crime. The only single instdnce where it is considered a crime is in misprision of treason. Thus, i t has been held that the failure.of 8 private individual to report to the authorities the commission of an offense is not a crime and the r.ere silence of one who w h e s s e d the commission of a crime does not make him criminally liable. #

Note:

But a publie.afficer who has th; duty to prosecute or

cause the prosecution of a law violator may be held liable for

*.

dorelictiol of .duty under Art. 208, if he maliciously tolerates the commission of a crime which is about to be committed or maliciously refrains from prosecuting. 8 violator of the law.

874. Is the person gnilty of m i o n of treason only

Note: It is absurd to think that a person guilty of misprision of treason is only an accessory to the crime of treason, when there is no treason committed. What is being committed by other persons is onlp conspiracy to commit trcawn, and wbat constitutes misprision of treason is the failure to make known to the ‘proper authorities the existence of that conspiracy.

i

I

r

.,~? _., 875. . A, a l?ilipino citizen, knew that B committed treason, ~. , having given aid and comfort to the enemy whom he

No, because the law (Art. 116) provides that the offender is “not being a foreigner”.

677. A, a private individual and a IWpino citizen, knowing that B was in conspiracy with others to commit treason against the Government of the Philippines, during the time of war, harbored, concealed and later assisted in the escape of B. Is A criminally liable? Yes, not under Art. 19, but under Art. 116, because he is guilty of misprision of treason f o r not reporting the conspiracy to the proper authority. Note: A private individual i3 liable a s a n aeeessorg par. 3 of Art. 19, R.P.C., for hairboring, concealing or

‘ k

347

346 ,

-/

S76. May an alien residing in the Philippines commit misprision of treason? merit. Why?

a9

accesso;ry to’ the crime of treason? He is o n a K n i s h e d as an accessory to the crime. of treason, but he is principal in the crime of misprision of treason, this being a separate and indegendent crime defined in a different article of the Revised Penal Code.

Elements of mispvison of tmaron: 1. The offender must be owing allegiance to the Government, and must not be a foreigner. 2. I€e has knowledge of any e_onsp>r?y (to commit treason) against the Government. 3. H e conceals or does-not disclose and make known the same as SO& as possible. 4. To the Governor or Fiscal of the province, or Mayor or Fiscal of the City in which the offender resides. Thc element of misprision of treason which is not present is: IIe has knowledge of any conspiracy against the Govern-

i

I

I CRIMINAL LAW REVIEIVER

CRIMINAL LAW IWViBWEI:

#

.. . .

8. Malting or causing war materials to be made in a defective manner when the Philippines is at war; etc.

ing in the escape of the principal, ,_.rlyif the pcin.&al

is q - o f i r s a s o n (not y cto commit treason), parricide. mur er or a n attempt to take the life of the .Chief Executive, or is known to be habitually guilty. of some other crime.

/,878. What a m the e!ements of the crime of espionage, as it is defined in the Revised Penal Code? Elements of the ist way of committing espionage: . _ 1. That the offender enters a warship, fort or naval: or military establishment or reservation; 2 . That he has no authority therefor; 3 . That his purpose is t o ~ o b t ~ ~ n . i a n y ~ n ~ ~ r mplans,. -a~on, photographs or other data o f a confidential nature relative to the defense of the Philippines. Elements of the 2nd way of committing espionage: 1 . Offender is a public officer; 2 . He has in. his. &.$esssn the articles, data or in6rmation referred to in the first way of committing espionage, bxreason~.oChis- .a€fice; He & A d h e i r contents to the rmIesenJ*bive of a foreign nation.

:"' /'r .

?

Which has jurisdiction over the offense of espionage committed, the Philippine Government or the United States authorities? Either one could try and punish the offender, because the act of espionage committed affects the security of both nations.

1

879.

-

i

.

,:

.,. ~./.,

If the offense is against the security of the Philippines, even if it is committed within the base, the Philippine courts have jurisdiction. If the offense is against the security of the United States, even if it is committed outside the base by 8 member of the.armed forces of the United States, the latter has jurisdiction over the offense. Note:

-

ay espionage be committed by acts other than those defined ass acts of espionage in the Revised Penal Code? Explain yonr answer Yes. Commonwealth Act No. G16 punishes as acts of espionage, the following : I. Unlawfully obtaining or permitting, through gross negligence, to be obtained information affecting national defe e ; Unlawfully disclosing information affecting national d ense; 3 . Disloyal acts or words in time of pcaee; 4. Disloyal acts or words in time of war; 5 . Conspiracy to violate certain sections of t h e Act; 6. Harboring or concealing violators of the Act; . '7. Destroying or injuring or attempting to injure or . aestroy war'materials when the Philippines is at war;

880. A foreigner was arrested by the military police in a * base of the U.S. Army, stationed in the Philippines. He was caught in possession of a photograph of a certain place in the base which was off-limit to the civilians.

I

r

:

881. What are the crinles clasgified as provoking war and ,. disloyally in case of war? They are: (1) inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals; ( 2 ) violation of neutrality, (3) correspondence .with hostile country, and (4) flight to enemy's country. The first two are crimes that may,provoke war. The last two are crimes involving disloyalty during the war. Note: In inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals, even mere negligent act, which is unlawful or unauthorized, is contemplated in the definition of said crime, for the effect is the , same whether committed intentionally OP through negligence. In the crime of flight to enemy's country, mere attempt t&-o~x~.goAmemm. consummates the crime. The q3 law doen not require that the offender should not be a foreigner. This crime may be eqgmjt&d by a resident alien, In the crime of cmrespondenee with hostile country, the penalty is +-eclusioit temporal to death when the correspondence. contains notice or information which may be useful to the ene and the offendw intended to aid the enemy thereby. The e is not treason, because in corrcspondenee with hostile eaua adherence to the enemy is not necessary.

549

948 i

*'

.i

CRIXINAL LAW IZEYIFXER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

They are: 1. Arbitrary detention, /. 2 . Delay in the delivery of the person arrested to th proper judicial authorities, 3. Delaying relea,se, 4. Expulsion, 5 . Violation of domicile. 6. Search warrants ,maliciously obtained and abuse in the service of those legally obtained, 7 . Searching domicile without witnesses, 8,. Prohibition, interruption and dissolution of peaceful meetings, 9 . Interruption of religious worship, and 10. Offending the religious feelings.

882. A group of men in a fast motor boat intercepted a cargo

.

vessel in ithe waters on the seacoast of Sumatra and by means of violence and intimidation took valuable personal property from the cargo vessel. They came to the Philippines in the same motor boat. If they are apprehended ' here, can they be prosecuted criminally before our court? For what crime? Explain. Yes, for piracy. It was committed on the @gh seas, which mea.ns any waters on the seacoast which a r e without the boundaries of low-water mark, alkhourh such waters m?x.be~in the jurisdictional limits of a foreign government. Insofar as the PhTIippines is concerned, the crime was committed -. on the high seas.

,..

1

883. Suppose that in the same case they were caught in the very 'placs where they had committed the forcible de. predation, what crime was committed by them? Explain. I n that case, the crime committed was j:obber+with -~ violence against or intimidation of persons.

1 /

Note: It will be noted that with the-single exception of the crime of offending the religious feelings in Art. 133, the offender in all the crimes against the fundamental laws of the State is n public officer or e@oyf!! I

I'

884. What is mutiny and state the venue of action in case of

prosecution Tor mutiny on the high seas? Explain your answer to the second part of the question. I . It is the raising of commotions and disturbance on board a ship against the authority of its commander. It being a crime against the law of nations, the crime may be prosecuted and punished i n any country where the offenders may be found.

7

'

'/

i.,

a

hen is piracy or mutiny on t h e high sea^ punishable +leath? Whenever the pirates seized the vessel by boarding or firing upon the same; when the pirates os mutineers &andoned their victims without means of saving themselves; whenever the crime was accompanied. by murder, .injuries, ox rape. omicide, physical the State7

887. What are the classes of arbitrary detention? The classes of arbitrary detention a r e : ,~ I. Arbitrary~detention by arresting ' and detaining a . person without legal guounds (Art. 1 2 4 ) ; 2 . Delay in the delivery of detained persons to the proper judicial authorities; and s:;peia,:ing release. Note: In these three classes of arbitrary detention the penalties depend on the periods of detention: (1) if the detention has not exceeded 3 days; (2) if the detention has continued for more than 3 days hut not more than 15 days: (3) if the detention has continued for inore than 15 days but pot more than 6 mcnths; and ( 4 ) if the detention has exceeded$ months. E l ~ ? n e ? i l sof wbitrarll dotentdon b y wresting and detmining (i person without legal grounds: 1. The offender is a public officer or employee. ' 2 . He detains a person. 3 . Without lcgal grounds.

/

.

d W h a t is the usual cause of arbitrary detention by arresting and detrinin:: a person without legal grounds?

6. What are the crimes against the fundamental laws-of .

. ., . .

..,

361

350

I

.'W '.?.

I

CRIMINAL L A W REV1EWF:R

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

They must pursue any of the following objects: 1. To prevent the promulgation or execution ‘of any law or the holding of any popular election: 2. To prevent the National Government, or a h provincial or municipal government, 01’ any public officer thereof from freely exercising its or his functions, or to prevent the execution .of any administrative order; 3 . To inflict any act of hate nr revenge upon the person or property of any public officer or employee: 4 . To commit, for any political or social’end, any act of hate or revenge against p r i n t e persons or any social class: and 5 . To despoil, for any political or social end, any person, municipality or province, o r the National Government of all its property or any part thereof. 043. A wanted to eliminate his political rival B before the election which was about to take place in their province. A had an understanding‘ With the Huks, whose commander was his friend, to the effect that the Huks would attack the barrio where B was living, with a particular end in view of killing B. During the attack madc by the Hukri in which A also took part, B was seriously injured and his house was burned. Considering that the Huks were engaged in rebellion and A was in conspiracy with the Huks, do you believe that A committed rebellion? Explain your answer. NO. A committed pkditioa If the purpose of the vpr&ing is cot exactly against thesovernment and not for the purpose of doing any of the things defined in Art. 134 of the Revised Penal Code, bi:t-.-merely to attain by force or other means outside of legal methods one object, to wit, to commit for any political end an act of hate against private person, the crime committed is sedition. <

N o t e : While it is true that the Huks were engaged in rebellion and that A was in w n s p i r a c y with them, their purpose was not to overthrow the government, but o&&Q-@fljct fozL&iEl end an act ..of . hate against B.

374

f

9.14. What is the nature of the crime of sedition? It is one of those offenses which a r e directed against the authority, not against the existence of the government, or the general peace. The u@g&?-_objsst of sedition is a vglation of tine puhlic-.peace., 945. E, in a meeting, uttered: “The big ones are persecuting and oppressing us, who are small, which they have no right to do.” Then shouts were heard from the audience, R saying, “Let u s fight them until death.” Is this inciting t o rebellion o r inciting to se,rlition? Why? Inciting t o sedition, because the people were actually incited when they said, “Let us fight them,” followed .by R’s shouting, “Let us fight them tc death.” When E uttered that the big oues ivere persecuting and oppressing them, he was lamenting a feeling of hatred andxexe.we among them (People vs. Evangelista). To inflict an act of hate or rcvenge against the person or property of public officer is one of the objects of sedition. The crime of inciting to sedition is committed when the offender who does not take direct part in the crime of sedition i& others to the accomplishment of any o f the objects of sedition by means 01“ speeches.

”

1,

!

94F. Suppose, the speaker uttered and told the audience, “Overthrow the present Government and establish your own government, the government of the poor. Use your whip so t.hat there may he marks on their sides”. Is this inciting to rebellion? State your reason. No. This is inciting to sedition. The reason is that the words uttered “suggest or incite rebellious conspiracies or riots,’’ which is one of the ways of inciting to sedition under Art. 142 of the Revised Penal Code (People vs. Nabong) . 947. May there be inciting tn sedition even if the inciting does not relate to the accomplishment of any of the objects, of sedition mentioned in Art. 139?

375

I

CRIhlINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

Yes. There are two parts of Art. 142. The first part defines inciting to sedition by inciting others to the accomplishment of any of the acts which constitute sedition, by means of speeches, proclamations, writings, ernblems or other representations tending to the same end. The second part defines inciting to sedition, as by uttering seditious words or speeches, or by writing, publishing or circulating scurrilous libels against the Government or any of the duly constituted authorities thereof, which tends to disturb the public peace. ,,In the second part of Art. 142, the accomplishment of any of the objects of sedition is not the purpose of the act of inciting others. 948. What is the justification for punishing the uttering or

..

writing and publishing of sediti,ous words or speeches? The justification for punishing it is that the utterances or writings which tend to overthrow, or undermine the security of, the governmellt or t o weaken the confidence of the people in the government are against the public peace, and are criminal not only because they tend t0 incite a breach of the peace but also because they are conducive t~ the destruction of the goxe.rgment itself.

-

--

949. Does not the second part of Art. 142 violate the eonstitutional guaranty of freedom of speech and of the press?

It is opined that it does, because what is Dunisheid in that part: of Art. 142 is cot, the act of ineicing to sedition but the Citterances. or the-publication of words or speeches,. thereby affecting the freedom of speech and press. Under the c!e&r-and..present danger rule, the second part of Art. 142 may be dgc&red~u.nconstitntiona1. 950. What is. your understanding of the “dangerous tendency .. . . rule’’ in relation to the crime of inciting to seditbn, and

how is it distinguished from the “clear and present danger rule”? Under the (angerous tongency rule, there is inciting to sedition when the yords uttered or. nublished have a seditious, tendency, in the sense that they could easily pro~

376

.

~ducedisaffection among the people a n d - a state of feeling:;,. incompatible with a disposition to remain 1oyal”to the . .. , Government and obedient to, the la.ws. Under the clear and present danger rule, it is required’~ ,‘thatthere must be a reasonable ground to believe that the danger apprehended is imminent and that the evil to be prevented is a serious one. There iaust be the’probability of serious injury to the State.

i

-

Eznntpl~ of the application of c l e w and v e s e n t danger &: A political @arty applied for a permit to hold a publIc mecting in Mimila. The Mayor refused to grant permit. The refusal of the mayor to grant permit for the holding of a public meeting was predicated upon fear that in view of the bitterness af the speeches expected from the minority men - who^ were fresh from political defeat and were smarting with ,charges of fraud agaiiist those in power, there might be hreach of the peace and of public order. Held: The danger was not imminent and the evil to he prevented was not a serious one. The mayor was ordered to issue a permit (Primieias VB. Fugono)

.

.

951. What are the crimes against legislative or similar bodies. They are: (1) preventing the meeting of a deliberative body by force or fraud (Art, 143); (2) disturbing its session or meeting; and (3) misbehaving in .the presence of any such bodies as to interrupt its proceedings or to impair the respect due to it (Art. 144). Note: The legislative or similar bodies referred to nre eithe? House of Congress, its committees or sub-committees, constitutional commissions, provincial hoard or city or municipal council OF board.

952. What is the liability of il person who disturbs the proceedings of either House of Congress? The same act of disturbing the proceedings of either House of Congress may be made the basis for contempt proceeding and/or for criminal prosecution (Lopez vS. De 10s Reyes). 953. What do you understand by parliamentary immunity?,

377

I

I I

i CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

.

.

Parlinmentary immunity, under the Constitution, means that the members of Congress shall, in all cases except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be pivileged from arrcst during their attendance bt the session of Congress, and in going to and returning from the same. Under the Revised Penal Code, it means that the members of Congress should not be arrested or searched during the regular or special session, except in case a member has committed a crime punishable under the Revised Penal Code by a penalty higher than pvision mayor.

