ESTAFA (ART.

315) 2 Elements: Damage or prejudice to another which is capable of peculiarly value Damages was caused either through abuse of confidence/unfaithfulness or deceit or fraud (In essence, lahat ng panloloko) -Unfaithfulness (or) -Abuse of confidence Illegal Recruitment (example of estafa) At least 3 Large Scale Illegal Recruitment More than 3 Large Scale Esatafa Examples: 1. Enter into an agreement to deliver 100 sacks of Dinorado, delivered another class of rice. 2. A entered into agreement with B to sell his jewelry and the latter will give the proceeds to the former. The jewels were sold but the proceeds were not given to A. 3. A took a jeep. Sabi niya bababa siya UST pero sa Morayta siya bumaba. 4. PJxD 5. Si A nagpahula kay B, dahil maganda yung hula, nagbayad si A Pag in form of a donation, no estafa 6. A person who has no authority to recruit both Illegal recruitment and Estafa; there is no double jeopardy 7. Selling a carabao which is sick another form of deceit

B is NOT GUILTY UNDER B.P. 22 (because he was not the drawer of the said check) NOR IS HE GUILTY UNDER ESTAFA (because it was a payment of an obligation) C is GUILTY OF ESTAFA(not a payment of an obligation) but NOT GUILTY UNDER B.P. 22 (since C was not the drawer of the check)

Arson and Malicious Mischief Arson (Art.320 326-B) real property is involved; trains, airplane, vessel, watercraft or conveyance for transportation of persons or property The law does not de fine what arson is; it is a willful destruction of real property by means of fire *if what is burned is a personal property, then it is not arson but malicous mischief but it is subject to some exemptions provided for by law; malicious mischief can be done not just by means of fire but also by means of hands Examples: Arson accompanied by killing murder by means of fire, there is no complex crime of murder with arson 1. A wanted to kill M and burnt Ms house = MURDER BY MEANS OF FIRE 2. A wanting to burn the house of M not knowing that Ms mother was inside = ARSON ONLY, there is no complex crime of arson with murder; there is no intent to kill, somebody was occupying the house and he didnt know about it. If he knew about it then it is murder 3. A killed M and burnt Ms house in order to cover -up the crime = 2 SEPARATE CRIMES OF MURDER AND ARSON ****the Dalongtong case involved burning the house to kill them; intent to kill was not established by reasonable doubt/not apparent. Thus, it is only arson. Malicious Mischief (Art. 327) personal property is involved (**example given was burning of cellphone), you destroy the property for the heck of it. CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS PARRICIDE (ART. 246) 3 instances: Killing between husband and wife -must be married -best proof of the relationship: marriage certificate. In the absence thereof, oral evidence may be considered especially if it is not objected to. Between father/mother son/daughter (whether legitimate or illegitimate) Ascendants/Descendants (only legitimate) (grandfather grandson; great grandfather, etc.) when it is committed with the use of an unlicensed firearm, the crime of Illegal Possession of firearm is deemed absorbed.

Estafa by means of Issuance of Checks -issuance of post-dated check constitutes estafa if you use misrepresentation. Example= misrepresented that the check is good. **If payment of a pre-existing obligation NOT GUILTY UNDER ESTAFA Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 - Good faith is not an excuse - ONLY THE DRAWER CAN BE HELD LIABLE UNDER THIS LAW **Example: A issued a check (Php 10,000) to B as a payment of a PRE-EXISTING OBLIGATION telling B to not yet deposit the check unless A tells B so. B endorsed the said check to C AS A PAYMENT OF HIS OBLIGATION TO C (Php 9,000 + interest = Php 10,000). C then needs money so he asked D if he could exchange the said check into money promising that the said check is good one. D then deposited the said check originally drawn by A and bounced. What are the liabilities of A, B, and C? A is guilty ONLY UNDER B.P. 22 (because he was the drawer of the check); NOT GUILTY UNDER ESTAFA (because IT WAS A PAYMENT OF A PRE-EXISTING OBLIGATION AND A PAID B IN GOOD FAITH)

1 | M S A C N S P

Examples: 1. If wife killed her husband with the help of the paramour or her nephew the wife will be guilty of parricide while the lover/nephew will be guilty of murder or homicide as the case may be and not Parricide since only relatives by blood in the direct line are involved in this crime. 2. If A killed his brother, there is no parricide (killing of ascendants/descendants) 3. in killing the spouse, they should be married. if they were only in live in status then there is no parricide and the crime would be Homicide or Murder. 4. in killing the wife/husband, if legally married, then there is parricide. This is personal. Thus, if the killing was in conspiracy with the paramour, say for example, a nephew, then the latter committed the crime of murder or homicide as the case may be and not parricide. 5. The killing of the son/daughter even if legitimate or illegitimate is parricide. 6. The killing of the child is considered parricide even if, at the time of the commission of the crime, the offender is not knowledgeable that the victim is his or her child. In a court decision: IF WITHOUT KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR RELATIONSHIP STILL GUILTY OF PARRICIDE 7. A, an illegitimate son of B, who killed the legitimate father of the latter, is not guilty of Parricide because in case of other ascendants (grandparents, great grandparents) the relationship with the killer must be legitimate; the same applies with other descendants 8. A who legally adopted X killed the adopted, NO PARRICIDE even if the adoption vests in him all the rights and privileges of a legitimate child since in the said crime, the relationship of the offender with the victim is the paramount element. DEATH UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES (ART. 247) Matter of defense that needs to be proved -Murder or parricide needs to be filed first then Article 247 should be used as defense Article 247 DOES NOT DEFINE ANY CRIME, it cannot be alleged. Otherwise, the decision is null and void. does not apply to a person who promotes or facilitates the prostitution of his wife or daughter or shall otherwise have consented to the infidelity of the other spouse. Penalty of Destierro (if inflicted upon them any serious physical injury. If inflicted upon them physical injuries of any other kind, exempted from punishment. ) As it does not define and provide for a specific crime but grants a privilege or benefit to the accused for the killing of another or the infliction of Serious Physical Injuries. Failure to establish the circumstances called for in Art. 247, he/she wil l be guilty of Parricide and Murder or Homicide if the victims were killed. Examples: 1. Wife and Paramour were only sleeping together, 247 cannot be used as a defense, the SC ruled that there is no surprise. 2. PEOPLE VS GONZALES, the husband saw that his wife and another man were kissing, entitled to 247, the husband need not to wait that a sexual intercourse to

3.

