UNIVERSITY OF CEBU LAPU-LAPU AND MANDAUE

A.C CORTES LOOC MANDAUE CITY

COLLEGE
OF CRIMINOLOGY

CLJ 2
3:00-6:00 SAT

SUBMITTED
BY:
MANAGAY, ALAN C.
BSCRIM 4

SUBMITTED TO:

ATTY. PIO R. DARGANTES

ART. 296 – DEFINITION OF A BAND AND PENALTY INCURRED BY THE NUMBERS.
When more than three malefactors take part in commission of robbery , it
shall be deemed to have been committed by a band . When any of the arms used in the commission
of the offense by the penalty imposed upon all the malefactors shall be maximum period of
corresponding penalty provided by law, without prejudice to the criminal liability for illegal
possession of such unlicensed firearm. Any member of a band who is
present at the commission of a robbery by the band, shall be punished as principal of any assault
committed by the band , unless it be shown that he attempted to prevent the same.

Requisites for liability for the acts for thew member of the band.

1. That he was member of the band.

2. That he was present of the
commission of a robbery y that band. 3. That the other members of the band
committed an assaults. 4. That he did not attempt to the assault.

Examples:

In the case where three person committed robbery in a house

two of robbers committed rape, while the third guarded the owner of the house downstairs, the
first two were convicted of robbery with rape, while the third was convicted o robbery only.

OPINION:

The robbery was not committed by a band, because the robber who did not take in
the assault by another is not liable for that assault.

ART.297 – ATTEMPTED
AND FRUSTRATED ROBERY COMMITTED UNDER
CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. When by
the reason or on occasion of an attempted or frustrated robbery a homicide is committed, the person
guilty of such offenses shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion
perpetua . Unless the homicide committed shall deserve a higher penalty under the provision of this
code.
EXAMPLES:
 Aba ka , his son Aba tar and daughter -in-law were
awakened by the presence, below their house of appellants who asked for some water to drink.
Unless Serapio balbakua ,Manuel Do and George pautog went up and forced their way to the
house. Balbakua made demand to the inmates of their house to bring out their money. Aba ka got
hold of his own firearm and confronted the trio. All of a sudden the intruders started firing at Aba
ka who returned the fire. After the gunfire stopped, aba ka and george pautog were founded dead.

OPINION:
The crime committed is attempted robbery with homicide . The demand made by
balbakua to the inmates of the house to bring out their money constitutes an overt act witch would
lead to commission of the robbery . If the robbery was not committed , it was because of armed
resistance. The killing was apparently an off shot of the plan to carry out the robbery.

FRUSTRATED ROBBERY

EXAMPLES:
The accused agreed to rob two LCM boats from navy boat pool with idea of selling
them for profit. They disarmed the guard and they failed to take the boats , because they could not
start the motor, they killed the guard.
OPINION:
The crime committed is frustrated
robbery with homicide they killed the guard , and they an intention to sell the boat for profit.

ART. 298 – EXECUTION

OF DEEDS BY MEANS OF VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION.
Any person who, with intent to
defraud another by means of violence or intimidation shall compel to sign, execute , or deliver any
public instrument or document shall be held guilty of robbery and punished by the penalties
respectively prescribed in this chapter.

REQUISITES:

1. That the offender has intent to defraud another.

2. That the offender compels him to sign, execute, or deliver any public
instrument or document.
3. That the compulsion is by means of violence or intimidation.

EXAMPLES:

MR. TULFO HAVE 1000 HECTARS OF LAND,AND MR. SE COMPELS AND

INTIMEDATE TO SIGN AND EXECUTE MR. TULFO TO MAKE AN A DEED OF SELL OF
LAND .
 OPINION:
MY
OPINION OF THIS CASE WAS MR . SE CRIMINAL LIABLE OF ROBBERY BECAUSE THE
OFFENDER HAS INTENT TO DEFRAUD THEY COMPELS TO SIGN AND EXECUTE TO
MAKE A DEED OF SELL .

UNIVERSITY OF CEBU LAPU-LAPU AND

MANDAUE A.C CORTES LOOC MANDAUE ITY

COLLEGE OF CRIMINOLOGY

CLJ – 4

7:30 – 8:30 PM MWF

SUBMITTED BY:
MANAGAY, ALAN C.
BS CRIM
4

SUBMITTTED TO:

ATTY. PIO R.
DARGANTES

RULE 131 – BURDEN OF PROOF AND

PRESUMPTION
SECTION 3. DESPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS. -
THE FOLLOWING PRESUMPTIONS ARE ATISFACTORY IF UNCONTRADICTED,
BUT MAY BE CONTRADICTED AND OVERCOME BY OTHER EVIDENCE.

(B) THAT PROPERTY ACQUIRED BY A MAN AND A WOMAN WHO ARE

CAPACITATED TO MARY EACH OTHER AS HUSBAND AND WIFE WITHOUT THE
BENEFIT OF MARRIAGE OR UNDER VOID MARRIAGE ,HAS BEEN
OBTAINED BY THEIR JOINT EFFORTS , WORK OR INDUSTRY .