CIUMINAL LAW REVIEWER 1’

Ui

No, because the immunity under the Revised Penal Code extends only to awest and search during regular or special, session of Congress and the felony committed is not punishable under the Revised Penal Code by a penalty higher than pi.ision .irztqior. Even if a senator o r representative committed a crime under circumstances where his arrest and/or search would be punished as a crime, he can be prosecuted and, if found guilty, he can be punished. Eveu under the Constitution, parliamentary immunity is limited only to civil arrest. The immunity excludes all indictable offcnses.

1 I

954. In what cases may a public officer lawfully arrest or

search a senator or a rempresentative? In the following cases a public officer may lawfully arrest or search a senator or representative: (1) when Congress is not in regular or special session, he may lawfully arrest or search a senator or representative in connection with any crime; and ( 2 ) when Congress is in regular o r special session, he may lawfully arrest or search a senator or representative, provided that the crime committed is punishable under the Revised Penal Code by a penalty lt.y ina1 liability?

‘958. A group of about 20 persons, armed with bolos, daggers

!

, .’

and licensed pistols, were gathered together in a c e r t a i n place holding a meeting. A group of PC soldiersJwho were suspecting them investigated each and every one of them on the spot, but n,ot one of those persons revealed the purpose of the meeting. Can they be prosecuted and and punished far illegal assembly? Explain your answer. No, because to constitute the crime of illegal assembly the meeting must be either one of the following: (1) any meeting atteuded by a m e d persons for the purpose ?f

319 >c

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEYYER

punishable under the Revised Penal Code, and ( 2 ) associations totally or partially organized for some purpose contrary to pubiic morals. 961. Distinguish illegal association from illegal assembly, as to (1) the act or acts constituting the crime, ( 2 ) the person or persons criminally liable. What is punished in illegal assembly is the holding of meeting and attendance a t such meeting; whereas, what is punished in illegal association is the formation or organization of an associntion and membership thereof. In illegal assembly, the persons liable are the organizers or leaders and persons merely present a t the meeting; whereas, in illegal association the persons liable are the founders, directors and presidents, and mere members of the association.

purpose o'f the meeting was to commit any of the crimes punishable by the Revised Penal Code. In this kind of illegal assembly, two requisites must concur, namely: (1)

962. What is the difference between ill'egal association nnder the Revived Penal Code and illegal association under the Anti-Subversion Act? Under the Revised Penal Code, the illegal association must be totally or partially organized f o r the purpose of committing any of the crimes punishable under that Code, o r totally o r partially organized for some purpose contrary to public morals; whereas, nnder the Anti-Subversion Act, the association or organization must have the purpose of overthrowing the Government of the Republic of the .Philippines to establish in the Philippines a totalitarian regime and place the government under the control and domination of an alien power.

'959. Suppose, one of the persons who attended the meeting

.,

?vas carrying an unlicensed firearm, what crime, if any, was committed and by whom? Explain your answer. $ Only the persons carrying unlicensed firearm may be held liable for illegal assembly, because under the law, if . any person present a t the meeting carries an unlicensed , firearm, it shall be presumed that the pur7ose of said -meeting, insofar as he is concerned, is t o commit acts . . punishable under the Revised Penal Code, and he shall be ' considered a leader o r an organizer of the meeting. I

Note: 13ut that provision of the law establishes only a p r ~ sumption and may be rebutted by proof of lack of such purpose.

,960. What are the two forms of illegal associations?

...

,.

,

..

They are: (1) associations totally or partially organized.for the purpose of comrnitting any of the crimes

380

I

i

963. What are the acts punishable under the Anti-Subversion Act? The acts punishable nnder that Act are: 1. By knowingly, wilfully and by overt acts (a) af' filiating oneself with, (b) becoming or (e) remaining a member of the Communist Party of the Philippines and/ or its successor or any subversive association defined in that Act;

381

"

I I

,

CRIMINAL LAW REVItEWER

CRIhIIXAL LAW REVIEWER

.~

. .

. '/

986. What is the difference between conspiracy to coma

2. By conspiring with any other person to overthrobthe Government of the Republic of the Philippines or the

rebellion under the Revised Penal Code and conspiracy .overthr,ow the government under the Anti-Subversion Act?;! In conspiracy to commit rebellion under the Revised Penal Code, the conspiracy relates to the crime of rebellion_ as t!ie latter crime is defined in the Revised Penal Code) whereas, in conspiracy to overthrow the government under the Anti-Subversion Act, the purpose of the offender is to estahlish in tb.e Philippines a totalitarian regime and to lace the government under the control and domination an alien power.

government of any of its political subdivisions by force, violence, deceit, subversion or other illegal means f o r the purpose of placing such government or political subdivisions. under the control and domination of any alien power. 3 . By taking up arms against the Government to over-~ throw it, to establish a totalitarian regimd in the 'Philippines, and to place the government under the control and domination of an alien power.

..9 4. Suppose, the members of the Communist Party under the

'.

.,

,

.,/

9 a. What is the difference between rebellion or insurrectionunder the Revised Penal Code and violation of the AntiSubversion Act where the purpose of the offender is to take up arms against the government? Both in rebellion or insurrection and in violation of the Anti-Subversion Act, the offender takes up a.rms.ta overthrow the government. Gut while in rebellion or insurrection the purpose of the ofEender in taking arms is only to overthrow the existing government and replace it with a new government, in violation of the Anti-Subversion ., Act the purpose of the offender in taking arms to overthrow the government is to establish in the Philippines , . .a totalitarian regime and to place the government under the control and domination of an alien power. 382 ?

/

9

guise of forming a political party with a different name. presented a ticket of their candidates , for the coming election, with the intention of obtaining control .of t h e . Government and, once successful, of plaLing t h e government under the o n t r o l and domination of an alien power, are they liable for violation of the Anti-Subversion A e t ? ~ Yes, because one of the acts punished is by conspiring t ' overthrow the Government of the Repuhlic of the Phil: pines by deceit for the purpose of placing such Govern-. ment oi' political subdivision under the control and domination of any alien power.

jf

What are the two forms of direct assault? The two forms of direct assault are: (1) without pub-

,

lic uprising., by employing force or intimidation for, the attainment of any o f the purposes enumerated in defining the crime of yebellion, or of any of the objects of sedition; * and ( 2 ) without public uprising, by attacking, by employing force, or by' seriously intimidating or by seriously resisting any person in authority or any of his agents while engaged in the performance of official duties or on the occasion of such performance, Elements of dived assault of the 1 s t form: 1. The offender employs farce or intimidation. 2 . The aim of the offcnder is to attain any of the purposes of t h e crime of rebellion or any of the objects of the crime of sedition. 2. There is no public uprising. Xlaments of d.bect nssuult of the Bnd / o w n : 1. That the offender (a) ,makes an attack, (2) employs farce, ( e ) . makes a serious intimidation, or (d) makes B serious resistance. 2 . That the peisan assaulted is n person in authority or his agent. 8 . That t h e person i n authority o r his agent is (a) engaged in the perfarinanee of official duties, or (b) on the OCCBSi0,l of SUCII performnaee. 4 . There is no ,iiublie uprising. Note: The phrase "on the occasion of such performance'' should be undwsloud as "by reason thereof."

383

,. ,~,

/'

I

i

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIllIINAL LAW REVIEWER

8. May direct assault 'be committed against a private in-

.

. ..

:

They are : (1) By attacking; (2) By using force; ( 5 ) By seriously intimidating; or , (4) By seriously resisting a person in authority o r his ,,"agent while in the performance of his olficial duty or by reason of the past performance o f such duty.

dividual? Explain. Yes. if the crime committed is direct assault of the first form. because in this form of direct assault the object of the offender may be any of the objects of sedition. When the object is to commit for any political or social end an act of hate or revenge against private person or social class, and there is no public and tumultuous uprising, but only force or intimidation, the crime is direct assault even if the offended party is a private individual. But in the second form of direct assault, the crime is always committed against a person in authority or his agent.

971. What degree of force is necessary t o constitute direct assault? If the offended party is only an agent of a person; in authority, the force employed must be of a serious character as t o inclicate determination to defy the law and its representative at all hazards. The force employed need not be serious when the ofended party is a person in authority. The mere laying of hands, as slspaing his face, is sufficient.

'S B

How do you distinguish persons in authority from their agents? Persons in authority are those public officers directly vested with jurisdiction, that is, those who have the power and authority to govern and execute the laws. Thus, the Provincial Treasurer is a person in authority because within the province for which he is appointed, he has the duty t o execute all the laws pertaining to finance and collection of taxes in addition to hi6 other duties; tine Provincial Health Officer, within the province where he is appointed, has the duty to execute all the laws relating to health and sanitation; the Division Superintendent of Schools, with respect to all the laws pertaining to education, in additioii to his general superintendence over all the schools and school teachers within the province to which he is assigu ed On the other hand, agents of persons in authority are only charged with the maintenance of public order and the protection and security of life and property. He is a subordinate official of a person in authority. Thus, the municipal treasurer and the municipal health officer are only agents of the provincial treasurer and district health officer, respectively.

the purpose of the crime of direct assault by resisting a person in authority or his agent, what is the nature of the resistance? Why? Serious resistance; otherwise, it would be resistance and serious disobedience only.

.

.

~~

A, the mayor of the town, and B, a private individual, were conversing in front of the municipal building. I n the course of their conversation about politics, B and the mayor became engaged in an altercation, resulting in B's giving a fist blow on the lips of the mayor. Is B IiabIe .for direct assault? Explain your answer. No, because the mayor was& in the performance

Note: The crime committed is o

970. What are the different ways of committing direct assault of the 2nd form?

384

385

n

l

y

(

&

~

~

i

CRIXINAL LAW REYIEWER I)

/

:..,

formance of his official duty when he is attacked o r seriously intimidated by the offender? Why? No, as long as the attack or the intimidation a made by of the past l3erformance of his officiat duty, there is direct assault even if the person in auG t y o r his agent was at the time of the attack o r intimidation in the actual performance of his official duty.

9

The .Division Superintendent of Schools who was asked by the Provincial Governor to appoint certain applicants recommended by the latter for the position o€ teachers .. openly refused to do so, because the applicants were not eligibles. The agent of the Governor who met the Superintendent in the railroad station gave the latter fist . blows, causing contusions on his face. Since the agent . . of the Governor was not the person affected by t h e performance of the official duties of the Superintendent, ... .. can that agent be punished for direct assault? Explain . . . your answer. Yes, because it is not necessary to commit the crinie of direct assault that the offender was personally affected by the pi?rformance of the official duty of the person in authority or his agent. Since the attack appeared t o have been prompted by the desire of the special agent to revenge a supposed affront to the Governor by the Superintendent in connection with the appointment of teachers, which involves the performance of official duty, the agent is liable for direct assault committed by reason of the performance of official duty of the person in authority.

*975. .,.,

.

i

.

When is the &ve of the offender important in delermining 111isguilt in connection with the crime of direct assault? If tho person in authority or his agent is attacked . ' while he is n o t i n the performance of his official duties, '. , . :the 9 v e or reason for t h e k is necessary. It must

-

386

d e by reason of the past , :, , -performance +--of pfficial duties ofhe person in euthoritx ,,&his agent.

b a w n that the a m c k w

-

A learned from his neighbor that B, the mayor of his town, was maintaining an illicit relation with, his wife. A got his pistol and proceeded to the municipal building. As soon as A saw I3 in the latter's office going over some ,pending papers, A shot B but failed to hit him. Is A guilty of direct assault with attempted homicide@ $$& Explain your answer. The m n v e here is iptnaterial,,because B, a person in authority, was attacked w s l e p r r f a r m 3 n c e of his official duty. Hence, A is liable for direct assault. 1 978. What c&umstane&tuay qualify the crime of direct asMUlt? when it is committed Direct assault is with a weapon, 0 when the offend% is a public officer or employee, or when the offender lays hands u I n a person in authority.

p)

P 97

.A, councilor of a town, upon knowing tllat some PC soldiers were arresting his political leaders and followers for playing a gambling game, went to. the place and requested the soldiers to release them. When the sergeant of the FC refused, the councilor hit the sergeant with a cane several times on the different parts of the body, causing serious physical injuries on the sergeant. Considering that the councilor who attacked the PC sergeant is a person in authority, do you believe that the councilor is guilty of direct assault? Explain your answer. Yes, because the sergeant ya&Ata.cked while in the performance of his duties _and by reason of the nesfomance of his duties, while tliemuncilor was&in the performame of his duties. It was n g his official duty to intervene in a case where an agent of a-person 3iT authority, like the PC sergeant, had lawfully arrested law387

I

-I

/

?.,

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

breakers. In other words, the councilor was . not , contending in the exercise of official duties.

98 , A harboir policeman and a policeman of the Manila Police

'

Department happened to investigate a complaint for theft committed in the pier. The harbor policeman claimed that the MPD policeman had no right or authority to investigate any case mithin the harbor compound. The MPD policeman seriously injured the harbor policeman. Is the MPD policeman guilty of direct assault? Explain your an.,w e r . because No. He is liable for physical injuries o& & b w s e contendine in the exercise of authority. Jhere was no i,ntention t w h e authority of the n t , k ut t o-son in authority.

,

' .?# I

.. , ~,.>

~

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWIER

f

&. When the person in authority o r his agent at the time of the attack, is& in the performance of his official duty and the attack is not bv reasop of the aast performance of hisofficial duty; n n the Derson in authority or his agent has acted without authority of l a q in excess y - o when. he is attacked; ., +dWhen the offend!@ & a person in ald.bm& he and the offended or an agent. of authority and

!

..

9 1. A slapp,ed the barrio lieutenant who was helping the

..

. ,.

.

,

.

,I

.',

~

. . '

'

policeman in preserving order in a procession., Is the crime direct assault? Explain your answer. Yes, because the barrio lieutenant is a person in authority by direct provision of Art. 152, as amended. =e f w w d , when the offended uarty is a person i n a-yt, need not be serious. The law simply mentions laying oP hands, without making any distinction as to different cases. It is to be noted that the same provision of Art. 148 with regard to intimidation or resstance as other constitutive elements of assault expressly requires that they be serious. If the law had intended to distinguish between the case of a serious laying of hands and that which is not serious, i t would have laid down that distinction. This indicates that the distinction which the law makes in the cases of intimidation or resistance is

blows. Is A liable for direct assault? I t is submitted that inasmuch ai3 the offended party was no longer a person in authority at the time he was attacked, A was not liable f o r direct assault. One of the elements of direct assault is that the offended party is a person in authority or his agent. 984. A policeman saw X when the latter attacked the justice i

itted by X?

ficial duty.

cases is an attack against a person in authority

4

... . ..

i

388

-v

389

I

CRIRIIXAL LAW REYIEWHR

CRIMINAL LAW n E v i E w m i

..

’

Elements of indiyeot assault: 1. That a person in authority or his agent is the victim

.

of any of the forms of direct assault defined in Art. 148. 2. That a person comes to the aid of such authority o r his agent. 3. The offender makes use of force o r intimidation upon suck person coming to the aid of the authority of his agent.

~

certificate. In the police precinct, the Malacafiang agent shouted at the policeman, telling hdm that . h e , d i d not know how to investigate. Whereupon, the policeman grabbed the hand of the agent to take him to, the police sergeant. The agent refused to go with him and gave fist bXo\vs on the policeman. What crime was committed against the policeman, direct assmlt or resistance and serious disobedience? Why? The crime committed was only qSistance and serious The order disobeyed is that which requiTed him to go to the police sergeant. ,The foree ‘emdovef i u t o f a &s nature and did not indicate defiance of the law 01: its r e p r e s e n w e , iEview f& &at the aecusedadxd.re-i . ,, :.

:’,

’

’.’

. ,.