4.

happen, the SC ruled that the husband in this case, is not acting on reason but based on instincts. -it is not necessary that the spouse actually saw the sexual intercourse being committed. It is enough that he/she surprised them under such circumstances that no other reasonable conclusion can be inferred but that a carnal act was being performed or has just been committed. A saw his wife and the paramour doing the act, he ran after the latter but was not able to cope up, when he returned to their house, he saw his wife begging for his forgiveness but he still killed her, the SC ruled that the attack is continuous and the husband is entitled to the benefit of art. 247. penalty = Destierro PEOPLE VS ABARCA, Saw his wife and the paramour doing the act, he was supposed to shoot them when the latter, who is armed with a rifle, saw him. After an hour, he retreated with an armalite and saw the paramour while playing majong. The SC ruled that it is a continuous attack and that he is entitled to the benefits of Art. 247, penalty is destierro. According to the SC, it is not necessary that the defense occurred instantly, what is required is that the proximate cause of the attack is the outrage overwhelming the accused after chancing upon his spouse in the basest act of marital infidelity.

Attempt in killing his wife and paramour but hit his neighbour/ hit an 11-yr old girl with a stray bullet - arresto mayor/ slight physical injuries (nichelle's notes) Cannot be held guilty of killing his neighbour (aure's notes) 5. PEOPLE VS CULYANEM, even if the husband and the wife is living separately, Art. 247 is still applicable. 6. A saw his wife and the paramour in the act of sexual intercourse but the two were able to run away. A hit his neigbor and was killed, is he liable? there is no decision yet. Justice Sandoval's opinion: if the wife and the paramour were inflicted of light physical injuries only there is no penalty, no crime and A is not liable for the consequences. then

if the wife and the paramour was killed, the penalty is destierro and if the neighbor was killed then A is liable for the ensuing consequence. MURDER (ART. 248) Aggravating and Exempting circumstances must be taken into consideration. Section 9 of Rule 110 of the Rules of Court there is a need to specify the Qualifying and Aggravating Circumstances which must be stated in ordinary and concise language and not necessarily in the language used in the statute but in terms sufficient to enable a person of common understanding to know what offense is being charged as well as its qualifying and aggravating circumstances and for the court to pronounce judgment. killing of another w/c is not Parricide, not Infanticide and provided that the ff circumstances are attendant:

2 | M S A C N S P

a. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing means to weaken the defense or means to insure or afford impunity; b. In consideration of a price, reward, or promise; c. By means of inundation, fire, poison, explosion, shipwreck, stranding of a vessel, derailment of or assault upon a street car or locomotion, fall of an airship, by means of motor vehicles, or with the use of any other means involving great waste and ruin; d. On occasion of any of the calamities enumerated in the preceding paragraph, or of an earthquake, eruption of a volcano, destructive cyclone, epidemic or any other public calamity; e. With evident premeditation; f. With cruelty, be deliberately and inhumanely augmenting the suffering of the victim or outraging or scoffing at his person or corpse. *this circumstances must be alleged in the information. Otherwise, the crime would only be Homicide. By a band, though not included in those enumerated, as it was one of those qualifying circumstances that will make the crime as Murder. Examples: if the fire was employed in order to kill, the crime is Murder with Arson (???).

HOMICIDE (ART. 249) the killing of a person in the absence of those circumstances for Murder or even if those were present but were not alleged in the information; killer is not the relative mentioned in Parricide and the victim is not less than 3 days old; the killing must not be justified under any of the circumstances in Article 11. Examples: 1. If a boxer killed his opponent in a boxing bout duly licensed by the Government without any violation of the governing rules and regulations, NO HOMICIDE. If the boxing is NOT AUTHORIZED, there is HOMICIDE. 2. In a duly licensed boxing bout, if he hit his opponent below the belt without any intention to do so, it is HOMICIDE THROUGH RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE/ RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE RESULTING TO HOMICIDE if the latter died as a result. If he intentionally hit his opponent on that part of his body causing the death, the crime is Homicide. 3. The accused hurled a challenge to the deceased who readily accepted but who was thereafter killed, the accused is guilty only of HOMICIDE as treachery can not exist under that scenario; agreement to fight will always be categorized as HOMICIDE. 4. PEOPLE VS PORRAS, the shooting of a peace officer who was fully aware of the risks in pursuing the malefactors when done in a spur of the moment is only HOMICIDE. INFANTICIDE (ART.255) the killing of a child less than 3 days old; the age referred to here is broad and general. The SC in a number of cases ruled that it is ABORTION even if the child is 8 months if he was NOT CAPABLE of independent existence, it is INFANTICIDE if the child is CAPABLE of independent existence. If the killer is the mother/father/legitimate grandparents, the crime is still Infanticide and not Parricide. However, the penalty is that for Parricide. If the killer is not related within the purview of Art. 246, the crime is also Infanticide but the penalty would be that for Murder. ABORTION (ART. 256) it is an expulsion of a non-viable fetus. However, as long as the fetus dies as a result of the violence used or the drugs administered, it is abortion even if the fetus is full term. INTENTIONAL ABORTION when the offender shall intentionally cause the abortion and the intention to abort is paramount Example: 1. A boyfriend, knowing that his girlfriend is pregnant, gives her drug to alleviate her stomach pain, NOT GUILTY OF INTENTIONAL ABORTION if the drug caused the death of the fetus since the intention of the boyfriend is not to cause abortion. Is

