CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

IMPOSSIBLE CRIME

In qualified theft, the personal property subject of theft must have some value, as the
intention of the accused is to gain from the thing stolen. At the time JJ took possession of the
check, he had already performed all acts to consummate the crime of qualified theft, had it not been
impossible of accomplishment. Were it not for the fact that the check bounced, he would have
received the face value thereof. It was only due to the extraneous circumstance of the check being
unfunded, a fact unknown to JJ at the time, that prevented the crime from being produced. What
was committed in the case was an impossible crime and not qualified theft (Jacinto vs. People, G.R.
No. 162540, July 13, 2009).

PROXIMATE CAUSE DOCTRINE

A person who commits a felony is liable for the direct, natural and logical consequences of his
wrongful act even where the resulting crime is more serious than that intended. Hence, an accused
who originally intended to conceal and to bury what he thought was the lifeless body of the
victim can be held liable as a principal, not simply as an accessory, where it is proven that
the said victim was actually alive but subsequently died as a direct result of such
concealment and burial. Romeo threw the body of Kevin as what he was ordered to do so but
unknown to him, Kevin was still alive. The medical examination showed that the cause of death of
Kevin was drowning. Thus, Romeo is liable as principal (People vs Ortega, G.R. No. 116736, July 24,
1997).

MOTIVE IS MATERIAL IN THE FOLLOWING CASES

1. The acts bring about variant crimes;

2. There is doubt whether the accused committed the crime, or the identity of the accused is
doubtful;
3. The evidence on the commission of the crime is purely circumstantial;
4. There is a need to determine whether direct assault is present in offenses against person in
authority committed when he is not in the performance of his official duties;
5. In ascertaining the truth between two antagonistic theories or versions of the killing; and
6. Where there are no eyewitnesses to the crime and where suspicion is likely to fall upon a
number of persons.

CONSPIRACY

It is not required for conspiracy to exist that there be an agreement for an appreciable period prior
to the occurrence. It is sufficient that at the time of the commission of the offense, the accused
had the same purpose and were united in its execution. Direct proof of such agreement is not
necessary. It may be deduced from the mode and manner in which the offense was perpetrated, or
inferred from the acts of the accused which point to a joint purpose and design, concerted action
and community of interest. (People v. Bustamante G.R. No. 172357. DEL CASTILLO, J.)

Mere association with the principals by direct participation, without more, does not suffice.
Relationship, association and companionship do not prove conspiracy. It must be shown that
the person concerned has performed an overt act in pursuance or furtherance of the complicity. In
fact, mere knowledge, acquiescence or approval of the act, without the cooperation or approval to
cooperate, is not sufficient to prove conspiracy. (Salapuddin vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 184681,
February 25, 2013, J. VELASCO JR.).

Principle of Conspiracy Also Applies in RA 9262

While the law provides that the offender be related or connected to the victim by marriage, former
marriage, or a sexual or dating relationship, it does not preclude the application of the principle of
conspiracy under the Revised Penal Code. This is because Section 47 of R.A. No. 9262 expressly

1
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

provides that the Revised Penal Code shall be supplementary to the said law. The parents-in-law of
Sharica Mari L. Go-Tan, the victim, were held to be the proper respondents in the case filed by the
latter upon the allegation that they and their son (Go-Tan's husband) had community of design and
purpose in tormenting her by giving her insufficient financial support; harassing and pressuring her to
be ejected from the family home; and in repeatedly abusing her verbally, emotionally, mentally and
physically (Go-Tan v. Tan, G.R. No. 168852, September 30, 2008).

ATTEMPTED MURDER

In frustrated murder, there must be evidence showing that the wound would have been fatal
were it not for timely medical intervention. If the evidence fails to convince the court that the
wound sustained would have caused the victim’s death without timely medical attention, the
accused should be convicted only of attempted murder and not frustrated murder (People vs.
Labiaga, G.R. No 202867, July 15, 2013).

Mitigating Circumstances

If the mitigating circumstances of sufficient provocation, immediate vindication of a grave

offense, and sudden impulse of passion and obfuscation are present, ONLY ONE of these must
be appreciated. Because, all arose from the same facts.