For raiding his house where some gamblers were arrested, A became resentful against the policeman who made the raid. The next day, A met that policeman, while patrolling on the street, and struck him with his fist which hit the latter on his breast; but when the policeman held his hand, A desisted from further attacking him. What crime wais committed by A? A wa2: liable f o r 6 t r e a t m e n t on@ He w a s not liable for resistance and serious disobedience, beeause there was no order by the policeman that A disobeyed. u d &I Le gkect assault, be&se the force employed k.p& ofasedous nature as to inilkate &e, Ofthebw

-

a

-of

resistance and serious rii8i-e: 1. That a p s n in authority or’h-t

ikenaaaed’h

the nerformaneeqf_official duty. 2. Such official duty c o d i: givinp a Iawful~order to the ofgnder. . , S . That the offender resists or seriously disobeys such pereon in authority or his azent. . 4. That the act of the offender is not included in- the provisions of Arts. 148, 149, and 150. I

--

i

What are the6rimes against public o r a They are: Tumults and other disturbances of Oublic order. Unlawful use of means of puh-n and unlawfui ,

f

Alarms and scandals.

,’ 4 Delivering prisoners from i&& I

98# A, beccming angry with the employees in a government office, shouted to the top of his voice and chaenggd them to a fight. There was disturbance in the office.

I

390 .*’

>

: n

G-3

I

case of US. vd. Tabiana, wherein the policeman who was struck on the breast by T a l h n a with his hand had ordered Tabianr to submit himself to the arrest being effected. There w88 then in order disobeyed.

a certain Chinam? alien registration both the agent

.

was no law requiring aliens to carry their .gegistration

I

985. Several strikers obstructed the free passage along a

road by 1:ying on the road forming roadblocks. A constabulary major ordered them t o get out from the road ; and clear the way. They refused to do so. What crime . . . was committed by the strikers? Explain your answer. The strikers committed the crime of simule disobedienxe, H person in abecause the disobedieuce Lo an-of w t y was not of a serious n a b.e (Art. 151, par. 2, R.P.C.).

and the Chinaman were taken to’ the. police precinct for investigation, hecause the policema.n, believed that there

391

I

I I

I

i'

,

, f

./

.

I

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

. . . .

Is A liable for tumults and other disturbances ,of publie order? Why? No, because even if there was serious disturbance in the office, it was n& p&~&& or intended, A having been .' p e d to cause the disturbance ( U S . vs. Domingo, 19 'Phil. 69). -,

..

'

.I--.

Note: A is liable

.99

I

99

and seandal$u.ider

Art. 166.

news that the President of the Philippine% died in his sleep, is that reporter liable for unlawful use of means of publication? Explain. No, because such false news may not endanger the public order or cause damage to the interest or credit of the St,ate.

/

.

,'.,. .

,

fw @arms

If a reporter published in a newspaper as news the false

p'

.

of the peace, rind then presented it the jailer who, not knowing the falsification, released upon receipt of the forged document. What crime was

..,

fired his pistol upward in the air within . Iftown,a person what crime was committed by him? Explain.

a

The crime of4i&ms and scandamwas committed by him, bsakse it producd alarm or d a n e r , since the slug ired from the pistol would fall down and might hit a person.

a perison caused serious disturbance in 'the meeting of a municipal council, what crime was committed by him? He committed disturbance of proceedings of a legislative body unddr Art. 144 of the Revised Penal Code.

h the intention of helping B to escape from jail,

ed an order of release and counterfeited the signa...

392 ~

,-.~. *:;,:., :.r,.:~' ,

,

.

;$

/

It is a eomdex crime of delivering prisoner from jail through falsification of x w&.A . -- 1 n t by a private iGdividual. The usual means for committing the crime of delivering prisoners from jail are -e, intimidation or briJgry. I t is true that the law (Art, 156) spF& of "other means", but the penalty for falsification of a public document by a priyate individual under Art. 172 is prision correccional medium and maximum periods and a fine not exceeding F'5,000, which is higher than the penalty for delivering prisoner from jail if other means are used (awesto m a g o r ) . Although the falsification was the means used to commit the crime of delivering prisoners from jail, the falsiiication which is a graver offense cannot be absorbed by the lesser offense.

,:

.j

"

E l m m t s of deJive&ng p7isoneru ,from jail: 1. That there is B pemm confined in> jail or penal estab lishment. 2 . That the offender removes therefrom such person, or elps the escape of such person. 3 . By means of violence, intimidation, or bribery, or by other means.

i

/

B scut through C to A file wrapped in the clothes delivered to A. Later, A ed the file in cutting the iron bars and succeeded in escaping. What crime was committed by B who sent the file to C? Explain your answer. Delivering prisoners irom jail. There are two ways of committing the crime o f delivering prisoners from jail: ,@f by E m A n g a person eonfined in jail or penal establishment, and @ by such person to escape. The act of helping the escape of a person confined in jail or penal establishment de&~&$ thaL&f Lrovidinq the m'isonc with tools armeaps that may facilitate his escape.

994. A is a detention prisoner in jail.

-

393

I i

CRIMTN-AL LAW REYIEVVER,

. .

Not6:

ii

a t-lter doeJt

A!

c

A

m

CRIWINAL LAW REYIEWER

e an accomplice in the escape.of A, -b

not 8. nrinchal. A commit a crime,

'

who

m

d

ova&

cc hzr escagixg:

o~sa7.u-

+fThe

eseaQeg

A.

offender is B convict b y final i I& is -8 hissontenen which con% : ?n

t. deprivation

of+ul€&.

4.

detained in the city jail on a charge of murder. money to the jailer who permitted A to leave jail, thereby making possible the escape ' o f A. I? be punished for delivering prisoner from jail? :>Why? A is found milty of the crime of [email protected] to show that A committed would be l&le as an 6 c c e s s a t o the crime ' @, of murder, because he assisted in the escape of'a aersou guilty of murcer (Art. 19, par. 3, 'R.P.C.). should be the liahility of B, because tKe llenalty

He e d s the service of his sentence bn-g the term of his s e d q e e .

For committing parricide under exceptional circumstances contemplated in Art. 247 o f the Revised Penal Code, A was sentenced to 4 years, 9 months and l 0 ' d a y s of destierro, during which period of time he was prohibited from entering the City of Manila. While serving that penalty, he entered the 6ity of Manila. In case of conviction for evasion of the service of the sentence, must he he sentenced to destierro or to the penalty of prision, c~rreccionalin its medium and maximum periods? The penalty plovided for evasion of the servica&.&e during t h e t e r m of his s&?&ce& a m Et cannot e-i prescribed by law for_the_crun ' e. Hence, the D e n a l t y b be imuosed m a b e pision eol.relxh& in its medium &&.igp. because it i s - n pt and maximum t~

eeessorv to the crime of m u r k i s h i p h e r t u h e the crime of delivering prisoners from jail,

crimes of evasion of the service of sen,.

They ape: Evasion by escaping during the term of sentence. ,$ Evasion during a disorder, by failing to give up to the authorities within 48 hours after the Chief Executive has annonneed the passing away of the calamity; and , Evasion by violation of conditional pardon. "

._'

parricide, was confined in the Bilibid Prisims in Muntinlupa pending his trial. There occurred a disorder resulting from a strong earthquake. A was .one of those who left the prison, because of the earthquake. He never returned to the prison or gave himself up to the authorities within 48 hours followkg the issuance of the proclamation amnouncing the passing away of the calamity. May A be prosecuted and punished for a violation of Art. 158 of the Revised Penal Coiie? No, because he is&I a c& serving sentence penal institution, which is an e m t of the offense. The Z f3feevasion on the occasion of a disorder ia; .., that the offender is a convict who is serving sentence hi!.! a penal institution. This element presupposes b h & : ' '

, .

s convicted of murder and way sentenced to' death. id not appeal. After -months from the time udgm(ent was promulgated and while being confined ;:in the Bilibid Prisons in Mnntinlupa; A escaped. Later, &A,, was captured by the Philippine Constabdlary. 'Can L4.rbe. prosecuted and punished for evasion of tho service @:of.the senltence? Explain your answer. , . , Whether heappeals o r t , the judgment of the e penalty of death does shall have been d e,A wsi&&&&

&

. . ~ ..

.

, .

-d

I

-

595 4,

i

I

I CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

--

.

he might also he killed. He never gave himself up hi; the authorities even if the disorder already ceased to exist.) Is he liable criminally? Not under Art. 158, because the disordgr mustresult from conflagration, earthquake, e s u o n or similar catas-" *te, o r d i n g the m u t i w in which h e x a s not particie d . But he is liable under Art.157, for evasion by escaping -.during tile +yam of his sentence. ' . Noti: F i s an i ed resistance to superior officers. Hence, lsarmlng the guards hy certain prisoners is not mutiny. B U the guard@ attacked th&m~&s, there is mutin=.

person is not a detention prisoner. A person confined .. in prison pending his trial & i a detention urisoner. evasion on the oocasion of disordem: 1. The o f f e n d g is a convict who is se&ng sentence i

-9of

.

.

Lf.

u penal institution. 2. Them is rdresultina frma. conflagration. b. earthquake, e. explosion, or d. similar catastrophe; or e. in which he has & participated. 3. The offender evades the service of his sentence by .leaving the penal institution where he is confined, 0.1 the oceasipn of such disorder or during the mutiny. 4. The offender fails-ot p to the authorities , w i g n 48 hours following the issuance of a pmelamation by the Chief Executive announcing the passhg away of such +unity. Note: If the offender fails to give himself up, ire ets an in penalty is that the m c u s e h ~ f the time still remainine to be served under the origina ntence, n a exceed six (6) months. ' in 48 hours, If he ives himself u to the authorities he shall z T & d of the of.J&&.w

(Art.

1002. A. was gwa>ted a a d i t i o n a l pardon after serving four years of the six years imprisonment imposed on him by the court. The condition was that he ShQuld not commit any other crime in the future. Oln year after, he wi1q accused and found guilty of concealing deadly weapon punishable under a special law and was sentenced to pay a fine of twenty-five pesos. By order of the President, A was reincarcerated and required ito serve the unexpired portion of his sentence of six years. A filed a petition for habeas corpus claiming and contending that he was illegally detained, because he was never prosecuted and tried for violation of the conditional pardon under Art. 159. Will his petition prosper? Why? No, because the President of the P-s, &r the Revised Administrative C o b (See. [64]), may order the arresi a& reincarceration of the person without previous judicial trial. the conditions of the =don Jn such case, it would not be necessary to urosecute L &IL~ under Art. 159 of the Revised him and to liPenal Code.

98).

1000: Explain why those prisoners who & . n o t leave the pen&

institution during a disorder are n o t entitled to a reduction of their penalty. Those convicts who remain in the penal institution are m &entitled to 1/5 deduction of their sentence, b there is no assurawe that had they successfullv run away and ' w d their . they would have, nevert-s, - l$v ed i -1 with the a r i v a w of prison lifed- i by that sense of rightand loyalty - - t h e ~ w e r ~which t is sought to be rewarded by that special allowance (Losada vs. Acenas), the disorder in the Bilibid Prisons, resulting from the killings of certain prisoners by the other prisoners, A, a prisoner by final judgment, escaped for fear that 396

--

I

1003. A was convicted of concubinage amd, as the concubine of her co-accused, was sentenced to 4 years, 9 months and 1 0 days of 9 t i e r r o . After one month,/she was granted a conditional pardon. Later, she violated the condition by committing vagrancy, of which she was later found guilty. In case she is prosecuted for and 397

J

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW..KEVIEWER

convicted of violation of the conditional pardon, w h a t will be her penalty, the unexpired portion of destierrw which she was serving when granted a conditional pardon,. or the penalty of prision correcciondl in it3 minimum period? The Supreme Court held in one case that in such a . c' ase the m u l d .be s e m e d t d e unexuirtxl: portion of destierro. B & the law provices the nenaltY of prision. eorreceio~@Z in its minimum erfbd,' when the unexpired Dortion of his sentence is years. It is un\y when the d1s h~ he t u years that tksxmuc ' t shall suffer the unexpired portion. It is submitted that, with due respect to the Supreme Court, the penalty to be imposed on A is p?.ision eorreeeional in its minimum period.

'

.

."

& $

'_

398

',

1006. A comniitted theft in 1935 and est:afa in 1936.

In 1937, A was convicted of theft comrnitted in 1935. While serving sentence for theft, A w a s convicted of estafa ' committed in 1936. Is A a recidivist or a quasi-recidivist? , ' Why? A is a recidivist, not a quasi-recidivist, because when , . he committed rstafa in 1936, he was& yet m e d of theft by final judgment.

04. A was corivicted of murder and was sentenced t o 17 yeam. 4 months and 1 day of reclusion temporal. On March 6, 1 9 a after serving 15 years, 7 months and 11 days, and when only 1 year, 6 months and 20 days remained'

"

@

formatory institution pursuant to Art. 80 of the Revised Penal Code, having been found guilty of homicide. While in that institution, A killed a guard there. Is there quasi-recidivism in this case? Why? None, hecause the &r w a G a c o n v i c t e d hv final judgment. His sentence was suspended (Art. 80, R.P.C.).

$'-Note: The @of the netion for violation of !he canditio?lal ardon is the province or bity where the n 1 n i s violated,. h 8 , where the new crime is e o m m i t t e d e q L o n ofthe n cof the JWJ! on.

to be served by A, he was granted a conditional pardon, the condition being that "he shall not again violate any of the penal laws of the Philippines." On April 29, 19fi 10 years after he was granted the conditionaX on, A committed the crime, and was found guilty,. drivin,g without license. May A be prosecuted fox of the conditional pardon? Explain your answer. No. The condition of the pardon which A was charged: with having breached was no longer operative when h e committed a violation of the Motor Vehicle Law; for driving without license. A's pardon dld not s t a t e t = i s within which the condition thereof was to be observed.. Hence, A had to observe the condition of the pardon only 'within 1 year, 6 months and 20 days. When he committed another crime thereafter, it did not result in the

.

1005. A, 15 years and 7 months old, i s confined in the r q

I

'

violation of the conditional pardon, as there was no coiidii tion violated. The duration of the condition subsequent annexed to a pardon would be limited to the remitted portion of the' prisoner's sentence, unless an intention to extend it beyond that time was manifest from the nature of the condition or the language in which it was imposed (Infante vs. Provincial Warden).

't

N o t e : To be a q u a s i - r e c i w t wo , < - re F 3"mite must be present: 4. He must be aiready convicted by final iudgment; and He commits a new felony b&vu b-g to SeNe or while sciwino the sentence. In the probiern givtn, when A conimitted estafa, there was no final judgment and he was not yet serving the sentence ,, far theft. .. Suppose A committed estafa after service of sentence for ' theft? Is A a quasi-recidivist or a recidivist? Why? .; A is a recidivist, because at the time A committed estafa.% it was after service of sentence for theft. To be a qua?i-'** recidivist, A must have committed estafa before beginning .to, serve or while Eerving the sentence for theft. As e s t a f a . ' d theft are embraced in tho same title of the Code, A i s ' ? reeidivisc.

4.

,

...

399

<

j

I

,,,

,.

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

'i i ,

.,I

CRlMINAL LAW REVIEWER

~, : .', 1

-

1407. While A was serving sentence for homicide, he inflicted . . .serious physical injuries on another prisoner. Is A a recidivist or a quasi-recidivist? Why? .. A i s a quasi-recidivist, because when he committed the

i'.,.

. .. ', '

.

.

felony of serious physical injuries he was alreadz cmYi&ed b a a L i u & m a t of homicide a& he committed the new felony while serving the sentence for homicide.

1008. Suppose that A committed serious physical'kjuries before serving the sentence f o r homicide, but the judgment in 3 the homicide case was already final, is A 'a quasi-reei.. ' divist? A is still a quasi-recidivist, because he committed the last crime a€ter final ixdgnm~ t as regards the first crime and p-serving sentence for the first crime.