1. in a party, A poured gasoline in the dress of a mental retarded to add up in the merriment, as a result, the latter was killed. Since the fire is not employed to kill then there is no murder, the crime would be Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide. **** the killing which was accomplished by means of fire allege d in the information does not qualify killing to Murder unless the use of fire was employed to kill the victim. **** what is important is the intent, if the intent was to kill then the crime would be murder. If the intent was not to kill, then the crime is not murder. **** the same rule applies to poison, it would be murder if the poison was employed as a means to kill the victim. 2. Maid Law student case the law student gave the maid "canteras" which if given in high dosage is poisonous. As a result, the maid died. Initially, the lower court ruled that it was murder by means of poison but on appeal, since there is no intent to kill as the intent was to arouse the sexual appetite then it is not murder. NOT GUILTY OF MURDER BY MEANS OF POISONING BUT GUILTY OF RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE RESULTING TO HOMICIDE Murder with cruelty (People vs. Pea) 3. When victims are children of tender age (5, 6, 7), killing is always Murder qualified by Treachery or abuse of superior strength.

3 | M S A C N S P

2.

there an UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION? Nitchs answer = there is no unintentional abortion as there is no violence. A husband mauls his pregnant wife and in the course of a heated argument, abortion became a consequence. As there was no intention on the part of the husband to cause the abortion, NO INTENTIONAL ABORTION. However, he is GUILTY OF UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION. UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION

even if the suicide did not materialize, the person giving assistance to suicide is also liable but the penalty shall be one or two degrees lower depending on whether it is frustrated or attempted suicide. committed by person who acted upon the principle of mercy killing Example: 1. One who, upon a plea of his friend to pull the trigger of the gun which he himself poked on his temple as he could no longer bear the pain due to a brain cancer, squeezed the said trigger causing the death of his long-suffering friend, is liable under this article. 2. A saw B who was about to jump the building, A to prevent B from jumping, pointed a gun at the latter threatening to fire upon him if he jumps, pointed a gun on B while compelling him to go nearer him GRAVE COERCION = you compel or prevent a person from doing an act which is not unlawful but is against his will. DUEL (ART. 260) shall be imposed upon any person who shall kill his adversary in a duel a duel involves a formal agreement in writing to fight between two opposing parties under determined conditions and with the participation and intention of seconds (witnesses), who fix such conditions. If it is not in writing, the crime would be Homicide. ART. 261 = challenging another to a duel is also punishable. It is imposed upon any person who shall challenge another, or incite another to give or accept a challenge to a duel, or shall scoff at or decry another publicly for having refused to accept a challenge to fight a duel. Example: 1. A and B, after an argument in a bar, left the place at the same time and pursuant to their agreement, went to the plaza to fight each other to death with knives which they bought on the way, the facts do not constitute the crime of dueling since there were no seconds who fixed the conditions of the fight in a more or less formal manner. If one was killed, the crime committed would be Homicide. CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY ADULTERY (Art. 333) Par. 1- committed by any married woman who shall have sexual intercourse with a man not her husband and by the man who has carnal knowledge of her, knowing her to be married, even if the marriage be subsequently declared void. Par. 3- If the person guilty committed this offense while being abandoned without justification by the offended spouse, the penalty next lower in degree than that provided in the next preceding paragraph shall be imposed. It takes TWO to commit adultery:

while no intention to cause abortion is present, it nonetheless occurred by means of violence willfully exerted on a pregnant woman. Example: 1. A pointed a gun at a pregnant lady who became so frightened, causing her abortion, NOT LIABLE FOR UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION as there was no violence exerted. If he intended the abortion however, his crime would be INTENTIONAL ABORTION. DEATH IN A TUMULTUOUS AFFRAY (ART. 251) when several persons not composing groups organized for the purpose of assaulting each other reciprocally, quarrel and assault each other in a confused and tumultuous manner, and somebody died in the course of the affray, and it cannot be ascertained who killed the deceased, those who inflicted serious physical injuries shall be the ones liable. if those who inflicted the serious physical injuries can not be ascertained too, then those who shall have used violence upon the deceased shall be the ones punished. known in local dialect as labo labo; no particular group against another group the participants must be more than 3 the person killed could be a participant or anybody caught in the melee Examples: 1. A, B, C, D, and E had a tumultuous affray, E died and it cannot be ascertained who among A, B, C, D killed him. Even if one of them only kicked the victim, he would be held liable for the death of the victim as those who inflicted the serious physical injuries are undeterminable. 2. If those who actually killed the victim can be determined, they will be the ones to be held liable, and those who inflicted serious or less serious or slight physical injuries shall be punished for said corresponding offenses provided no conspiracy is established with the killers. 3. riots in city jails and/or Muntinlupa brigades do not fall under this because the participants are members of different gangs. GIVING ASSISTANCE TO SUICIDE (ART.253) committed by any person who assists another to commit suicide to the extent of doing the killing himself, penalty is the same as that for Homicide.