In order that the mitigating circumstance of physical defect may be appreciated, it must be
necessary that defect is related to the offense committed.

The mitigating circumstance of plea of guilt must be on the original crime charged and not on the
basis of plea bargaining agreement.

What is Castle Doctrine?

Castle Doctrine (also known as a castle law or a defense of habitation law) is a legal doctrine that
designates a person's abode or any legally occupied place – e.g., a vehicle or home, as a place in
which that person has protections and immunities permitting one, in certain circumstances, to
use force (up to and including deadly force) to defend oneself against an intruder, free from legal
prosecution for the consequences of the force used."

CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS

The prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments is generally aimed at the form or character of
the punishment rather than its severity in respect of duration or amount, and applies to
punishments which public sentiment has regarded as cruel or obsolete, for instance, those inflicted
at the whipping post, or in the pillory, burning at the stake, breaking on the wheel, disemboweling,
and the like. Fine and imprisonment would not thus be within the prohibition. It takes more than
merely being harsh, excessive, out of proportion, or severe for a penalty to be obnoxious to the
Constitution. The fact that the punishment authorized by the statute is severe does not make
it cruel and unusual. To come under the ban, the punishment must be flagrantly and plainly
oppressive, wholly disproportionate to the nature of the offense as to shock the moral sense of the
community (Corpus vs. People, G.R. No. 180016, April 29, 2014).

SELF-DEFENSE IS INCONSISTENT WITH ACCIDENT

Self-defense is inconsistent with the exempting circumstance of accident, in which there is no intent
to kill. On the other hand, self-defense necessarily contemplates a premeditated intent to kill in
order to defend oneself from imminent danger (Pomoy v. People, G.R. No. 150647. September 29,
2004).

2
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

Self-defense necessarily implies a deliberate and positive overt act of the accused to prevent or
repel an unlawful aggression of another with the use of reasonable means. The accused has freedom
of action. He is aware of the consequences of his deliberate acts. The defense is based on necessity
which is the supreme and irresistible master of men of all human affairs, and of the law. (Toledo v.
People, G.R. No. 158057 September 24, 2004).

VOLUNTARY SURRENDER

The act of surrender must be spontaneous, accompanied by an acknowledgment of guilt, or an

intention to save the authorities the trouble and the expense that search and capture would require.
Going to the police station to clear his name does not show any intent of appellant to
surrender unconditionally to the authorities (People v. Viernes, G.R. No. 136733, December 13,
2001).

BUY-BUST OPERATION

A buy-bust operation is “a form of entrapment, in which the violator is caught in flagrante delicto and
the police officers conducting the operation are not only authorized but duty-bound to apprehend the
violator and to search him for anything that may have been part of or used in the commission of the
crime.” In this case, witness Buencamino testified that a certain Taba was the target of the buy-
bust operation and not the accused. Where there really was no buy-bust operation conducted, it
cannot be denied that the elements for illegal sale of prohibited drugs cannot be duly proved despite
the presumption of regularity in the performance of official duty and the seeming straightforward
testimony in court by the arresting police officers (People v. De la Cruz, G.R. No. 185717, June 8, 2011, J.
VELASCO JR.).

TREACHERY

In ambush, the crime is carried out to ensure that the victim is killed and at the same time, to
eliminate any risk from any possible defenses or retaliation from the victim—ambush
exemplifies the nature of treachery. (People v. Adriano, G.R. No. 205228, July 15, 2015).