4i$!

of the peace in favor of X. M stole from the desk of secretary the paper with the signature of the Presidei#j in blank and typewrote a document over it, making :the>,,: President liable to him for a sum of money. What c&e7< was committed by M? Explain. Is M liable for forge+$ under Art. 161? Why7 Falsification of a private docum& The President wa: ma.de m a r as a &bto> & u I - > n his private c w The document prepared over his signature thena private one. M is ml&ible for _forgery under4 Art. 161, b-hte z g n a t u r e of-tha PredtXIt ms .I@) fd. The s i m a t y r e o f the President mvst be forged :, on official document? of _ t h e _ B e p u h P nf the : , . Philippines. "'

9:;-

-

sm

..

. S? , , -,!4 1011. What are the crimes under cud"Z , ;*: i_ ": They are: .1. M m and importine false coins and utterine false i CAS in connivance w u e c-feiter or ~L?.Q&. r ; 2. Mutilat,ion of coins, importation u m e of mutilated coins i ~ ! n i v :', 'a,. o m e r ; and 3 . Selling of faJsrormufiktehcoin,a c o n i i + i n ,.&;,,&J:..,'~.: 1

:. . stenographer? The stenographer committed two crimes, namely : (1) , estafa and (2) falsification_af-document, the ' . receipt of his father. The act of falsification committed a itsi S i g a genuine cbcumd which c i%. The falsification w a a m r y t o m i t M a . . The falsification was committed to conceal the crime sf .>, . estafa. - < x s l @ b e malversation, becauJe received the money, not as tax collectpr, but as a private individual. :

,

,,-....spent 'the money;

sented t o the no

~

%-

%

very act constituting the crime 0: (See Art. 316, par. 4 , of the Revised Penal Code.) ,__

-

a

'1036. What i!s the crime committed by a private individual , .. . who.cooperates with a public officer in falsifying a document, the public officer taking advantage of his official : .. . ,

position? A private person who cooperates with a public officer in the-:falsification of a public document W s thesame ofarivate document by omission when he did not record some of the invoices in the record of the account of B. The falsification by omission in effect constitutes the making o f untruthful statements in a narration of facts. The selling of invoices to the customer for half their respective values does not constitute a separate and distinct offense, because it is merely evidence of damage to the company, which is an element of falsification of a private document. However, if the record of the account of B is a commercial document, defined and regulated by the Code of Commerce or other mercantile law, the bookkeeper is liable for two distinct and separate crimes, namely, (1) qualified theft 'of the invoices which he sold to B:'%nd (2) falsification of a commercial document which was committed t o conceal the crime of qualified theft. The falsification was not necessary to commit the qualified theft, because the bookkeeper had in his possession the invoices stolen. Note: The selling of the invoices is qualified theft, because the baokkemer toak the invoices with grave abuse of Con-

u s 9 i a d the ca-

ment.

~

1052. A, a private person and not enlp~loyedin any office, sent a telegram to B who was then in Mindanao, stating in the telegram that the latter's fat.her was dead and that he had to come home to Manila. B came home, incurring expenses for his trip, only to find out that his father was very much alive and in good health. Is A liable,for falsifying telegraph message? Explain your answer. No, because he is nei$her a public officer or employee nor an officer or employee of a private corporation= gaged in the service of s e n d i n g s receiving wireless, telegraph or telephone message. The falsification of, or the uttering of fictitious w i r e ess, telegraph or telephone messages can be committed only by an officer or employee of the Government.or of any private corporation engaged in the service of sending or receiving wireless, telegraph or telephone messages (Art. 173, R.P.C.). But A is liable as a princiual bv inducement -e -. c&Ee of f a m o n nf telenrauh message.

f

\

a crime: in connection with false wireless, I!able, telegraph or' telephane messages? When he knowingly u m such falsified dispatch prejudice of a third party, &r atle;l& with intent ot-e such prejudice (Art. 173, par. 2, B.P.C.).

1053. In what cases may a private person commit

1064. A was applying f o r a job in a oompany.

The m required A to submit a certificate from his forme ployer regarding his length of service in his :fo ployment and efficiency as an employee. .A -eo

419

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRlMINAL LAW REVIEWIm

.., &., :

present any, a s he was never employed, befare. 'To impress the manager of the company, A typewrote a. certificate .+ .. , . purportedly issued by the administrative .officer of an , ,,.., ,.,office .of the executive department of. the Government, 1 *-. .)..stating therein that A was .a former ,ehaploYee of that department ' and very efficient and t h a t 'he intended to resign to look for a n employmen( with a bigger salary. A ,coumterfeited ,$e signature of the administrative officer . on thi? certificate and later presented it t o the manager .,,. . of the: Company. What crime was committed by A? A committed the crime of f a l s i f i c a b of certificate pf (Art. 174, R.P.C.), ..,. .. . . merit by a private indi.&W -.

'.

ti....

-

I

.- . . ,. .

,.,-.:

Note: The last paragraphiof Art. 174 p n i s h e s a ptivate,person who falsifies a certificate of merit, .or. service. The of the sam-punished under Art. 175.

1055. Suppose that it was the 'administrative officer:.who .. , issued . it; what' crime was committed? Tlle,, administrative officer committed the crime of '. f - " ' f&&.tinn of esrtificate af-mer it bv a ollblicdfficer. - . ;. , , f.

iO56.' A l i v i l complaint was filed by A'against 'B'for damages, -j,:oli account of the serious phpsical iniuries which the I , .., , latter infIicted upon the 'former. A induced C,,,l$s physician, t o sign a certificate to the effect that 'he treated *..:.' A, 'chiargeil and received Prom hlm the sum of P500 z e his fee, but. the fact is that C received 'only PZOO in full payment of his fee. What crime was rommitted by the *?* ohvsician? 1s..it falsification -of m e d i d tettificate"By , . .,'. 'a 'physician? ' Why? falsificlG b i f i c a t i o n of private documen3 'It .is *,i '. t&xn,,o w l e , b a s e the- Zertificate hi:.. ,to,the illness o r - injury nf -a':person. I n ' does mt '

.,.)

I

..

'

s'

-,.

, .,., ,:

.., .

falsification of medical certificate, the false facCs certified must refer t d e illness or injury qf a m n (Art. 174, i I : . , ~, : ., -R.P.(S.). ' .I. 'Note: When person, ''&a I;hys:kii?, -f?lsifi$d::'i. medical emrtificate, the crime' is 'falsification :of -rned&LCW&& .,..

420

.

.

7

;

P,;:,:-':r-,:,

.-

ay

1057.. What are .the crimes classified as ,&her falsities? . .. ' ' .They are: 1. Usurpation of authority or official functions. 2. Using fictitious name and concealing true 'name. 3. Illegal use of uniforms or 'insignia. 4. False testimony against a defendant. 5. False testimony favorable to the defendant. 6. false testimony in civil. cases. 7 . ' False testimony in other cam3 and .perjury. 8. Offering false testimony in evidence; ' , . , , . . , . . . ,. , . 1058,.May a pnhlic officer commit usnrp:ttion of authority or official functions? Why? Yes, because the law (Art. 177, R.P.C.) applies,$%. "any,person". T W s no reason to restrict its OD=tL~T&iyafL%ilwh 1. I

,

'

1059. -The .mayor of the town, although tho .justice of the peace was in the municipality, :conducted 'preliminary 'examination .and ordered the arrest of the offender. Is the mayor liable for Usurpation of official functions, of the. justice of the' peace? Explain your answer. No, because the act is specifically covered by Art. 241 ~' of the 'Revised Pe&L&&e, ~v@h punishes any o f f i a o-xecutive bran Ch ,of t h P G n v e m r & who assume% , , , ,' judicial uowera, . . . , . .

1060: An. employee in the Bureau of, Public Works exercised the powers of his Director wheu the latter was sick, without having been designated as Acting Director, and, without any right to do so. What crime was committedj; by that employee? -' That- employee committed usurpation of authority OG, official functions, because under pretense o f official posi-"' tion he performed acts pectaining t o . the Director without being lawfully entitled. to do, s o . (Art. 177, R.P.C.). -

,

1061. .A, a . private individual, pretended to be a detectiw' of the M.P.D. and succeeded in secoring- the consent 'of

42 1

CHIXINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

the owner of a house to enter the same, because of his false representation that he would make an investigation. Once inside, and taking advantaxe of the fact that tho owner went to his bedroom to changd clothes, A h l r from a table a purse containing money and left. In addition to whatever other crime he nommitted, did A commit usurpation of authority? No, because pretending the exercise of public authority was made by A to gain entrance into the house of the offended party to commit robbers with f o w unan_thingn in that house. Since it is a n e n t of the offense of robbery, the cfime of usoroation of authority is deemed a&rM

1062. In nsulrpation of authority or official function, is it neceszry for the offender to perform a public functicn

:,.

:

.

in the Government o r in any of its branches? If he already knowingly and falsely represented himself to be an officer, agent or representative of any department or agency of the Philippine Government or Of any foreign government, it is not necessary to perform any act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer. He is already guilty of usurpation of authority. But if, in addition to pretense of official position which he made, he also performed any act pertsining to any person in authority or public officer of the Philippine Government or foreign government, or any agency thereof, without being lawfully entitled to do so, he is guilty of usurpation of official functions.

:. 1063. Republic Act No. 10 punishes any person who, with or . without pretense of official position, shall perform any act pertaining to the Government, or to any person in authority or public officer, without being lawfully entitled to (lo so. To whom is it applicable? Republic Act No. 1 0 is applicable only to members of , . seditious organization engaged in subversive activities.

.

~.'3064. ,t;. , .I .., ,.

:,

Is 1,he use of a name other than one's real name dways pundshable?

No, it is notpunishable(1) When used as a @nym

or (2) When a fictitious name is nqtnsed (3) When the purpose is conceal a crim to evade the execution of a judg:ment, or not to damage to public interest, or (4) ,When the use of fictitious name is an -ent o a particular felony, as it is absorbed. Thus, in estafa or in robbery where fictitious name is used to commit the crime, 80 that it is an integral part of the commission of the offense, it is not t o be considered a separate and distinct offense. Also, when fictitious came is included in the false statement in the narration of facts, i t is considered pa of the crime of falsification.

&&

Elemext8 of using fictitious E r n e : 1. The offender uses n name oLhor than his real n F e . 2 . He uses that fictitious name publicly. 3. For the purpace ofconcealing a crime; b. evading the execution of 2t judgment; or e . causing damage.

=.

,,.

'!

C that he was B and signed B's name. on a deed of sale of a ]piece of land belonging, : to B and, after receiving thc proceeds of the sale C, the vendee, A spent the same. Is A liable for fictitious name? Explain your answer. While it is true that A publicly used a name other t his real name when he represented himself as B on public document, with the purpose of causing &ma because the to B, A is*liable, the law (Art. 178) is said to be terest. Since the act of A re -. private interest of B, the crime commit means of deceit. And having f & i e d a as a necessary niea,ns to commit

1065. A represented himself to

i

422

~'

423

I

I

I

CRIM~NKL'LAW REVIEWER

CIElMINAL- LAW. REVIEWER 1

--

c&&e of estafa through falsification d f a public , document, by causing i t to appear that B'pahicipated in a n act or proceeding when in truth and in fact he did , . not so participate.

.1066. ..

. . Give an illustration of publicly using a fictitious name to conceal a crime; and an illustration, to evade the execution of a judgment. ,,.,,. , When A, who looks like B, a prisoner by final judg-

2,,

'

I,

. ,,

' '

ment, takes the place of the latter in the jail. A hae l o 'use the name of B, and B has to use the name of A ; other wise, the authorities will discover that one takes the place of the other. The purpose of A is to conceal the crime he has committed, that is, delivering a prisoner , ' . from jail. The purpose of B is to evade the execution ' ' bf the judgment against him, that is, to evade the service ' of the penalty imposed on him by the court. ' .I

1067:-A w : arrested ~ for playing a gamb1ing:game. A gave the name of B,for himself, stated he wag married, which was true; gave his real residence, real 'occupation, and correct age. Is A liable for concealing 'true name? No. He must &o 1-c his other aersonal circnms&,g. He must n a n l y conceal his true name, &l : _. 5''. a i all his other personal circumstances. .

.

:What crime. is committed. by a lieutenant who used the 'insignia ,of the captain of the Philippine Army? W h y ? 2 .

'

:! -.

, 8

Illegal use of i-because the lieutenant u m ni&& which aertaiw to an office no$..&ld by him (Art. 179, R.P.C.).

1069. What crime is committed by a constabulary soldier who . used the uniform of the policeman of the Manila Police Department? Why? because the constabulary soldier j,w&fihe is not m member (Art. ,170,R.P.0.). 494

'

;

'

. ,

,:,, ~,

Note: The insignia or uniform must beluaod nublidy'and ikinsignia o r uniform tahould not be that of an . -P,maginary The office. .,'.

.

1070. What are the three forms of false testimony? They are : 1. False testimony in criminal cases. 2. False testimony in civil c a s e ! ,.,, 3'. False testimony in other cases.

,. I.

"I

~.,

1071. The evidence presented against A ;shows that.dur&g the .: preliminary investigation conducted by the fiscal, A tes-.":.' tified under oath that he saw B stab C who was k i l l e l as a result. n% he' the' case was tried before the Court of First Instance, A changed his.' testimony by testifying ;'' then and there that he did not 3ee B at the.~piacewhere -'. C was killed, and that C was killed b y an unknown 'person.. :! Can A be 'Convikted of false testimony on the basis of ,. the foregoing facts? ' ' No, the -1 must' determific"'~fY& wllich of the W contradictory testimonies If the testimony given by A before the fiscal is false, it being a testimony upon : a material matter, under oath before a competent artthorized l o receive and administer' oath, and the requiring the giving of that testimony, it-istestimony of A was upon a material matter;.-becaudg, death of C and the person who caused his death were' main facts which were the subject of"th& 'itiquiry; fiscal before whom 'A gave his testimony' wag a.,compe authorized to receive p,nd, administer oath; ( officer . waa a willful and deliberate assertion of falseho cause A knew. his testimony before therfiscal was false; and under the law, the person giving evidence-ortestimony-; 4 relative to the subject of the inquiry -by the fiscal must , . ' do so uiider oath (Art. 183, R.P.C.). If i t is the testimony of.A before.the .court which is .: .false, then the cri qf the defendant

.-

425

CRIMINAL LAW HEVIE'WER

CRIMINAL L A W REVIEWER

,1072. What are the two wvnvSof committingIllustrate each. y.' By testifvine falsely u u k . c d k in a proceeding o e r than judicial. (a) False testimony &re any committee of'conwess; (b) False testimoFy before a y adrninSrativ+-&&Y ...,. ,., , a-a t-&r a hearing. Example: B, C , D and E testified under oath before . . . the board of special inquiry in support of the applicair tion of three Chinese boys to enter the Philippines, declaring that said boys were the children of A: and that they were born in Manila. During the investiga' , 'tion, A testified that the three boys were not her children. B, C, D and E are guilty of perjury by testify- ' ~ " ing falsely under oath. By making an affidavit. (a) In a9liaction for marriage license. (b) In @lieation for civil service examination. ( c ) f p p w g s , re&ing that a f & h i t s be attached thereto. Ezantple: In his application for civil service examination, which is under oath, A stated that he wa8 not convicted of any crime, when in truth and in fact he was once convicted of theft.

false testimony under oath or who executed the false afiidavit is I &liable for perjury. Perjury m t be committed t l m u 'I negligDFee, one of its elements is that there must he a willful and d assertion of falsehood.

,',:::

I

.