4 | M S A C N S P

To convict a woman for adultery; with the ff. elements: a. That she is a married woman, b. That she unites in sexual intercourse with a man not her husband. 2. To convict a man for adultery; with the ff. elements: a. That he had actual intercourse with a married woman, b. That he commits the act with the knowledge that said woman is married. The man need not to be married but the woman, of course, must be in wedlock with another man. Best proof is the marriage contract. In the absence thereof, the presumption of the law that a man and woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have entered into a lawful contract of marriage may be availed of = through husbands declaration or by a witness to the marriage. The marriage may be voidable but not that of a void marriage because in the former, there is Adultery because until the marriage is declared to be null and void by competent authority in a final judgment, the offense to the vows taken and the attack on the family, exist. Consummated by a single sexual intercourse; It must always be committed by two persons. Direct evidence need not to be proved; CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, like seeing the married woman and her paramour, in scanty dress, sleeping together, alone in a house, etc. WOULD SUFFICE. The crime is not a continuing offense. It is completed and consummated at the moment of carnal knowledge. The acquittal of an accused does not necessarily mean that the co-accused should likewise be acquitted. However, the mitigating circumstance in the last paragraph will be appreciated for BOTH offenders. Examples: 1. A and B is coming out from a motel and B, the man was the one driving the car. Are they guilty of adultery? Supposed there was no sexual intercourse, will you proceed with filing charges for adultery? Yes as sexual assault need not be proved by direct evidence but by circumstantial evidence. It cannot be proceeded against the man only. 2. A and B had an affair while the latter didnt know that the former is the wife of C, his friend. He must still be included even if he didnt know that the woman is already married. The fact that she didnt know that she was married is a matter of defense. 3. What if the man is already dead, can he still be included? He should not be included, proceed against the wife only. 4. When the complaining husband entered into an agreement with his wife that each of them was to live separately and could marry other persons; but about a year after discovering his wifes infidelity, he filed a complaint, he is not authorized by law to institute the criminal proceedings as he had consented to, and acquiesced in, the adulterous relations of his wife; this does not speak about pari delicto.

1.

CONCUBINAGE (Art. 334) Par. 1- Any husband who shall keep a mistress in the conjugal dwelling, or, shall have sexual intercourse, under scandalous circumstances, with a woman who is not his wife, or shall cohabit with her in any other place, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods. Par. 2- The concubine shall suffer the penalty of destierro. Any of the following acts shall constitute Concubinage: a. By keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling; -must be brought in as a mistress b. By having sexual intercourse under scandalous circumstances with a woman not his wife; -the rage of the community is aroused; he is mocking the spiritual sensibility of the community c. By cohabiting with her in any other place. By keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling: There is no need of proof of sexual intercourse. Conjugal dwelling is the house of the spouses even if the wife happens to be temporarily absent therefrom; as long as youre living there with your children. The woman however must be brought into the conjugal house by the accused as a concubine to fall under this article. Examples: 1. If the co-accused was voluntarily taken and sheltered by the spouses in their house, and treated as an adopted child being a relative of the complaining wife, her illicit relations with the accused husband does not make her a mistress. (People vs. Hilao, et a., CA 53 O.G. 94) 2. A and B are married. B, the husband brought in a mistress, A didnt do anything. For the second time, B again brought a mistress, A didnt do anything. For the third time B brought a mistress, A objected to it. Can A now file for charges of concubinage against B? NO. the acts of A showed that he consented to her husbands playing around and once you do such, it applies to all. Thus, this defense available to the husband and his mistresses if proven, will make the case not to prosper. 3. There has been an agreement between the married parties that they can each have their new partners. Although the said agreement is null and void in civil law, it has an effect in criminal law. Thus, the husband/wife cannot later on file for charges of concubinage/adultery as the case may be as their agreement constitute consent to such acts. 4. Pari delicto is applicable in civil cases only. In adultery and concubinage, the proper defense would be consent or pardon. 5. A Muslim who marries another woman without the consent of his first wife is liable for Concubinage.

5 | M S A C N S P

6.

A and B are married. B had an illicit relation with C. When A filed for complaint against them both of them were still alive but upon the courts judgment, C is already dead. The decision is executory only against the living party.

RAPE (Art. 266-A to 266-D) Pardon must be express RA 8353 in case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or penalty giving the logical implication that in such a case, the pardon need not be express nor granted prior to the institution of the criminal action Lust is no respect of time and place, it can be committed even in the unlikeliest of places. Repealed Art. 335 of the RPC and re-labelled Rape from Crimes against Chastity to Crimes against Persons; Amended by R.A. 8353 or the Anti-Rape Law of 1997; can prosecute the offender even without complaint filed by the offended party 1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: a. Through force, threat, or intimidation; -what amount of force is necessary? It depends on the circumstances surrounding the case -it is not necessary that the force or intimidation employed be so great or of such character as could not be resisted it is only necessary that it be sufficient to consummate the purpose which the accused had in mind. -physical resistance need not be established in rape when threats and intimidation are employed and the victim submits herself to the embrace of her rapists because of fear. Examples: o A mayor and a German lady who is taller than the former. The SC ruled that there is no rape, there is romance. o If the offender was the father of the victim, said force, threat or intimidation is substituted by parental authority. o In marriage, before there is consortium but now it is chargeable o What if it is the wife? Not guilty of rape. GRAVE COERCION, by compelling a person to do an act which though it is not prohibited by law is against his will. b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; -when the woman is sleeping, etc. -the deprivation of reason contemplated by law need not be complete; mental abnormality or deficiency is sufficient. -when a female is mentally incapable of validly giving consent to or opposing the carnal act Examples: o Fisherman example o Kill and tell example c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and -this is a new provision Examples:

By cohabiting with her in any other place: Proof of actual sexual intercourse may not be necessary too. But the tem cohabit means intercourse together as husband and wife or living together as husband and wife. The cohabitation must be for some period of time which may be a week, a year or longer as distinguished from occasional or transient meetings for unlawful sexual intercourse. Example: 1. Where the wife surprised her husband in a room in the Philippine General Hospital lying on one bed with another woman, her husband wearing pants while the co-accused wore an ordinary dress, cohabitation was not established since the man had his quarters in the hospital while his co-accused lived in a nearby house in the same street. Same ruling even if the prosecution was able to prove that the accused was married and that he was the father of the child born of his co-accused. The rule is that, if a married mans conduct with a woman who is not his wife was not confined to occasional or transient interview for carnal intercourse but is carried on in the manner the husband and wife for some period of time, then such association is sufficient to constitute cohabitation. Sexual Intercourse under scandalous circumstances: It must be imprudent and wanton as to offend modesty and sense of morality and decency. The unlawful union of a married man with a woman not his wife, when the live within a town and in the same house as lawful husband and wife, go together through the streets of the town, frequent places where large crowds gather and commit acts in plain sight of the community without caution and with effrontery, is a procedure that gives rise to criticism and general protest among the neighbours. By its bad example, it offends the conscience and feeling of every person. Example: Where the accused and his mistress lived in the same room of a house, comported themselves as husband and wife publicly and privately, giving the impression to everybody that they were married, and performed acts in sight of the community which gave rise to criticism and general protest among the neighbours, they committed concubinage. The crimes of Adultery and Concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon complaint filed by the offended spouse who must include both the parties if they are both alive. Consent and pardon of the offended spouse shall bad the prosecution of the offense, provided that it be done before the institution or filing of the criminal complaint. Pardon may be given expressly or impliedly.

6 | M S A C N S P

2.

Rabbi example Police If a woman of majority age had sexual intercourse with a man through the latters scheme of pretending to marry her which is the condition upon which the woman agreed to have sex with her, manipulating a sham marriage. o A prostitute who willingly had sexual congress with a man upon the latters assurance that she would be paid handsomely, may be guilty of rape if later on he refuses to pay the said amount. o A person in authority who maneuvered a scheme where a woman landed in jail, and who upon promise of being released after having sex with the officer, willingly consented to the sexual act, may also be found guilty of Rape under this new section. d. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present. -also known as Statutory Rape; even if the girl was the one who force the man to have sex with her. -force intimidation or physical evidence of injury is immaterial; carnal knowledge of her alone consummates the crime The victim is exactly 12 years old or more, and there is consent, there is NO RAPE. However, RA 7610 provides that since children exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse has been defined as persons below 18 years of age or those over but are unable to fully take care of themselves or protect themselves from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability or condition, it would seem that the act is within the prohibition of this law otherwise known as Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act even if the victim is over 12 years old and the carnal act was with her consent as long as she falls under the classification of a child exploited in prostitution and other sexual abuse By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person. -not only a male person can be the offended in this crime; also involves other parts of the body. Penalty: -simple rape is punishable by reclusion perpetua -The penalty shall be death under any of the following circumstances: a. When by reason or on occasion of the rape, homicide is committed b. When the victim is under 18 yrs old and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity rd within the 3 civil degree, or the common law spouse of the parent of the victim

o o o

c. d. e. f. g.

h.

i. j.

When the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law enforcement or penal institutions When committed in full view of the spouse, parent, any children or other relatives within the third degree of consanguinity When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation or calling and is personally known to be such by the offender When the victim is a child below 7 years old When the offender knows that he is afflicted with Human ImmunoDeficiency Virus (HIV)/ Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim When committed by any member of the AFP or paramilitary units thereof or the PNP or any law enforcement agency or penal institution, the offender taking advantage of his position to facilitate the commission of the crime When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party, or of her mental disability, emotional disorder and/or physical handicap at the time of the commission of the crime.

Principles in rape cases: 1. An accusation of rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove, but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove 2. In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime where only 2 persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution 3. The evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense. ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS (Art. 336) Any person who shall commit any acts of lasciviousness upon other persons of either sex, under any of the circumstances mentioned in the preceding article, shall be punished by Prision Correccional. The feeling of lasciviousness is an emotional process that differs intensity among different persons in different situations, discernible only by overt acts so that no flexible rule can be laid down as accurate measure. Example: 1. When the accused not only kissed and embraced the complainant but also fondled her breast with the particular design to independently derive vicarious pleasure therefrom, the element of lewd design exsits. To be guilty of this crime, however, the acts of lasciviousness must be committed under any of the circumstances that had there been sexual intercourse, the crime would have been rape.

7 | M S A C N S P

Where the circumstances indicate a clear intention to lie with the offended party, the crime committed is Attempted Rape. When the accused lifted the dress of the offended party, and placed himself on top of her but the woman awoke and screamed for help and despite that, the accused persisted in his purpose, tearing the drawers, kissing and fondling her breasts, the crime is not only Acts of Lasciviousness but that of ATTEMPTED RAPE. 3. If lewd design can not be proven as where the accused merely kissed and embraced the complainant either out of passion or other motive, touching her breast as a mere incident, the act would be categorized as Unjust Vexation. This crime can be committed by either sex unlike in Acts of Lasciviousness with Consent (Art. 339). Example: A lesbian who toyed with the private part of an eleven-year-old girl who enjoyed it since she was given Php 50 before the act, is guilty of Acts of Lasciviousness under this Article as the victim is below twelve years old (had the sexual been possible and done, act would have been rape. A gay who toyed with the penis of a demented (mad, insane) boy or one who is below twelve years old is guilty of Acts of Lasciviousness even if both of them are males. QUALIFIED SEDUCTION (Art. 337) Par. 1- The seduction of a virgin over twelve years and under eighteen years of age, committed by any person in public authority, priest, home-servant, domestic, guardian, teacher, or any person who, in any capacity, shall be entrusted with the education or custody of the woman seduced Par. 2- any person who shall seduce his sister or descendant, whether or not she be a virgin or over eighteen years of age. Par. 3- seduction is committed when the offender has carnal knowledge of any of the persons and under the circumstances described herein. Elements: 1. The offended party is a virgin; 2. The offender has carnal knowledge of her with her consent; 3. The offended party is over twelve but under eighteen years of age; and 4. The offender is a person in public authority, a priest, house-servant, domestic, guardian, teacher or any person who, in any capacity is entrusted with the education or custody of the lady seduced. Three (3) classes of offenders in Qualified Seduction: 1. Those who abused their authority (like a person in public authority, guardian, teacher or any person who, in any capacity is entrusted with the education or custody of the lady seduced); **In case of a teacher, he need not to be the teacher of the offended party. It is sufficient that they are teacher and student in the same school.