PRESCRIPTION OF CRIMES VS. PRESCRIPTION OF PENALTY

Prescription of Crimes Prescription of Penalty

Prescribed Penalty Prescription Prescribed Penalty Prescription

Death, reclusión perpetua or 20 years Death and reclusión perpetua 20 years

reclusión temporal Other afflictive penalties 15 years
Other afflictive penalties 15 years Correctional penalty, with the 10 years
Correctional penalty, with the 10 years exception of those punishable
exception of those punishable by arresto mayor, which shall 5 years
by arresto mayor, which shall 5 years prescribe in five years.
prescribe in five years. Light penalties 1 year
Libel or other similar offenses 1 year
Oral defamation and slander by 6 months
deed
Light offenses 2 months

INTERRUPTION OF THE RUNNING OF THE PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD

The running of the prescriptive period shall be interrupted:

3
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

1. Crime punishable by the RPC – interrupted upon the filing of the case before the fiscal’s office.
2. Crime punishable by special law – interrupted upon the filing of the case before the fiscal’s office
even for purposes of preliminary investigation.
3. Violation of municipal ordinance – interrupted upon the filing of the case before the appropriate
court.

Effect if Prosecutor Delays in Filing an Information

The filing of the complaint with the Fiscal’s office suspends the running of the prescriptive period.
The Office of the Prosecutor miserably incurred some delay in filing the information but such
mistake or negligence should not unduly prejudice the interests of the State and the offended party.
As held in People v. Olarte, it is unjust to deprive the injured party of the right to obtain
vindication on account of delays that are not under his control. All that the victim of the offense
may do on his part to initiate the prosecution is to file the requisite complaint (People v. Bautista,
G.R. No. 168641, April 27, 2007).

Prescriptive period :
RA 3019 – 20 years, as amended by RA 10910
RA 7080 – 20 years.

GUIDELINES IN THE DETERMINATION OF THE RECKONING POINT

FOR THE PERIOD OF PRESCRIPTION OF VIOLATIONS OF
ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT

1. As a general rule, prescription begins to run from the date of the commission of the offense.
2. If the date of the commission of the violation is not known, it shall be counted from the date of
discovery thereof.
3. In determining whether it is the general rule or the exception that should apply in a particular
case, the availability or suppression of the information relative to the crime should first be
determined.

Since the commission of the offense is not known to the parties at the time, involving as it does the
grant of behest loans which was recognized as a violation that, by their nature, could be concealed
from the public eye by the simple expedient of suppressing their documentation, the prescription
shall run from the discovery thereof and the institution of judicial proceedings for its
investigation. The prescriptive period commenced not on January 6, 2003 (Filing Affidavit-
Complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman) but on January 4 1993, the date when the crimes
were discovered by the Ad-Hoc Committee. The Ombudsman was thus correct to rule that the crime
had already prescribed (PCGG vs. Carpio-Morales, G.R. No. 206357, November 12, 2014, J. VELASCO
JR.).

SPECIAL TIME ALLOWANCE FOR LOYALTY AS AMENDED

A deduction of 1/5 of the period of his sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who, having
evaded his preventive imprisonment or the service of his sentence on the occasion of disorder
resulting from a conflagration, earthquake, explosion, or similar catastrophe, or during a mutiny in
which he has not participated, gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following the
issuance of a proclamation announcing the passing away of the calamity or catastrophe (Sec. 4, R.A.
10592).

A deduction of 2/5 of the period of his sentence shall be granted in case said prisoner chose to stay
in the place of his confinement notwithstanding the existence of a calamity or catastrophe (Sec. 4,
R.A. 10592).

4
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIMES VIS-À-VIS COMPLEX CRIME

The component crimes in a special complex crime have no attempted or frustrated stages because
the intention of the offender/s is to 'commit the principal crime which is to rob but in the process
of committing the said crime, another crime is committed. "Homicide," in the special complex
crime of robbery with homicide, is understood in its generic sense and forms part of the
essential element of robbery, which is the use of violence or the use of force upon anything.
(People v Dillatan, Gr. No.212191)

In People v. Desierto, although the burst of shots was caused by one single act of pressing the trigger
of the Thompson sub-machine gun, in view of its special mechanism, the person firing it has only to
keep pressing the trigger with his finger and it would fire continually. Although it is true that
several successive shots were fired by the accused in a short space of time, yet the factor which
must be taken into consideration is that, to each death caused or physical injuries inflicted
upon the victims, corresponds a distinct and separate shot fired by the accused, who thus
made himself criminally liable for as many offenses as those resulting from every single act that
produced the same. Hence, it is not the act of pressing the trigger which should produce the
several felonies, but the number of bullets which actually produced them (People v. Tabaco,
270 SCRA 32, G.R. Nos. 100382-100385 March 19, 1997).