' '

:

-

4::

@iof

P)BViUWi

k.There must he state-

oa h a x affidavit won a-material matter: 4. Before a competent officer, authorized U v e and administer oath; b x E - 4 W i l f u l n d deliberate assertion of a false& g M r ; and That the sworn statement containing the ralaity i u &ired by law. Note: The false testimony under oath or the affidavit must. ~ i k t ac material matter; if it ildaes not refer to B material matter. the false testimony under oath or the false affidavit cannot xive rise to perjury. , There must be a w v n d deliberate assertion @.&%,&, ,,. If there is an bonest mistake, the person who BaVe a

4.

,

~

!,&.

1073. To hold a person liable for perjury, must there be a law requiring that a testimony under oath or an affidavit be made in certain cases? This is not a settled question. The meaning of the phrase (in Art. 183), which is, "in cases in which the'; law so requires" has been the subject of different interpretations by the Supreme Court (People vs; Tupasi, et' al.; and People vs. Angangco). In the Tupasi ease, it: was held that there must be a law requiring a statement ,: under oath or an affidavit upon a. material matter to be made in a particular case. I n the Angangco case, it 'w" held that i t is sufficient that the siatement be made under oath or an affidavit be made to serve a legal purpose, such as to be assured of the veracity of the witness who testifies. It is submitted that there must be. a law reauirina it. This interpretation must Drevdl, hecause such s t m k p m i m ? m d .

1074. Under the old Penal Code, a person who would procure another t o testify falsely would be liable for subornation of perjury, if the latter would testify in a manner, making him liable for perjury. What does the Revised Penal Code provide for such act? Give an example of subornation of perjury. The Revised Penal Code treats and punishes such act as plain perjury, the person who procures the false witness as the principal by induction; and the false witness, the principal by direct participation. . Example; A induced B and C to testify falsely in a'preliminary investigation that A's servant who left his house without his knowledge took with him some clothes and,

,T

427

CKIMENAL LAW REVIEWBR

CRIMINAL. LAW REVIEWER

when. as a matter of fact the servant did not n proptake anything with him, except his o ~ personal erty. B and C testified falsely under Uath before t h e 'fiscal that the servant stole^ some ,clothesbnd money belonging to A. A was guilty of the crime fonnerly . . known ,as ,subornation of perjury. Under,Jie, Revise$. Penal Code, A is liable for perjury as a' q$$pal ,,. by^ induction. .P money,

..

'

the crime'af offei*inc false testimony m

,

or official proceeding.

.

1076. A procured

I) to testify in his favor, their agreement being that I3 would testify that he was present when A. " ' paid his debt to'C, which was not true. Dur&g the trial,. ,.. ' . when A presented B, a s his witness, the lader told t h e . . . t r u t h ' t h a t ' he had no' knowledge of any payment made ' by A t o C; and th& he waS requested by A to testify ".' blsely. Is A liable criminally for having presented B ; .I as a' witness? Has B any criminal liability for taking ., . the witness stand? Explain your answers. When A, presented B as' his witness, he knew that his said witness was false, because the latter agreed with him to testify :falsely. Under, the Revised Penal Code (Art. 184), t M m e offer of a witness knowins him t a -.false wit&-% i= consummated felolly. It ,would Seem that it is not necessary that the witness offerkd should testify in .a manner making him liable for false testi. . mony, because this is covered by Art.,l7, par, %,in rela,. tion to Art. 182. A s regards, B, i t is submitted that he is also liable, because B and A were in conspiracy. ' From the facts of ' w e , it will be noted that A and E had a previous .: agreement __ and both af-them decided to carry Gut th& &,,ag indicated by the f a t t u presented him a u :, . ' W M s s Lnd B took the witness stand pursuant to their ' agreement. Since there is conspiracy, the act 'of A is consi.dered the act Of'B. ' It is true that B told tkk tr& and did n e testify in the manner he was told to testify, ';a%but such'desistance on the part of B, having been made ', 1-a the acts of ' hae..hen ppsfanned, w & not in. any way relieve him of criminal resuonsibility. In .:,,

, .

.,

.

'

e (Art.

-

, ,,

c

184), a +the acts of execution are'.Derbollged. * u ~ h e , . -mere offer ,of a false witness 5,tes:timony . ' 'a1

' '

.

'

Note: This ctime is also committed when.the offender offered in evidence a false witness o r .false teutimony in an official proceeding. This is not a crime formerly known. 8 s Subornation 09 perjury, because under Art. 184. it is not necessary that the witness offered should testify falsely !n B manmr making him liable for perjurv. "~ If the offender knowingly offered in evidencc false doeuest in a judicial or official proceedinz, the crime is' not covered by Art. 184, but should be^ punished under;the last .paragraph of Art. 112. , . The false teatimony may be offered without the witness by preienting his swposed deposition in court' or othkf official .. proceeding. ..

.

1076. A i s a retailer of certain goods imported from a foreign Colintfy by B. Tilting advantage of the Scarcity of that kind of imported goods, B and A agreed'to fix highep prices ,for the goods ,which A purcha.sed from him and A. .in turwwould resell the same goomds a t much .higher prices, ,thereby increasing the market price of such goods. Are A and B liable under the Revised Penal Code? If eo, what crime was committed by them?. . ... - ' . Yes. The Revised Penal,' Code punishes -any ,' person who, being an imuorter .of merchirnrWisewholesaler , n,r t s e r ' s h a l l a x r a in any manner w i - t t W . ' o t h e r . uersop f o r the uuruose of increasing the nprket price- of m -i ' & g (Art. 186, pa?. 3, R,P.C.). ' : ! ' ' . . .

The crime committed i s ~ o a o l vand :. G 5 0O i' trade ~!.' , : .~ . , . ., ,.. , . , , j . . ,*. 1077. A, B and C executed a Ijnblic documknt wh;ch:embodiea their".ngreement .,to the. effect t h a i mrtain .merchandise would .be sold at certain price .and .no$+one of ..them shall : , .. sell &is merchandise at,--lesserprke:without thwprevioukl ... ,,,consent of ,.the athexs, .The agreement.. xas.,not:::~carn$ .out, because they were..arrested, , @m,thep .be$held, .crim-3 , '>f F

I

I

+:

I

429,

CRIMINAL L A W REVIEWER

i n d y liable under the Revised Penal Code on the basis OF ,,': : that agreement? Explain your answer. .~, '. , . Yes. Under the Revised Penal Code, any person who . shall enter into any contract or agreement or shall take? part in any conspiracy or combination in the form of a " trust or otherwise in restraint of trade or commerce o r ' ' to 'prevent by artificial means free competition in the ' ' market is liable for monopolies and combination in restraint of trade (Art. 186, par. 1, R.P.C.). ' ,

"

:

. . 1078. A, a millionaire, invited all lumber concessioners and of.

,

fer& them certain price plus a share in the profits if dl of them wwld sell their lumber to him only. A's purpose was t o conitrol the price of lumber sold locally or exported to foreign countries. The lumber concessioners refused , and,.rejected the offer. May A be held criminally liable under the Revised Penal Code for his attempt to mono':,.polize the sale and exportation of lumber? Explain your . . your answer. No, be,cause in monopolies and combinations in re' straint of trade, it is necessary that the offender &@ . -combine with any other person or persons to monoDo&e , ' a particular merchandise or object of commerce, !y&& n presupposq that there Should. b_e an acre.,.-"-.' .i, two or m r e aersons to accomalish $he uuraogO. The . .Re' 'vised Penal Code-e& or CoDlbdWn. But in this case, since the proposal of A was rejected by the lumber concessioners, there was no meeting of the mind between him and the lumber concessioners and, there^'fore; there is not even a conspiracy. '

"

'

Illustrate monopoly by spreading false rumors or making use of any other artifice. .. Spreading false rumors or making use of any other artifice to restrain free competition in the m a r h t is illusted in the case of U.S. vs. Fulgueras. i n that case, .'accused went about distributing papers and prochmas to .the people of a certain town, spreadink suhvewive . .

*

.

430

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

and fanatical ideas that unless they lower the prices' of needful commodities they would be viziited by flood and other calamities. As a result, the people lowered the prices of their commodities and used inrjtruments of measure larger than the regular size.

1080, When is the pussession, preparation, administration or otherwise using any prohibited drug punishable? When the possession, preparation, administration or the use of any prohibited drug is n e i s u l l y authorized. ,. , . : 1081. What requisites must he present in order that a persohi. may be convicted of illegal possession of opium? They are: tl?_eoccupancy or taking and:&&tent to possess the substance shown to be opiLm.

..

Note: The second reqiiisite is lacking .in. the case of . a wife who was told by her husband to got from beneath.-a pillow B can which contained opium and, after having tnken it-therefrom, attempted to throw it away when the policeman was searching for opium in their house. She was caught by.tha policeman wliilc in the act of throwing it away. I t was held that she had no intent to possess opium.

1082. A policeman found in the possesion of the accused a bottle containing opium in very slight quantity. The ,accused: claimed that he purchased them 6 months' prior ,:tb h is arrest,' because the state lof ..his health. necessitated his frequent use of the same. Is the accused criminally liable? The law penalizes the mere possession of opium by unauthorized person without regard to the quantity. If the state of his health really required the pills there must be a prescription of a physician therefor. Note: P-=ion of Datent medicine q w , the possessor k m that it contains wium, i s also punished by -cause the term "oDium" includes vrenarntians, b-&isb opium or morDhine e m ag an inzredieat.

1083. Two ,policemen, armed with a search warrant t o 'search for opium in the house of X, found under his bed a can

451

,/"

CRIMINAL L.4.W REYIEWER, .:,

:,. . I I

".,, which,.wa.s, empty;: but. there, .were ,traces . g f , . . ~ i j s ~ j ~an ~ing i opium .container. Can, X be .held-liable,for illeg&posses:

1087: The policemen also charge those found smoking opium h~'. that place with the crime of knowingly visiting an opium. dive. Do the policemen properly charge them? No. Only those "g&being included in the provisions of the next preceding article," which p& possessing

i

,; 'i. , , sion ,sf ,opium?:. Why?,. 1 b ? s l s e the law r d a e s n o t . ~ ~ ' p ' a ~ ~ ~ i i ~ s s s e s s i o n , 1 but present nasi%&' (U.S. vs. Tang Seng Ki). '

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER.

~

a

prohibited d n g , can be chmred with'knnwingly visiting an opium dive o r resort (Art. 191, par. 2, R.P.C.). 1:';

or -u

l.1

1

088. A w& in the house of B while the latter was smoking opium. A and B were then in the same room. Is A Liable criminally? Explain.

....,

.

liable..for illegal possession of-opium?

, ,

No, because it does-not aunear that the house o f B , w E a n opinm dive-rt. To be li&l,e for visitina a house where r-a is smolcinir opium, the & e must be shown to be an opium dive or re@.

. '

/ -

:

sion. , . . A is the owner o f a- 'house 'where Chinese sinoke opium, and f u r smoking opium in that house each Chinese would pay 1'12.00 t o A fhroq$i B' who is in charge of the place. B ilways'remains a e,door. That huuse"is well known a e s t s were' ma8e before in the .F' ' '.'to the & x m e n , place of 9ersons for smoking opium.. , are A and,:B crim, ., . , , .. . iually liable? . , m f an onium dive. B is a m ,...

,.

i

-

'

per bf o m - r c c ,m , r t : (Arts. 190, 7 , R.P.C.)., , .. , , , \ ' ..~

"i

e found'-in that house by.'tlie 'policemen 'the place: X, Y and 2 are'. just sitting er 'Chinese' are smolcing opium. They fail ~

regencf there.

'

What ~. crime .is committed

are !gdlty of the erirne of. knowinglp. ' v i m -'(Art. 191, par. 2, R.P.C.). . -

432

1089; A, who 'was a member o€ the crew o€ a foreign steamer which arrived in Manila from Kongkong, bfought with ,, /' him several cans of opium. The opium was never landed from t h e vessel. He was arrested. R e confessed that the opium belonged to him but would nut state his purpose in having in his possession the opium. There was nu evidence to show that his intention was t u import illexally the opium into the Philippines. For what crime may A be prosecuted and ,punislied? If the steamer hadManila a-ort of d estination, - t i s illegal imQortation of opium. The terms "import" and "bring" are synonymous. Importation -d 're - e the goods at the customhouse, b m e l y hr&$C~ t&m inta wort. K t would be absurd to think that A was merely carrying opium back and forth and a foreign country. No better exthe logical deduction is that A be brought into t h e Philippines. There illegal importation. But if the steamer was not makinx Manila a$ its n a t of destination, then there i s m r i m e Mere possession ' of opium in such case is He, because it does

T

J

433

: ,,

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINAI, LAW REVIEWER .,

which it is found is a foreign vessel.

Note: In fact, if he was actually smoking opium, it would be tho a w r i m e for which he can be prosecuted. The possession .of the pipe would n n t he a s m t L c r i m e . Even if together with t h e opium paraphernalia a quantity of opium was found in the same place at the same time and by the same detective or policeman, there should be w s i m c only.

ful or that the list is in no way connected with %e ., . jueteng game. u t if the ~uetenglist bears a date or is otherwise / shown " . to have been used a t a time different from that / / when the game of jzieteny was played, tberemustbe evidence of its connection with the game of jueteng that has taken place or is about to take place. 1095. A group of persons were surprised by several policemen

playing monte. Cards for playing monte, tallx-sl1eets and lead pencils were found on the table, but no money W a s used as bet in the game. Are those 'person3 criminally liabletifor gambling.? . ,

. ,:e

When may a physician or denList be held criniinalb liable for preseribing opium for his patient? When the physical condition of the uatient dls.ot require the use of opium (Art. 194, R.P.C.).

-

What -si It is a 01' scheme the result of which wholly o r a l y upon chance .or. hazard.

-

(US.vs. Rafael): .

. . I ,

*.

deDends 1096.

Are spectators liable for gambling?

Why? No, becjuse a speetator does not take Dart directzw o r .%!&#*J:. . ' indzctly i n . gambling. T h e w punishes "any person y: .."'.tvho, in any rnawr, s h a dIY or i n d i r e take uart .' y~ ,,. . . i w a m b l i n g game. L . . i " . ~

1

4. .Must the Drosecution wove that the iuetenz list is conjueteng wW&has taken place or ectea wi& a game &ut Ito :take, place?

ai

434

.

I.,,...

Art.. 193, par. 2, provides that "the illegal possession of an opium pipe or other paraphernalia for using arty athei prohibited drug shall be prima facie evidence that its possessor has used said drug." Does this provision authorize the prosecution of a person for smoking opium, if he is found in pos+ession of opium paraphernalia, even if no opium 'was found in his possession? No. That provision merely a presumption that the sor other psraphernalia found in the nuia?&m of the accused are for the use of, or have b e a o -,r any prohibited d r u q

-

%

No. I n the nature of things, B jxeiew list 'nat..rag& pertains to a game of iueteng and that the actus,.' shift2 to the accused to show that his possession.is law-

pot involve a breach of Dublic order and the steamer o n

<

I

I I

,

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CKIXINAL LAW REVIEWEll

1097. What are the provisions of the Revised Penal Code pun:' nishing the crimes pertaining to lottery? Art. 185, par. (a) punishinc lottgy as a gasle9f I .; chance. ~. . ' , €'amgraph (c) of Art. 196 punishps D ~ S S ~'011 S Sbf-lnir ~ a t w 'w Q O . J is in any , m a n n x u u the game of iueteng. Art. 196 importation, selling or distribution, k 9 . Q n*ce with the i m r , of lottery tick&; mere possession w m of lottery tickets; and selling or distributing the same without connivance with the importer.

-

.,

.+

1098. May a person be held liable for betting in games the result of which does not depend wholly or chiefly upon chance or hazard? Yes. In betting in sports conkiib. &uy person Who shall bet -money or any objest el-o o m e g2Qn t . u l t of boxing & other sport contest i&&$& fpr betting in mort contest.