2.

2. 3.

Those who abused confidence reposed in them (like the priest, house-servant or domestic); and Those abused their relationship (like the brother seducing his sister, or an ascendant who seduced his descendant).

Qualified seduction is committed when the offender has carnal knowledge of any of the persons mentioned and under the circumstances described therein. In this crime, sexual intercourse with the woman is with the latters consent. Virginity referred to here, is not to be understood in so material sense as to exclude the idea of abduction of a virtuous woman of good reputation. o When the accused claims that he had prior intercourse with the complainant, the latter is still to be considered as virgin. (But if it was established that the girl had carnal relations with other men, there can be no crime of seduction as she is not a virgin.) Domestic is one who lives in the same household with the offended woman; if the offended party merely slept for a day or two in the house, she is not a domestic but a mere transient. o Where the complainant who is sixteen years old, lives in the same house where the accused, her uncle, also lives, the latter is guilty of Qualified Seduction when he had sexual intercourse with her consent. Where the lady seduced is a sister or a descendant, she need not be a virgin and she may be above eighteen (18) years old. SIMPLE SEDUCTION (Art. 338) The seduction of a woman who is single or a widow of good reputation, over twelve but under eighteen years of age, committed by means of deceit The sexual intercourse with a woman who is single or a widow of good reputation over twelve but under eighteen years committed with her consent which was obtained through deceit is Simple Seduction. -there is no such thing as widow of good reputation below 18 They lady need not to be virgin. Deceit usually takes form of promise to marry (if promise to marry was made after sexual intercourse, no crime of simple seduction; if promise was made by a married man and woman knowing such fact, no crime of simple seduction was committed) o If a man procured a fictitious marriage ceremony to yield his girlfriend for sexual intercourse, he is guilty of simple seduction since deceit was employed. (This could now be punished as Rape under the Anti-Rape Act of 1997) The purpose of the law in punishing the crime of Simple Seduction is to penalize the seducer who by means of a promise to destroys the chastity of an unmarried female of previous chaste character

8 | M S A C N S P

ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS WITH CONSENT (Art. 339) shall be imposed to punish any other acts of lasciviousness committed by the same persons and the same circumstances as those provided in Articles 337 and 338. The act of the offender were limited to acts of lewdness or lasciviousness, and no carnal knowledge was had, but had there been sexual intercourse, the offense would have been seduction, he is guilty of acts of lasciviousness under this article. AOL w/o consent (336) Committed without consent and the offended party could be over the age of eighteen years old Even a male person can be a victim AOL w/ consent (339) Committed with consent of the offended party and the offended party is over twelve years old but below eighteen years old Only a woman can be offended

Enlisting the services of women for the purpose of prostitution (whether the offender profits or not, is punishable) ***virginity is material in qualified seduction and consented abduction. FORCIBLE ABDUCTION (Art. 342) Par. 1- The abduction of any woman against her will and with lewd designs shall be punished by reclusion temporal Par. 2- The same penalty shall be imposed in every case, if the female abducted be under twelve years of age. Elements of Forcible Abduction: 1. The woman, regardless of age or civil status, is abducted; 2. The abduction is against her will; and 3. The abduction is with lewd designs. 4. No sexual intercourse unlike in Rape and Seduction If below 12 years of age, there need not be any force or intimidation to constitute forcible abduction; it may even be with her consent, and the reason for this is that she has no will of her own, and therefore is incapable of giving real meaning of consent. Lewd designs may be shown by the way the accused or one of them conducted himself as when he kissed and embraced the woman or touched her private parts while on the way. Forcible Abduction with Rape when the accused had carnal knowledge during or after the Abduction (since in the crime of abduction there is no sexual intercourse and the acts are limited to lascivious acts) Example: 1. If a man abducts a woman to marry the latter if there is a genuine intention to marry, there is no lewd design and there may be no Forcible Abduction. But the crime committed is Kidnapping with Serious Illegal Detention (Art. 267) with a higher penalty (committed when lewd design was not proved or shown, and the victim was deprived of her liberty). In case of subsequent two (2) other sexual intercourses committed against the will of the complainant would be treated as independent separate crimes of rape. CONSENTED ABDUCTION (Art. 343) The abduction of a virgin over twelve years and under eighteen years of age, carried out with her consent and with lewd designs, shall be punished by the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods. Not necessary that the young victim be personally taken from her parents home by the accused; it is sufficient that he was instrumental in her leaving the house. Must always be accompanied with solicitation, cajolery or deceit, or honeyed promises of marriage to induce the girl to escape from her home.