EXAMPLE:
A MAN AND A WOMAN ARE BOTH SINGLES, THEY
WANT TO LIVE IN A HOUSE WITH THERE THEY SAME CONTRIBUTION, AND
PROPERTY AS HUSBAND AND WIFE,EVEN THEY ARE NOT MARRIAGE.

OPINION:
THE PRESUMPTION OF THIS
SEC. WHEN THE MAN AND THE WOMAN SHALL WE SEE (LIVE-IN),IN THE EYES
OF NIEGHBORS THEY ARE HUSBAND AND WIFE, especially WHEN THEY ARIVED
CAME FROM THEIR WORK WITH MATCHING HOLDING HANDS, WHEN THEY GO
OUT GO TO CHURCH WITH Matching KISS.

(CC) THAT IN CASES IN COHABITATION BY A MAN

AND WOMAN WHO ARE NOT CAPACITATED TO MARRY EACH OTHER AND WHO
HAVE ACQUIRE PROPERLY THROUGH THEIR ACTUAL JOINTS CONTRIBUTION
OF MONEY, PROPERTY OR INDUSTRY, SUCH CONTIBUTION AND THEIR
CORRESPONDING SHARES INCLUDING JOINT DEPOSITS OF MONEY EVIDENCES
OF CREDIT ARE EQUAL.

EXAMPLES:

A MAN IS ALREADY MARRIED AND A WOMAN IS A SINGLE,THEY

ARE NOT CAPACITATED TO MARRY EACH OTHER BECAUSE THE MAN HAS
OBLIGATION TO HIS FAMILY.THEY BUY HOUSE AND LOT USING THE MONEY OF
THE Man and the woman will en charge the things needs in the house were they plan to live
by using her own money.

OPINION:

THE PRESUMPTIONS OF THIS CASE THERES NO CONJUGAL

PROPERTY BETWEEN THE TWO,BECAUSE THE GIRL IS (KABIT LANG) .IF THE
WIFE KNOWS THAT HER HUSBAND both house and lot for there (kabit), the wife of the
man has the right to get that property, but they have no right to get those things inside the
house, because thats property of the woman.
 (DD) THAT IF THE MARRIAGE IS TERMINATED AND
THE MOTHER CONTRACTED ANOTHER MARRIAGE WITHIN THREE HUNDRED
DAYS AFTER SUCH TERMINATION OF THE FORMER MARRIAGE , THESE RULES
SHLL GOVERN IN THE ABSENCE OF PROOF TO THE CONTRARY :

EXAMPLE:
MR. TAN
GO TO PALAWAN,HE RIDE AN AIRPLANE FOR THERE BUSINESS TRIP ,SUDENLY
THE AIRPLANE OF MR. TAN WAS crush. AFTER THAT MR. TAN MISSING, ON THAT
DAY THE INVESTIGATOR TALK TO MRS. TAN THAT HER HUSBAND WAS
ALREADY DEAD, BUT MRS. TAN NOT ACCEPT THAT INVESTIGATION BECAUSE
HE WANT TO SAW THE BODY OF HER HUSBAND.WHEN 10 MONTHS LATER MRS.
TAN CONTRACTED TO MARRIAGE TO HER (COMPADRE).

OPINION:

MY OPINION OF THIS CASE THAT MRS. TAN CAN MARRIAGE TO HER

COMPADRE BECAUSE THE MARRIAGE OF HER HUSBAND WAS TERMINATED,
BECAUSE THE DEATH OF SPOUSE. EVEN OTHER PEOPLE CAN MARRIAGE
TWICE,IF IT IS ANULL EACH OTHER.
(1)
A CHID BORN BEFORE ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS AFTER THE
SOLEMNIZATION OF THE SUBSEQUENT MARRIAGE IS CONSIDERED TO HA VE
BEEN CONCIEVED DURING SUCH MARRIAGE , EVEN THOUGH IT BE BORN
WITHIN THREE HUNDRED DAYS AFTER THE TERMINATION OF THE FORMER
MARRIAGE.

EXAMPLE:

MR. TAN WAS already DEAD , when the one hundred eighty days after that
there husband was dead his wife born a baby boy. But they are already married to her
compadre.

OPINION:
It will presumed that the child belong to the
prio marriage.
(2) A CHILD
BORN AFTER ONE HUNDRED DAYS FOLLOWING THE CELEBRATION OF THE
SUBSEQUENT MARRIAGE IS CONSIDERED TO HAVE BEEN CONCEIVED DURING
SUCH MARRIAGE , EVEN THOUGH IT BE BORN WITHIN THE THREE DAYSAFTER
THE TERMINATION OF THE FORMER MARRIAGE.

OPINION:

It will presumed that the baby boy belong to the present marriage, or legitimate
child of the present marriage.