L

.1

1099. A policeman saw a man and a woman 27 below the wall facing the sea at t h e Luneta. below the wall is not visible to the publie. was pcrforniing acts of lasciviousness on the . the woman, with her consent. Are they liable

I

'

'

&Qmkll? a s , because the act, a highly scandalous conduct w a h w d d o&d ag2inst decency or good customs (Art. 200, R.P.C.),was committed in a public dace. It is not re&d that the act be committed also within the knowle&e - IC o blic, m as circumstances are

stated by the Supreme Court in the alternative, being senarated .bv_ the word "or". :',..,. .. N o t e : The.i,mportant n l e m et~ of the offense of @ve scandaD is, that the i c t & complained of be committed in a W place or mithz the SiGnicso). ;

1101. In a gathering where there were many people, A advocat-. ed the practice of birth control. Did A commit any crime punishable by the Revised Pena.1 Code? If so, what crime? Yes. A committed the crime -of ut.&e L t h d G h re, L as indi't, i m arimpure; OJ whether it is naturally r&ul&d k e x w' ' e imqllr.ns-

/

,/

yea+s old The place The man person of for WIXS

1100. Suppose that the woman w a s m e a s old and the man was her teacher, what would be the crime? Why? The man would be liable f o r m € l a s c l v ~ o u s n e ~ ~ the consent of the offended party, grave scandal, when the high& ' cause the latter crime is committed scandalous conduct is &expressly falling Within any other articl? of the Revised Penal Code. -----------

err

-

'

. / .

1

N o t e : As regards immnral acts or shows exhibited in theaters by d a n c e t s - t h a t is the lustful .rei& d l h L U l %e.

p h 3 . Is lack of visible means of s u u p s t an indispensable. element in vagrancy? No. Only in two cases is lack of visible means of sui5fGrt an indispensable element of vagrancy. ! 1. First caseL (a) The person has the physical ability t o o r k ; ( b ) He neglects t m himself to some lawful CalliB;

I

(c) He b 2.

i

.

S

~

C

m aDarent meanSof subsistence.

case: O ~

(a) The person is found about public or semi-public buildings or places or tramping or wandering about the country or the ,street& ., (b) Without visible means o f support. 437

I

I I

,i

CRUIINAL IAIV REVIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

1104, Suppose that B who has a pension or income from rents . .

'

'

\ .:

.

of his property and has nothing to do, finds pleasure and spends his time in the house of 'prostitution, is he a vagrant? Yes, because any idle or dissolutn nerson who lodxes in houses of ill-fame is also a vagrant. This 'is true, e m if he has a visible means of support.

-

loitering in the yard of the house of B, at late hour of the night. He could not explain his presence there. A is a man of moderate means with a good job. What crime, if any, did A commit? V m '. A person is also a vagrant if he be.fyyd oitering -i inhabited or u n i n h a h i t d & X 2 belonping a n o t l r w or iustifiab!c purpose. He is liable, e d f he has a good iab.

are the crimes classified. .under office? 5

The crimes which are classified under malfeasanc.nce,m office are: 1. Direct bribery, and /'2.

I .I

,,,WlO.

'I .~

in having sexual intercourse wit11 a woman in consideration of t500 given by A. That was the first time ,she had sexual intercourse. Is she a prostitute? Explain your answer. No;because a rostitute is n $0;. mnnev .or profit, & $ j e s C l intercourse.

' 1. !

Note:are thQse ''women who, for money or grofit, /kabituallu i n d u l E in sexual intercourse iascivious condue:" (Art. 202, 1LP.C.).

What are the crimes classified under G i s f e a s a n t in office? The crimes which are classified undcr misfeasance in office are: 1. Know&& rendering uniust iudemeqt. 2. Rendering judgment t l w h negligence. 3. Rendering utm-m it interlociitorv order. 4. Malicious delay in the-da ' e. +'

438

Jndjreci

hr-.

A justice of the peace, a lawyer for many years, hap-,.' pened to try his political enemy on a charge of less& serious physical injuries which under the Revised Penal Code is puriishable by arrest0 mayor. A s a revenge, t h e , justice of the peace convicted, and imposed two years hprkonment on, the accused. What crime was committe$.,. , ' . i . by the justice of the peace? nowingly rendering unjust j u d a The judgment is ntjust and he knows or he ought to know that his judgment is unjust. There is malicg 9' ill~will~JI this ease, t&eAustice of the peace having acted in the spirit. &. -e (Art. 204, R.P.C.). Note: An unjust jud-ent is one which i i i d supported bv the eYiddnce. , , ' - An unjust judgment m a y be iUe because of bribery.

a,

a woman who is physically a virgin be a proktitute? B Y if-she, for money or orofit, !&utiavl indulges i n i o u s conduct only, w 2sexual i n t e m u me. -

Y

i

Suppose, the justice of the *peace tries a man, malice or ill-will, for the same crime and upon eo imposed the same penalty, is' he criminally liable? Yes, f o K i - ' e gence' oi. ianorancg (Art. 205, R.P.C.).

I-

1112. The justice of the peace, knowing after examining the witnesses, that there was no groun? t o issue the& w ,.' ofst, nevertheless, issued it an'&by reason thereof A was arrested by the policeman who executed it. Is the justice of the peace criminally liable? Yes, because he rendered an G l s t interlocutory o r d e 3 1113. When is the detay in the adininistratim of justice punishable? 439

I

/” ;m

CRlMlFAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIlIlINAL LAW REYIEWER

e n the delay in the hearing and disposition of the is criminally liable and such (Art. 207, R.P.C.).

o

~

f

f

e es. u .

a

c.

Y

of committing dereliction of duty in the prosecution of offenses? The two ways of committing dereliction of duty in the prosecution of of€enses are: BY ina~icious~y refraining from instituting prosecuin the e By maliciously tder&-g

A-rds the fri&-, B, the policeman, committdd dereliction of dut@ & maliciously tolerating / . commissio-f the crime, k m g that a crima was abaut to be .-e He was a&o guilty of &ect b r i b e r 3 esbhe accepted a promise of .s?ift. and a n e e d to aer. . ’ in connection with the form an act performance of his official duties. Relative to the se_ond question, s w chanped his the crime of robbbbury, it is siibm a a n d did &commit niitted t h a a , the policeman, c e t be held liable for dereliction of duty, because in dereliction of duty, in the prosecution of offenses, it is necessary to prove t k m m mission of the crime which was taler&d (U.S. VS. Menu the policeman ;loza).egaIly possible t li$e €or frustr&ted dereliction o f t y in the prosecution of offenses, k w e such crime_ i s e n t i a l l y by omissjpn & t in felonis by omission t h d s S p 3 5 ) and it attemuted or frustrated stage of execution. B S having agreed to accept the $rift of Plod from A and havinr: agreed to tolwate the commission of the crime, w m anaeteonstituhga-m ’ ’m e, t h e m ?i m t y ofGreet b r i h e r a

~

that A committed by arrest0 menor notwithstanding the complaint made to him by the offended ‘party, took no action against X and even gave him money so that he could go to’ a far place outside of that municipality. What is,the eriniinal liability of the chief of Wlice? He is&oL s-aiclesnyy, because X committed only irrht W w g $ , a n accessorv i s x t liable for light felony; for @ e r e l i c t i o n m i u e prosecution of offense:, hy nP niaim refrafrom institprosecution against a violator of the law.

.,

L__

-

of a town that he would The treasurer kept the matter to the opposite his office. treasurer liable criminal-

,

ly? /Why? . To be l i a b & ~ d e r e l i c t i o i lof duty in the prosecut i f m i e s xthe public officer m m e “in dereliction ‘f the duties ”.ecoIt is-n& the duty of the kunieipal treasuEr to cause the prosecution of offenses I against person or public order s ; t o s t o p the commission 1 07 such crime which is about to be committed.

t

d‘”

i

1

I

440

&8.

A tax collector told a taxpayer that the latter need not, pay his tax, but that he had to give him some chickens.:, .,

i

441

CKIXiNAL LAW KEVIEWER

CRI>IINAL LAW REVIEWER

,'>



1147. The municipal council uppropriated P10,OOO for the purchase of a garbage truck. Before the municipality could purchase m e , the Lions Club donated a garbage truck t o the municipality. The lreasnrer, knowing that there was no need to reserve the amount tor the puwose of a garbage trrrelc, spent the money for the repair of the municipal building without any authority from the municipal council. Considering that there was no damage caused, do you believe that the treasurer is criminally liable f,or@Iqal use of the public rnm@ Why? because the crime is Committed even “if no dam= a or_embarrassment to the public service has resuked.“ The penalty is a fine from 5 to 50 per cent of the sum misapplied. T e S e must be an ordinance appropriating that amount, for the renair of the m>ieipal building before the treasurer could law&lIy u s the money therefor.

a

-

a public use had not bee3 N d e : When the amount UppJied to ;i appvipviated by @ or mdinan e, the public officer applying that amount is i s liable m e f o r be u n d e r Art. Art, 217, b u propriating puubbTl-8s.

1148. The contractor who constructed a building for the munieipal police presented his claim, with all the n e e w a r y

,papers duly approved by the proper officials, to the treasurer for pzynient. The fund f o r the purpose was in the custody of the treasurer, but he delayed the pay. ment in the hope that the contractor would come across with a cut from the amount payable to him. Because for ~ W Q months the treasurer did not make the payment, the contractor filed a complaint with the provincial fiscal.

456

I

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

..

CRIAIINAL LAW REVIEWER

Is the municipal treasurer liable for any felony? If so, what felony? Explain your answer. Yes, he is liable for failure to make navmentfrom Gzvernment funds in his nosse.sian as a public officer under obligation to make such payment.> failure to .. make payment must bunahmus. In this case, the d& in the paym$nt w&e to his malicious intentiw to cause the contractor ta come across with a cut from the amount due the contractor (Art. 221, par. 1, R.P.C.).

I

1149. A court stenographer, having a grudge against the ac-

cused who appealed from the decision of the court convicting him, kept the slenograpldc notes and their transcript in his house and when ordered by the judge ti, produce them the stenographer claimed that the stenographk notes and their transcript were lost, which was not true. For what crime may he be prosecuted and punishecl? Explain your answer. It is submitted that the stenographer is liable for & cious failure to make delivery of Dublic Drone& & . . I & custody. It is committed by a w c officer who refuses to make delivery of any property in his custody or under his administration, a t : the ordel; to do 80 by competent authority. The refusal of the stenographer to make delivery of the stenographic notes was malicious (Art. 221, par. 2, R.P.C.).

--

-

.’

1150. A municipal policeman, having under his care and guard ..

a prisoner who was serving sentence in the municipal jail, permitted said prisoner to go and buy something in the store near the jail. The prisoner, taking advantage of the confusion in the crowd, fled and never returned to the jail. These facts are alleged in the information filed by the provincial fiscal against the accused jailer. If these facts are established by sufficient evidence, what crime was committed by the jailer? Explain your answer. ’.:’ The question involved was not squarely decided by the k?Suprerne Court in the case of U S . vs. Eandino. In that i ,.