CORRUPTION OF MINORS (Art. 340) Any person who shall promote or facilitate the prostitution or corruption of persons underage to satisfy the lust of another, shall be punished by prision mayor, and if the culprit is a pubic officer or employee, including those in government-owned or controlled corporations, he shall also suffer the penalty of temporary absolute disqualification. (As amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 92) No longer requires habituality or abuse of authority or confidence unlike in the old provision. A single act of promoting or facilitating the corruption or prostitution of a minor is sufficient to constitute violation of this article. Minors include both male and females and must be below eighteen (18) years old This is usually the act of a pimp who offers to pleasure seekers, women for satisfaction of their lustful desires. A mere proposal would consummate the crime. But it must be to satisfy the lust of another, not his. WHITE SLAVERY (Art. 341) shall be imposed upon any person who, in any manner, or under any pretext, shall engage in the business or shall profit by prostitution or shall enlist the services of any other for the purpose of prostitution. (As amended by Batas Pambansa Blg. 186) Committed by any person who, in any manner, or under any pretext, engages in the business or shall profit by prostitution or enlists the services of women for the purpose of prostitution. It consists of any of the three acts: o Engaging in the business of prostitution o Profiting by prostitution

9 | M S A C N S P

 Taking of the offended party need not have to the character of permanency. No matter how short is the taking, the crime exists. The purpose of the law is not to punish the wrong done to her, because she consented thereto but to prescribe punishment for the disgrace of her family and the alarm caused to the parents by the disgrace of a beloved one who by her age and sex, is susceptible to deceit, cajolery and even perdition. (therefore the virginity mentioned in this article should not be understood in its material sense and does not exclude the idea of abduction of a virtuous woman of good reputation Example: 1. A and B has an affair. B abducted A who was only 17 years old, it was made with her consent. In this case, it is usually the mother who is the one complaining and practically, there is no defense as it is a continuing crime. SUMMARY Basis AL QS SS AL w/o C FA Age Any >12-18< >12-18< >12-18< Any Virginity IM IM IM IM Gender M/F F only F only F only F only Consent X ** X Sexual X X X Intercourse (=Rape) (= SS) Lewd IM IM Design Legends: >12-18< - Greater than 12 years old but less than 18 years old IM Immaterial ** - there is consent but with deceit FALSIFICATION FALSE TESTIMONY AGAINST A DEFENDANT (ART. 180) CA >12-18< F only X X

Though less obnoxious than a testimony against the defendant, both are equally repugnant to the administration of justice and must be repressed accordingly. It is not necessary that the testimony given directly influenced the decisions of the Court; it is sufficient that it was given with the intent to favor the accused. FALSE TESTIMONY ON CIVIL CASES (ART. 182)

Any person found guilty of false testimony in civil cases Proceeding must be strictly a civil case and must relate to the issues in said case Testimony must be false and the offender knows it to be false (THE SAME WITH CRIMINAL CASES) If the false testimony is committed in Special Proceedings (Petition for Habeas Corpus, Change of Name, Testate and Intestate Proceedings, etc.) Art. 183 applies. FALSE TESTIMONY IN OTHER CASES AND PERJURY IN SOLEMN AFFIRMATION (ART. 183) Par. 1 any person, who knowingly making untruthful statements and not being included in the provisions of the next preceding articles, shall testify under oath, or make an affidavit, upon any material matter before a competent person authorized to administer an oath in cases in which law so requires. Par. 2 Any person who, in case of a solemn affirmation made in lieu of an oath shall commit any of the falsehoods mention in this and the three preceding articles of this section Two ways of violating this Article: 1. 2. Testifying falsely under oath outside of the cases provided for in Art. 180, 181, and 182; and Making a false affidavit or false sworn declaration

Any person who shall give false testimony against the defendant in any criminal cases Applicable only when there is criminal proceedings; and The offender testified falsely Must testify on material matters so that even if he actually lied on immaterial matters (like his/her age), this article is not violated. If he testified on relevant matter or material matters proven to be false, he is liable just the same even if the judge does not consider his testimony. The decision in the criminal case where he testified must have been already FINAL. FALSE TESTIMONY FAVORABLE TO THE DEFENDANT (ART. 181) Any person who shall give false testimony in favor of the defendant in any criminal cases Oath includes any form of attestation by which a party signifies that he is bound in conscience to perform an act faithfully and truthfully. Oath also includes affirmation in cases where, by law, an affirmation may be substituted for an oath. th Example: The accused stated that he reached 4 year A.B. and that he studied for this course at the Cosmopolitan Colleges and the Harvardian Colleges from 1950-54 is devoid truth, and that the records of these colleges do not at all reveal that he was even enrolled at any time from 1950 to 1954, when he filled out the prescribed personal information sheet Civil Service Form 212 and swore to the truth and veracity of the data and information therein furnished before the proper administering officer in connection with his appointment (promotion) as School Administrative Assistant I of the same school, he committed a violation of Art. 183 and not Falsification of Official Document under Art. 171, par. 4. (Diaz vs. People, et al., 191 SCRA 86, citing People vs. Cruz, 108 Phil 255 and the earlier case of U.S. vs. Tupasi, 29 Phil. 119)

10 | M S A C N S P

It would seem that if a person testified falsely against a defendant in a criminal case (Art. 180) and the defendant is sentenced to arresto menor, he committed Perjury. There is no requirement of law to place the statement or testimony under oath, there is no Perjury considering the phrase oath in cases in which the law so requires in Art. 183. Example under Art. 183 Par. 2: While it is a requirement under the Rule in Summary Procedure that sworn affidavits of witnesses be submitted to support the position papers of the parties in the case, if the affiants do not take oath but declare in solemn affirmation in lieu of an oath, and the assertions therein are found to be false, then Perjury is committed. OFFERING FALSE TESTIMONY IN EVIDENCE (Art. 184) Any person who shall knowingly offer in evidence a false witness or testimony in any judicial or official proceeding, shall be punished as guilty of false testimony The offender offered in evidence a false witness or testimony knowing the same to be false in any judicial or official proceedings. The one who made the testimony is liable under either Articles 180, 181, 182, or 183. If the witness desisted, he may not be held liable for having desisted voluntarily during the attempted stage of the offense. FALSIFICATION (Art. 171) In Falsification, the basic principle is that the tampering or changing of the contents of the document is for the purpose of making the document speak a falsity so that if the purpose of the alteration is for the document is to truth, there is no falsification. Committed by making untruthful statements in narration of facts. In falsification altering date, the date must be is essential to the document, it must affect the veracity of the documents and the effects thereof

2.

3.