case, the in€ormation filed by the Provincial Fiscal was dismissed by the trial court on motion of the defense and on appeal by the provincial fiscal the Supreme Court remanded the case for further proceedings. Some Justices were of the opinion that while it may be true that the acccsed had no knowledge that the prisoner would escape and that he did not permit him to do so, it was unquestionable that he did permit him to go out of the municipal jail, thus affording him an opportunity to get away with ease, and that the prisoner’s escape was effected through the tolerance of his custodian and was deemed also to have been by connivance with the latter. In the case of People vs. Bandino, the Supreme Court cited Escriche’s dictionary “Legislacion y Jurisprudencia” which defines the word “connivance” t o be “dissimulation or tolerance.“ 011 the other hand, some Justices believed that proof of the facts contained in the information will sustain merely %I coiivictioc of@3elitv in the c u & r J J r i m ners through‘ Eegligenca But in the same case. it is stated that “if there was .~. connivance or conseat on the part cif the policeman in the prisoner’s leaving the jail, it is unquestionable that he is responsible fnr the crime with which h e is charged on accouiit of the escape effected by the said prisoner who took advantage of the leave allowed by his custodian.” The felony of conniving:.with or consenting to evasion is committed by any public officer who shall c o n s e n t 2 the escape of a prisoner in his custody or charge. It is submitted ?hat the guard is liable, a t least, for infidelity in the custody of prisoner through negligence. ~~

~~~

~

~

1151. What crime, if any, was committed by the municipal mayor who permitted a prisoner detained in the municipal jail to eat in the market near the municipal building three times a day, but always under guard? The niayor did not commit any crime. Leniency or laxity on the part of the mayor i s t infidelity. It was held that leniency or laxity in the per-

__-

457

I

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

formame of duty of the municipal president as regards the custody of prisoner is not in excess of his duties. Note that the municipal president was the person who was aceusied of infidelity in the custody of prisoners. The reason for this is that the l i i ~ n i e i p ~president, l now the municipal mqror, j, the head of the municipal jail. The m ~ is rguilty of infidelity in the custody of urisoner, i4 he utilized the prisoner’? s a f o r domestic chores i n & house (People YS. Evangelista, C.A. 38 O.G. 1 5 0 .

--

1152. Is the chief of police liable for infidelity in the custody of prisoner if he permitted the prisoner to sleep in the latter’s house at night and the prisoner a1wy-s returned to jail early in the morning? Relaxation of the imprisonment of the prisoner is considered infidelity. Thus, it was opined t h r t there is a real and actual evasion of service of senlence when the custodian permits the prisoney to obtain b relaxation of his imprisonment and to escape the punishment of being deprived of his liberty, thus making the penrlty ineffectual, although the convict may not have fled. Under this rule, a prisoner who is permitted to sleep in 11;s house every night and would go back t o jail during the daytime obtains relaxation of his imprisonment, and thereby makes the custodian liable for infidelity in the custody of prisoner. Where the guard allowed the prisoner serving a 6-day sentence in the municipal jail to sleep in his house and eat there, he is gnilty of infidelity in the custody of prisoner committed with malice (People lis. Revilla, C.A., 37 O.G. 1896).

1153. What kind of negligenee is contemplated in infidelity in the custody of prisoner through negligenee? The public officer who is charged with the conveyance or custody of a prisoner is said to be negligent when his laxity in the cnstody of prisoner shows positive carelessness short of deliberate non-performance of his duties as guard. As was held by the Court of Appeals in the case of People vs. Nava, C.A., not every little mistake or dis458

P

traction of a guard leading to a prisoner’s taking advan-- L hge a€ the situation is negligence. Such mistake or dis-7;; traction of the guard may be dealt with administrative1y;j only. The negligence of the guard which shows positive care’: lessness short of deliberate non-performance of duty is il- ‘( Iustrated in the case of a guard who fell asleep while.,: guarding the prisoner with the result that the prisoner escaped. 1154. l\‘ould the gunrd of the jnil be hcid linble Cor infidelity in the custody of yrisnnw if (he priwaaf rvho e * c W d is not pct rnukted 11.v fiwL JiidRnwnt? Yes, hccause the lam in dcfininp the crime of infidelity in the custody of p-isoiier provides t w o & D enalties to be imposed on the public officer guilty of the crime. The penalty of prision correccjonal in. .its medium and maximum periods is m i posed& , -’ heen sentenced by final i u d m e n t ; and the penalty of pr&ion COTreccional in its minimum p e r i o d , p s e the fupitive 2 only held as a detention p a y f o r any crime otion of law or municipal ordinance.

-

1155. Map a @&e individual be held liable for infidelity in the custody of prisoner? Yes, because the Revised Penal Code p w s vate person to whom the conveyance or custody of a pris. oner or person under arrest shall have been confided, w h shall commit any offenses of infidelity in the custody 0: prisoner. Hence. as long as the private ni-1 & c k m t i i e conveyance 0 - i of a orison% gpjzg sonunder arrest, if the escape o f the prisoner -2 under arrest is due to his connivance witl.lthepu’snne r g ] p-er ari’est or to his n-ace, sxih arivate in. diE&ual is criminally iiable (Art. 225, R.P.C.).

e

--

Y

1156. Tlie nt.cnogrwher In Ibe Plnciil’iu olllcu

romoved tho wrlf

ten confession of the accused from the record of

459

~

I

I t

L CRINIINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIilfINAL LAW REVIEWER "'

'

criminal case kept by the fiscal but which came into his possession when he was typing the information. Then, he gave i t to the accused who in turn gave him F'lOU. What crime was committed by the stenographer? Does the givin:: of the confession to the accused and receiving BlOO from him constitute a separate offense? Explain your answer. The stenographer is guilty of (infidelity in the e x $ of document3be~usehe_was a uublic officer; the wnconfession of the-accused, w h u a d m u m enl, w m f&ed o r a k u s i e d tQhim by r e m m of his of%c ' e: that h j remoyed stlchdorumeat -of e; and that t u s of the said docnment from the r w r d O f t h e c a s e w u u r a l l y result in the damage o r prejudice to& public i n m t . The m laof document i s n s t a c r i m e , u u k s i s f o r an illicit uuruose, an-at to urofit by it is an illicit puI'uose. It would seem then that the receiving. of PI100 by the stenographer is Et a n in&pg&ent and s z a rate crime of direct bribery, but as theconstitutive element of illicit purpose.

<

.

of infidelity in the custody of documents? Explain Y Q ~ ? answer. No, because the transfer cerrificate of titie &s@ yet-hned by -and, therefore, it- did not e w e & d m e n t within the meaning of' the 1a.w. In infidelity in the custody of document, the decYmept must Ke com& P th&s, it must be c a e of establishing a t or extinguishing an obligation. In this. case, before the t-raiisfer certificate of title is signed by the register of deeds, it cannot establish any right nor extinguish an obligation. wflJfl WnsL '

-

9 clLdd/;

.

'

..

6158. Is the destrnction, concealment or removal for an illicit purpose of peri.gdieals, pamphlets or magazines by the postnmster who has the custody of the same by reason of his office constitute infidelity in the custody of document? Explain yonr answer. / No, because books, p e r i o s s , p a m m t s and m s a zincs are ~ ~ documents, o t for they cannot establish a right 02extinguish an obligation.

1159. When is the taking of money hills used as evidence in the trial of a case by the clerlc of court infidelity in the

I

' ,

.,

not bo f o r a good or-lawful ourpose. Hence, if the stenographer of the fiscal was given PlOD e& the \n4ttoii confession of the accused, would also he e o n u n i t t d

I

1157. The Register of Deeds of a province told his clerk to

transfer certificate of title based on a deed The clerk prepared the transfer eertificate of title and presented the same to the Register of Deeds for his signatnre. When the Register of Deeds read the transfer certificate of title he foonil many erasures, insertion and intercalations which. made it appear very dirty. In the heat of anger, the .Register of Deeds tore to pieces the transfer certifieate of title. Did the Register of Deeds commit the crime prepare

z

. "

!,.

.-

B

case are

of sale submitted by the parties.

'

:'

.*~. !..

'~

custody of documerlt, and when is it malversation? When the money b i p are attached to the records as exhibits and removed therefrom by the clerk of court and misapFpriated by him, the crime committed i s m ;--2 documents2 b z c s those money bills.

I

trial of the case has terminated and the money b i i l s s e 1 3 t for the nuruose of returning the same to the owngr and the clerk of court misappropriated them, the crime committed is w o nYfLpsbecause these inonev bilk are trust funds ofhe government anrlthe clerk of court is accomtable therefor.

462

460

i

:

1 1

. .

.. CKIhIINAL LAW IU3Il:WER

/.’

116

,

--

. m a t c r h e is committed by tie pustw,a&e

The law (Art. 277) pu&&es any public afficer ch& custodv @ € m sor property sealed by mrmz a=, who shall b r u h e - s or permit them to & .*b

who w.d a letter addressed by one person to another and after opening the letter and finding a 50.peso bill inside the letter he renioved the money and spent it for himself: Explain your answer.

&,the

/

(

In several cases decided by the Supreme Court, the crime was held to bcfaithlessness in the custody of 6 c u mentor p a s The word “pauers” inrludes pBWX?lQUyp d n a - = m m r h .

1161. The stenographer of the court, for the purposc of helping a person accused of a crime, put the record of the ease among the records of decided cases, so that the CN of court might not set the case for hearing. As a lesult, i the case was not tried for more than one year until the. clerk of eourt, upon complaint of the offended partp, lceked for the record and found it. Is the stenographerof the court liable for infidelity in the custody of document? for infidelity The stenographer of the court is-liable in the custody of documcut, becalm he did LuLhave t h e custody of the record of the criminal case by reason o f his office. ‘fhe stenographer is not the custodian of the record. Note: If the clerk of court was the one who did it, he would

i

have been liable for infidelity in the custody of document by concealing the same, being a public officer who had the record by reason of his office. important element of the crime of infidelity in the cusof document is that the offender is a public officer .. whohas the custodv of t h e a n -t by P ce.

7

1162. A pub ic officer was charged With the custody of a sealed. docunrent. He permitted a private person to open it,. I causiig the breaking of the seal. What is the liability~ of the private individual, if any? The Revised Penal Code d m d h the a-& &k who8 theseal, & u there is conspiracy betX6een him and the public officer.

/

462

1163. When may a public officer be held. criminally liable €or opening closed papers, documents, (181‘ objects? When the public officer is &&ed with the custody of (not merely entrusted with) closed panem, dfmme&. os objects. Thus, the treasurer of a municipality who received from the PC corporal ciosed envelops containing election returns and addressed to the provincial treasurer, f o r the purpose of putting thereon sealing wax, and who opened them and read the contents thereof, was not held criminally liable f o r opening such closed documents, because he was not the custodian thereof [People vs. Lineses, C.A.). 1164. The Military Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines had a secret plan t o capture certain dissidents. An agent of the Military Int,elligence Service, who was one OF those who planned the raid l o be made, mentioned it to a friend who happened to be a relative of one of the dissidents. As a consequence, the dissidents were able to elude the soldiers who were seut to capture them, Is that agent criminally liable? Why? Yes, because having known a secret involving the general interest of public order by reason of his official capacity, he revealed it. The crime is called fivelation ot secret3 i 6 y an o f f i c e 9 A r t . 229, R.P.C.).

I

I

-

i

f

I

I

’

,?'because having known a secret affecting the administration of justice which should not be u u b l i & d h @ the promulgation of the W o n , he .t1 Note: This is also the crime committed by an inferior officer who made a report to his superior, h u t o r e the latter could approv m e t w r t , the inferjor officer mhlished

/

$

, The felony of revelation of secrets by an officer is also 'committed by a puhlic officer who shall wrongfully aelive? to another person papers or copies of papers of which he may have charge and which should not be published (Art. 229, R.P.C.).

1169. May the felony of open di member of the lawmaking body? KO,0 9 exand t h w . 1170. The city engineer ordered his assistant to cause demolition of the houses built on a public street by syuakters. The assistant of the city engineer did execuse the order, giving his reasons for suspending execution of the order. The city engineer became. furio and insisted that the order he carried out. gineer gave the assistant 24 hours during which the order. But the assistant still continued to execute the order of the criminal liability of the assistant? Why? The assistant city engineer is liable for disobedience to the order of -superior officer, after the latter has disapproved the suspension of his order (Art. 232, R.P.C.).

-

thmyzh somebody else the publie o f f h r

Art. 230 of the Revised Penal Code. slander or libel, as the case may he.

l167., Is damage to the offended party a necessary element of t h G i m e of revealing secrets of private indiddual? Why?

to reinstate a policet?ian liabio fur the

No. This felony is committet by any judicial o r a ecutive officer who s N openly r e f u s to me@e Ah2

464

-

Note: The e ~ n m g i e s of open disobmzdience are: 1. S h & f who r e f u s d t o execute t m ori!i&ment . . of the court. ,. 2 . Mayor who refused to execute the order of the Governor.

Nota: The secret of the private individual muat he known by reason o d o f f i e e of the public officer, % i f m e

--

judgment, decision or order of-anj s u u a i n r yde.'.y scow of the jurisdiction of the latter an&kmed . , with all th&gaLfmn&u . ' s (Art. 231, R.P.C.). .. It would seem that the o f f e - n b nkcommitted if there , '. js &y a refusal to obey the .iudgm&., decision or order of a superior a u m t y , which involves or a f f e c t s A e offices. I

66., To hold a public officer liable for revealing the sew& of private individuals which he came to know by reason of his office, what secrets of the private individuals must he' reveal? The secrets contemplated are those that may&@ !a the good n a m o r fortune of the private individual. If the secrets are contrary t o public interest or to the administration of justice, the same may be revealed by the public officer without incurring any criminal liability. to know of the

_ ; ..

k

1171. When is it not a crime to disobey the order of the superior? Disobeying the order of the order of the smer o f that order w g & b w I t Thus, if the cKief of police t o arrest X upon com 465

;

,

.

'

. %

,. .

.. .,., ,..

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER P

arrest X, because he knew that there was no legal {;he arrest, and the chief of police insisted but policeman is not the Revised Penal Code. I

' . ~

.

2. When the public officer shall maltreat

to extort a confessia_n.y to obtain some informa

..

.

hief of police of a. municipality received a letter m the provincial fiscal with a sibpoem to >e served X , to be present a t the preliminary investigation to condu&d by the fiscal. The chief of police forgot to $e the service,of the subpoena and because of his ure to do so .the fiscal was not able to continue with reliminary investigation. Is the chief of police crimliablc .. for refusal of assistance? Why? e chief of police is not criminally liable for the of refusal of assistance (Art. 233, R.P.C.). has been held that the failure t o lend cooperatioll the administration of justice o r other public service must be malicious. Since the chief of police only forgot t o serve the subpoena, he did not act with malice.

1115. May the mayor commit the crime of maltre

j+wner? The mayor i m l i a b l e for maltreatm'ent o€ p g if the latter i&tkcustodv of t h g d i c e . The, law, 235) contemplates actual charge of the prisoner, which is so merely by legal fiction. . . 1176. A constabulary soldier went inside the., provincl

/

1173., Why is the refusal of a person without legal motive to harge the duties of the office to crime under Art. 234 of the Re-

with the consent of the warden arid then and:thqe< constabulary soldier tried to obtain information %om prisoner. When the prisaner refused to give any formation, the soldier gave him fist blows and kicked him several limes, inflicting physical injuries. What was committed by the constabulary soldier. Explain answer. The constabulary soldier committed & He _c&n&-be held liable for mal -~ *?.~*a onel-, b s u s e the prisoner was not under his chdr&'.He., cannot be held liable for coercion eAher, b&..the,'pn&i$ ones was not beiw c o a e d by him @ @ s!bbng$ against his will at the time he subjected t m e e . " The physical injuries irere inflicted as an act of revenee : 1' ,., against the prisoner for not giving the desired information. -'!: r

.,(,A

d, the discharge of the duties O f a e . m&er of dutx of the person elected

1

,/

i

o a p b l i e office is l u L d m h a I I Y legal motive t - u or f the office to which he was appointed.

What are the ,two ways of committing the crime of maltreatment of prisoner? fficer shall

overdn. himself in the

-

/

.'.

from doing s.9, as he had no jurisdiction over the case. '. Nevertheless, the justice of the peace continued with the trial of the case. Is the justice of the peace liable .. .. ,for disobeying the request for disqualification? Why? . .. ' ' o n m b e i n s , No. bocause the .'.' c . e d b y m h Q l 3'ty. Besides, the one requiring him to refrain from continuing the proceeding i s . , not a superior authority, he being only a lawyer of the '.,:. accused. To constitute a violation by a pnblic officer of Art. ', ' ;42 of the Revised Penal Code, punishing the crime of disobeying request for disqualification, the folIo~ving ,, . :that t h d s a w o n rexwlng innst be present : .- , ',,.. ', ,. his jurisdiction w m n&t Q$ decided, M t h a t he has .~.~-~., .. %*, *;, been la_wfullv required b y m L & u t h o r i t v 11 -t .l.-..,-' .,.'. . frorb continuing the proceeding, and .@4 that k e continues :,,.sz@'z. the proceeding. .j,&&fieer f o m a n , o=y respect to which he is required to submit a report to, .. or consult w i t h a superior officer. It is also committed by a d n directly charged with the care and custody of woman nrisoner to whom he shall . .. , , ,,. ., , solicit or make immoral or indecent advances. It is also committed by a & who shall solicit or m e , , ~ ,: , i B a 1 o r indecent advances to the w t e r , s&r or . .., relative within the same dearee b-ity of the p m n $ ' thecustody of said warden. c There should not be s e m if the woman is under 18 years of age and a m , because i t .would _he t h e o w r being a p m m . . w . If the woman is under 12 wars of age, and thereis .. L ', tsexual intercourse, the crime isIf the woman is married, ..* ,.,. :. . i ' .. ', i t = s r m if thexad.cn or public officex lmQ%!Lher ~. . . to b a d d . The public officer should ~1 perform acts of lewdnegs On