Making Alteration or intercalation in a genuine document, the accused cannot be held liable if the alteration or tampering does not change the meaning of the document; thus, to change the word his to her to conform to gender is not falsification. Where the vault keeper extracted the original of a marriage contract in the file and changed it with another document so as not to distrupt the numbering of the documents numerically filed, to help prove the claim that no marriage was solemnized, he is guilty of falsification for intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, or official book. Bribery DIRECT BRIBERY (Art. 210) If a public officer (e.g. prosecutor or judge), receives money from a party litigant who told him the money is being given so that the public officer would decide the case in his favor, and that the party litigant by the evidence adduced deserves to win, that is, he has a meritorious case, the public officer is not liable for direct bribery

Three modes of committing Direct Bribery 1) When a public officer agrees to perform, or performed an act constituting a crime in connection with the performance of his official duties in consideration of any offer, promise, gift or present; Mere promise is sufficient Example: Stenographer, in consideration of an offer, promise, gift or present agrees with a litigant party to a case to alter the notes taken down during trial to make it appear that a witness testified favourably, when in fact his st testimony is adverse to him, is guilty of Direct Bribery under the 1 mode. 2) When a public officer accepted a gift in consideration of the execution of an act which does not constitute a crime in connection with the performance of his official duty Mere promise is not sufficient the public officer must have actually received the gift, money, or consideration Example: The secretary of the municipal mayor who was under instruction to receive the applications for awards in the municipalitys public market for only ten persons, the eleventh applicant bribed him to alter and made it appear that he was the tenth applicant, is guilty of Direct Bribery. When a public officer agrees to refrain, or refrains, from doing something which it is his official duty to do, in consideration of any gift or promise Mere promise is sufficient

Essential Requites: 1) That the offender makes in a document untruthful statements in narrations of facts 2) That he has no legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him; 3) That the facts narrated by the offender are absolutely false Offender is a private individual or a public officer who has no duty to make or prepare or intervene in the preparation of the document or who does not have the official custody of the document, then the act is punishable under Art. 172 of the RPC and not under this Article. Examples: 1. A municipal mayor issued appointment in favor of his son as a meat inspector in the office of the municipal treasurer, and taking advantage of his official position issued the certification which is a public document stating therein that he is not related to the appointee, said public officer guilty of Falsification of Public Document. (Layno vs. People 213 SCRA 686)

3)

11 | M S A C N S P

Example: Police officer, who in consideration of money received or promise offered by a taxi driver who beat the traffic light, refrains from issuing a TVR and from confiscating the drivers license commits this third form of Direct Bribery The gift or present can be received by the public officer directly or through an intermediary. The thing offered or accepted may be money, property or services, or anything else of value. (though any value is sufficient)

R.A. 6713 Public officials and employees shall not solicit or accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, gratuity, favor, entertainment, loan or anything of monetary value from any person in the course of their official duties or in connection with any operation being regulated by, or any transaction which may be affected by the functions of their office. QUALIFIED BRIBERY (Art. 211-A) Par. 1- If any public officer is entrusted with law enforcement and he refrains from arresting or prosecuting an offender who has committed a crime punishable in consideratio n of any offer, promise, gift or present, he shall suffer the penalty for the offense which was not prosecuted. Par. 2- If it is the public officer who asks or demands such gift or present, he shall suffer the penalty of death. The offender must be a public officer who is entrusted with law enforcement or prosecution of offenses and he accepted gifts, presents, promise or offer in consideration of releasing or refraining to prosecute a person who has committed a crime punishable under the law by Reclusion Perpetua to Death. CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS (Art. 212) upon any person, who shall have made the offers or promises or given the gifts or presents as described in the preceding articles. The article speaks of liability of the giver or offeror of the gifts, presents, or consideration. Even if the gift was demanded by the public officer and the offer was not made voluntarily, the person is liable under this article. Mere offer of the gift or the bribe is sufficient to commit the crime under this article. The public officer sought to be bribed is not criminally liable, however, unless he accepts the gift or consents to the offer of the offender.

P.D. No. 46 Throwing of parties or entertainment in honor of the official or employee or his immediate relatives is considered present or gift. Any public officer or employee, whether national or local government, to receive, directly or indirectly, and for private persons to give, or offer to give, any gift during Christmas, when such gift, present, or other valuable thing is given by reason of his official position, regardless of whether or not the same is for past favor, or favors, or the giver hopes or expects to receive a favor or better treatment in the future from the public official or employee concerned in the discharge of his official functions. R. A. 3019 Unlawful for a public official to directly of indirectly request or receive any gift, present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself of for any other person, in connection with any contract or transaction between the Government and the other party. Unlawful to directly or indirectly request or receive any gift, present, or other pecuniary or material benefit for himself or for another, from any person for whom the public office, in any capacity, has secured or obtained, or will secure or obtain for the help given or to be given. INDIRECT BRIBERY (Art. 211) any public officer who shall accept gifts offered to him by reason of his public office. Mere promise is not sufficient; the offender must have accepted or received the present or gift As long as the thing of value was offered to and received by the public officer by reason of his public office, he is liable under this article. Example: 1. A judge who receives from the plaintiff some amount of money delivered to him for a favourable decision, but said judge, instead decided the case not in his favor but in favor of the defendant. 2. A prosecutor who receives gifts or present from the complainant as expression of gratitude for issuing good resolution resulting in the filing of the case.

P.D. No. 749 Grants immunity from prosecution the givers of bribes and other gifts and to their accomplices in bribery and graft cases provided they voluntarily give information and would willingly testify against the public official or employee; Provided further that the information referred to consummated violations, the information and testimony are not yet in the possession of the state but are necessary for the conviction of the accused public official, such information and testimony can be corroborated on their material points; The informant or witness has not been previously convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude.

12 | M S A C N S P