In what cases is the perialtv for p g a i a e , . '

'

elusion perpetua to death, not t o he impoqed crime Committed is parricide? In the following cases : 1 . When there is a @$&&f in the tim (Art. R.P.C.). 2. When the s_se or d m , and living with her parents i circumstanc_es (Art. 247, R.P.C.). 3. When the offender m d any of his tioned in the definition of the crime of parriei nx&&eae w e -

1

'%

a,

~

~

-',

t if thewoman is a m i t u t e , the cdme i m o m m i t t e d ,

&

o @use agamst ehastita if t h 9 wnThe public officer shvaM i e Oeslt with d&ninm.-

p:

<

When i!l the killing of one's child not parricide? When a person kills his c&Ld who is h d l a d the crime is not parricide, hut infanticide. ,d..

.

.. . ,.:

.

,

,*. , ., ,

-

. I

,.

i he

I? ('

. When is the killing of one's grandchild or grandparent not parricide? Hence, the When the relationshipxis E& I-te. killing of an ille itiniete randson DI- an illegitimate grandfather is& or& as the ea%LZ?aL-he. er, adopted parent, or ister not parricide? Knd in the direct lice, tims in parricide.

conceived the idea of killing her hushand, a pistol furnished. of 4 . B shot the husband of A tb When C g a v e thhe pistol to B, the former knew that sister A had induced B to kill her hushand. What cri was committed hy B and C? 'Explain .your answer; B committed -because he k m the ds.e.as&$( of &e & promise of reward. =is am n the crime of murder, Et in the crime df *,d ~,';Lii$ w e . ;!#,

Note: When a person had the izl~e&LkdUL another and to accomplish his purpose, he used as means (1)inundation, (2)(3) p o k n , or (4) exp$o&n, tho cdme is murder

. .

w,

It is also murder when B person killed another b y means of (1) s h i m e k , (2) strivnding of a vessel, (3) derailment, or assault upon a streetcar or locomotive, o r (4) f&of an airship.

No, because killing a person on the occasion of any of the calamities mentioned in par. 4 of Art. 248 of the ,Code requires that the offender must take advantage of it /in comiqidng the crime.

A set the house of B on fire, resulting in the death of a child who was burned. What crime was committed b y A ? Explain your answer. A committed a c-rime nf a r m with hmu.ude ' (U.S. vs, Burns, 41 Phil. 418), or plain arson and the humicide absorbed in the crime of arson (People vs. Pa-, terno, et al., 47 O.G. 4600). It cannat 48 articular person by . means t l L t z . e J W ' ' nnv 7)

..

e. ..

,

,;,

. 1 :.,.a

,."

. , ir In the following cases: ,* 1. When t.he pe~sonkilled i s d i f f e s n t from the' ,in:.:. :, ::+ tended victim. . , ,. '

481

480 $E

i

',,

When is the k i l l e r n o t i a b l e for murder, even if he had premeditated hefore he coninlitted the crime?

1

. .

'!:

N o d Killing a person on the occasion of destructive cyclone, ,&&e and other public calamity is also murder.

i

ip

,'

CRIMZNAL LAW REVIEWER

. When ihhe js his-, a s d n i . or eendant; because the crime W i c i d e .

b-

'

'

.

When the v i e i s a child less than 8 A m L d d , . because the crime is infanticide.

/:; jl

~

4 . When evident uremcdi&%tionis d-n in the -information, but it is p-d-during the trial. : ;' , 6 ; When the killing of the victim is by means of B0;Son, S, .because evident aremeditation is absorbed. 1

lZl8;:Is the killing of a person with ignominy murder? Why'! * . . No, because w n y is && one of the aualifvina

'.

-

a g g r a v a t i n ~circumstances of murder. Note: But killinr

R

' s o n with-

i8-r.

i

its gaximum period to death. What is the .proper penalt y for A in case of conviction? Why? ~. .The .penalty that should be imposed on A in case, a€ conviction is reelusion perpetuu, the medium of the penalty. for murder, because only treachery qualifies the crime to. and abuse of superior strength, nighttime. purpose for, craft and fraud cannot lye eonsidered even w generic aggravating circumstances, because they a ~ so&&iLtwa *=Y-

.;

. .

1223.' A killed his y i f e with evident premeditation and with crueIty. What crime was committed by -A.? .Why? . .; / ~ a ~ ~ i ~ E v i d e n ~ r e m e d i t aand t i ocn m willbe ..;. c $ i H g e s aggravatim circumstances, w e , , 2 .< ,.? once the crime is aualified, as p a r ~ d e b, r the rplaibn- , . I ship between P a - d r t y , &e pyewnce of t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i a g _ e i r c u m s tsuch a n cas' e .treachery . an,cannot change the name and nature of the c r k a n d the qualifying circumstance shall bckea&$%z ': generic avrafor the deter; ~

--

>I

<

1&4. the crime.

' 1

/.

-

Is A liable for murder?

Why?

Are the members of that band liable for murder? Why? By a band is not sa&ficdy mentioned in Art. 248 as ' a qualifying circumstance in murder; but it may be considered either Was-We of suoerior streng-th, smed men-as r e g y d s the leader of $he : or @ as- a '. in which case, they are liable for murder. 21. A was killed by a band.

'

iahe.gropa pedy. . ,. i^hen two ou more qualifying circumstances are vresente

bow may they be considered in the qualification of the crime and in determining the proper penalt Only o&them will qualify the crime shall be considered as generic aggravating which shall have the a c t o f r a i s i n g the nenalty to the,

killed B with treachery, abuse af superior st3kugth. at .nighttime purposely sought for, and with craft and fraud. The penalty for murder is reclusion, temporal in

A

A83

~

,

CRIMIWAL LAW REVIEWEX

.,.'..

" ' - ~ ' p m t i Q i ion the part of the person performing or €ail-' ing to perform such act. Hence, intent to ~kiJl -oxanalice . cannot exist when the physical injuries are ni&&&&btugh re-Wdence. . .. The crime is - m e s s serio_u,T ph-iZi3gh Zeclrless i m u r u d w d e p e n d i n g . on the extent and/or effect of the injuries suffered 6y the .. ... offended party. '

/.

/

'~'.1 ,

~

I ,'

227. Without. any conspiracy or spontaneous agreement, A and B 'dealt X blows with clubs which hit the latter on the;J!ead. These blows, or at least one of them, which '' . ' on&ouId not be determined, caused the intracranial ... h e r n o r h g e and crushing of the cerebellum of X, which caused his death. Discuss the liability of A and B, explaining: your answer. ,It i!3 submitted that A and E are guilty of the crime o?(GmJ It is a welllsettled ruk ]%this jurisdiction that w J m a v-ied as a result of oneof the wounds r e h d from two uersons, a a n g independently of each other a,nd the wounds inflicted hy them could have caused the &:t.h, and It could not be shown yhich c a u d the ' . death of the victim, ressors are g m o f A e _c crime of homicide (People vs. Peregrino and Mangco, e C X 3 3 O.G. 4504). 1

,"*

~~

:

t u e a r a t h e r than the intention. Lack of intention to commit !so grave a wrong as that committed will only mitigate the liability of the offender.

:..

'$

1226. What is corpus delicti in crimes against persons where ~, the death of the victim consummates the crime? Covpus delicti, in modern sense of the term, means the actual c,Dmmission of the aime charEd. Hence, if the crime charged is homicide, murder, parricide, or infanticide, . , . . in which the' death of the victim is an element of the of. . .. . ' fense, there must be satisfactorv e.vid.mce o f A h e j & b f &&-of the victim and of his identity. Note: When the death pf the victim results from the usa Of violence by the offender the intent to kill is conclusidy p m surned, because in czimes against ~ e r s m athe. law considers

.g ~25;

was only slight, which could not have caused the death of tkk decensed. If there is no evidence which wound was inflicted.: by oiie or the other of the two defendants, it is not easg,to .' determine their liability. In the case of US. v8. Ahiog, et a l 1 ,.: . 27 Phil. 140, the Supreme Court stated: "One line of AmerieG decisions wou:d here simplify our task, if we were t o follow-. them strictly, by acquitting both defendants. Some of these . .,.. exculpatory doctrines fol!ow: -'" 'If two o r mom are acting independently, and the actual perpetrator of the homicide canno1 be identified, all must-:%4 be acquitted, although i t is certain that one of them was'>@) *11.S& milty. , 'And where two persons strike another, there being nothing to indicate a conspiracy between them, and death resulta, if the jury have a reasonable doubt an to which struck:' the blow causing death, it should acquit- them both."' . ":::, , j .Ti Of eorure, when tlierp is conspiracy, both are liable for the :. death of the deceased. . ,,% ~*

lit,

, '

:':*:

Note: The difficult question t o salve is when one of the w&& found in the body of the deceased was mortal and the oUl&

? ;,

:.:*

I

1128.

X and Y were brothers-in-law and not altogether friendly,although they were in speaking and visiting terms. One day, Y visited the residcnee of X , was receked .in a friendly manner, but after a whse an altercation arose, as a result of which %shot Y in the abdomen, inflicting a wound that was necessarily mortal. Soon afterward: but within a few minutes, when no other person W:a+ present, Y procured a knife and cut his throat, inflict;. ing a ghastly wound, from the effect of which Y must necessarily have died in five minutes. 1s"X liable f o r the death of Y? Explain your answer. Yes. In determining the liability of the defendant in when the deukh a case like this, the && is: "&&e?-, 00, the wound inflicted bu the defendant, &Lm&tribute t o thm_cueat. If it did, although other independent causes also contributed, the casual relation between the unlawful acts of the defendant and the death has been made out. Here, when the throat was cut, Y was not m e r a y ' languishing from a mortal wound. He was actually dying -and alter the'throat was cut he continued to languish; from both wounds. Drop b y drop the life current went

:

485

,,.

:1

.&j:*,2 j ,

.

,

,

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWEH , -. .&$from both wounds, and at the very instant of d a t h _.. . ,. _. ..t)le gunshot wound was contributing to the event. . I f the .,.:.,..a.! '' . throat cntting had been by a third person, unconnected ! '. . *., _ .. . with the defendant, he might be guilty; for, although a .., mdn cannot be MZed tivice, two persons, uiting inde,, '. may contribute to his death and each be guiltY , . . . . mndentlv, is stiil in life, a n d a y of a hoinicide. a wound $v!ien by anhe killed. but if ~ . . " ', ,, . ' other both may properly be said t o have contributed t o his death." (Cited in U.S. vs. Abiog,~etal., spcpra).

% : +.

,

-

x_.____...,

1229. When the evidence is not clear as t o which bullet or b d lets fired by the two defendants killed two persons, how many crimes 'are committed by the two defendants? i evidence showing that the two vicIf there is n tims died with more than one and different bullets and it is wifbin the scope of possibility that the two versons were ki1.led by one only and the same missile, there is I - only one crime of double murder, a complex crime (People vs. Bersamin Mirong, et al., G. R. No. L-3098,March 5, ", .. 1951). Note: This ruling applies only whcn the positions of the %tims ~ ~ such r te h u a c0-t by o n e x s a m e dug.

_-

1230. In what crimes may the court impose wpon the person guilty of lheir f r 9 a t e d stage a penalty lower b x t w o degrees, instead of one degree, than that proyided by law for the consummated stage? In the crimes of parricide, murder or homicide.

r

Note: A s regards any of those crimes, the court may impose a penalty lower hy three degrees, instead of two degrees, upon the person guilty of an attempt to commit any of such crimes. It, is, however, discretionary t o the murt to lawer the penalty by siieh namber af degrees, as it has to take into consideration the :facts of the case.

6r

1231. X and nixteen other persons had a free-for-all fight in a market place, In the course of the tumultuous affray, a market vendor--an old woman-was killed. The ' .i

486

'

person who killed her was unknown.. Two pointed to X as the person who pushed' ihe' old during the affray, resulting in her failing It appears, however, that the cawe .of the stab wound on the side of her body:and the perso who inflicted it could not be identified. Is X criminal1 liable for the death of the old woman? Y 2 because h-t of the old woman ing a confusgl tumultuous a f f w , and ascertained who actually killed her, and the person or persons who h f m e d the-*es b m d . In such case, the Derson liahb -ei KhDcd v m u m n the victim.

".

'

,

., L 1232. Must the person killed in a tumultuous affray be one ':' of those engiged in the free-&aIl fight? Why? ~,?*$.> ..,, ,,,,,>: ,. cia% as the case m a y be. .~i.t$:,. Explain your answer. , . not robbery That. man committed the crime of with' v i o l e m uersons, b-se the mere sna&hi n g . . of personal property from the hand of the offended party ,:: -v on the nersQn ,U ' ' on the thing taken. It is a rule that to constitute robbery with violence against persons, the violence must be on3h.e , -on the thing tagen. PeLSxof

mw

Note: But if in snatching the handbag, the culprit dragged tlie hand of the victim, the crime istrohberv with violence against nerson.

::

is .the nature of the intimidation as a constitutive element of robbery? ;,' Inhnndatio@may take any form,a s Iong as the& of the offender incites fear in,-k-0 ' of, the offended mzty. Thus, a threat with a weapon or a , threat o f arrest and prosecution is sufficient intimidation. \. 0

N o t e : Threat made to the owner of the store that it would be ordered closed and that he would be fined for failing to make entries in thc sales book unless he would give money is sufficient intimidation; and when the offender succeeded in getting. B dozen eggs and the ~ u m of P5.00 because of that intimidation, ,'-' ., ' intimidation. . , a he was suilty of -r

F 'a

-

'4

I

I

i CRIMINAL LAW REVIENER

CRIMINAL L A W REVIEWER

>.

/

-

tive and threakenod the offended party wiih arrest, if the latter would not give money, is liable for & rt k i l i , he succeeded in geitinsc mnn ey.

1371. While A was looking for his lost pig, he happened to pass by the house of B and saw under the latter's house a pig. A. told B that that was his lost pig, but B said

.

.

a:.

that the pig belonged to him. A unsheathed his bolo and threatened B with bodily harm, unless the latter would give to him the pig. Afraid that he might be injured, B gave the pig to A. A was prosecuted for robbery with intimidation. During the trial it was established by the prosecution that the pig really belonged to 33 and that it was not the lost pig of A. If you were the judge, would yon convict or acquit A? In case you decide to convict him, of what crime will you find him guilty? believed in good f a i t k that the pig was his, Since even if his claim later on appeared to be untenable, being no intent t o gain on his mrt, he should be found guilty o f ( ~ W iOnei of the elements of robbery is that the offender took the personal property belonging to another with intent to gain.

137d Suppose that the policeman in the preceding question ar- ' rested X and took the tires and later sold them and spent the proceeds of the sale,. for what crime is the policeman liable? Why? Tbe policeman is liable fortmalversationl because hz&g lawfully seized t n in the performance of his dyty, he had an obligation t o a c c o u n t . & ? d h m tQthe Governn ~ n Although , the tires were private property, &e t h g were seized b L h b as an' agent of public antho&',,,,+;,, his misappropriatimof the same m&e-.bL . liahlefor: . i .,, , . . .,. malversation (Art. 2 2 2 ) . '. < In the case of US. vs. San Lim, the Supreme Court::! held that in such a case the crime would beA Justice dissenting stated that it would be either estafa os malversation.

a

/

ommitted by t use, of force upon The fact that the boy, who was only seven years exempt from criminal liability, does not alt that A, as principal&induction, is liable criminal1 the crime committed.

iE

,

/ //

1408. A, servant in the house of B, broke the wall a bedroom from the storeroom and through ing thus created he entered the storeroom and sonal property. What crime was committed? \Qualified,. t h G j The yall broken is :/. wall.." " ~ ~- .

'

09. A, for the purpose of entering B's house,

in lifting the sliding door from its g r ~ v pushed it inward, thereby opening it. On took personal property. Is A liable for robbery? No, because the door 'wasnot broken, that of the door remained intact. A is liable f

653

W

' .

CRIMINAL LAW REVIEWER

CRIMINdL -LAW -REVIEWER

. >,., .? .i, -1

constitute robbery by the use of force upon things, the

'

offender must enter the house or building by breaking y:any door, etc.

"

- , I

t

,,

. ,

.+.* ,. i ,

,

A, a friend of the servant in the house of B, had an agree-

ment with that servant that late in the evening when B and-his family would have retired and slept, the servant ,. '.:-would ,drop from the window a white envelope containhe key for the lock of the 'outside door of the n: The servant complied with the agreement and in€: found on the ground the white envelope with key, took the key therefrom and used i t in openthe door of the kitchen of the house of B. Once in, A succeeded in taking clothes and monef from the Be What crime was committed by A and the Explain your answer. .4 and the servant committed robbery by the use iipon things in an inhabited house, by using false The key that the servant dropped to the ground the window and w h i c h 4 used in opening the door itchen was a u e y , i t L & g a stolen key, '. ,>''' 'The opening 'of an outside dam witit, a false key: will to the crime of robbery by the. nse._of force '. u e g s . when p>rson?Lproperty is taken inside the house or building with intent I. to - g a b . The servant is liable for the same crime, because there was comkacy .' . .. between him and A. When there is conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. f i e p r e r e l a t i o n of the servant with the offended party is i=t?.ial, because . the 'crime committed is robbery. .

,

*'"'

I

1412. A knocked at the door of the house of U who O p and, being a hospitable person, B invited A to en

I

metal badge, and that he wanted t6 verify the information that th'ere was an escaped c there. B told A to sit down as her baby and went .into her bedroom... left him in the sa;,l B returned to the sda, A was not there anymore left with the radio of B. What ,crime was commi A? Explain your answer. It is submitted that

I

offender t mt admitted A into exercise 01 public Pretending the exercise of public authority or. using; any fictitious name must be the ihdwa!.u& t h m e ' . the .person in.-the house. to ~ e ~ tcLthe4ffende. ~ $ e

. .

-_~

*

~

lill. A entered, ' t h e house of B through the open door and , . once insidse opened a wardrobe with a piece of wire which

1413. A, armed with a dagger, entered the garage of B after

I

~

he inserte,d into the keyhole. Once the door of the ward,. . robe was opened, A took personal belongings therefrom and left i.he house with the personal belongings. , What 1' crime was1 committed by A? Why? .$.' ,

8

Note: It is

1415. A and B entered the storeroom of a public s c h d ; through its open door. Once inside, they found. a. box tied with a piece of wire. They untied it an :y .