In People v. Nelmida, the Court explained the concept of a complex crime as defined in Article 4833
of the Revised Penal Code, thus:
Appellants and their co-accused opened fire and rained bullets on the vehicle boarded by Mayor
Tawan-tawan and his group. As a result, two security escorts died while five (5) of them were
wounded and injured. The victims sustained gunshot wounds in different parts of their bodies.
Therefrom, it cannot be gainsaid that more than one bullet had hit the victims. Moreover, more than
one gunman fired at the vehicle of the victims. Obviously, appellants and their co-accused
performed not only a single act but several individual and distinct acts in the commission of the
crime. Thus, Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code would not apply for it speaks only of a "single act."

Special Comples Crime Compound Crime Delito Continuado

It is the law which specifies for the The law merely states two or Offender is impelled by a single
crimes that should be combined. more grave or less grave felonies criminal impulse commits a series
or an offenseis necessary to of overt acts in about the same
commit the other. time and place violating one
provision of law.
The law provides for a single The penalty to be imposed will be
penalty. the most serious crime in its
maximum period.
A light felony committed in the A light felony committed would
commission of the crime is constitute a separate and distinct
absorbed. charge

Who is an accountable public officer?

An accountable public officer is one who has actual control of public funds or property by reason
of the duties of his office. The name or relative importance of the office or employment is not the
controlling factor. The nature of the duties of the public officer or employee, the fact that as part
of his duties he received public money for which he is bound to account and failed to account for it,
is the factor which determines whether or not malversation is committed by the accused public
officer or employee.

A mere clerk in the provincial or municipal government may be held guilty of malversation if he or
she is entrusted with public funds and misappropriates the same (Barriga v. Sandiganbayan, G.R.
Nos. 161784-86 April 26, 2005).

5
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

DIRECT BRIBERY

Mere request or demand of a gift, present, share, percentage or benefit is enough to constitute a
violation of Sec. 3(b) of RA 3019, acceptance of a promise or offer or receipt of a gift or present is
required in direct bribery. (Merencillo v. People, 521 SCRA 31, April 13, 2007)

INDIRECT BRIBERY

The essential ingredient of indirect bribery as defined in Article 211 of the Revised Penal Code is
that the public officer concerned must have accepted the gift material consideration. There must
be a clear intention on the part of the public officer to take the gift so offered and consider the same
as his own property from then on, such as putting away the gift for safekeeping or pocketing the
same. Mere physical receipt unaccompanied by any other sign, circumstance or act to show
such acceptance is not sufficient to lead the court to conclude that the crime of indirect
bribery has been committed. To hold otherwise will encourage unscrupulous individuals to frame
up public officers by simply putting within their physical custody some gift, money or other
property. (Tad-y vs. People, G.R. No. 148862, August 11, 2005

SYNDICATED ESTAFA

Under Section 1 of PD No. 1689, the elements of syndicated estafa are: (1) estafa or other
forms of swindling as defined in Artilce 315 and 316 of the Revised Penal Code is committed; (2)
the estafa or swindling is committed by a syndicate of five or more persons; and (3) defraudation
results in the misappropriation of moneys contributed by stockholders, or members of rural banks,
cooperatives, samahang nayon[s], or farmers associations or of funds solicited by
corporations/associations from the general public. (Galvez vs. CA, G.R. No. 187919, April 25, 2012)

To constitute syndicated estafa in this case,the funds fraudulently solicited by the

corporation must come from the general public. In the present case, no evidence was presented to
show that aside from Dy, the petitioners, through State Resources, also sought investments from
other people. Dy had no co-complainants alleging that they were also deceived to entrust their
money to State Resources. The general public element was not complied with. Thus, no syndicated
estafa allegedly took place, only simple estafa by means of deceit. (People v. Hao, G.R. No. 183345
September 17, 2014)

The essence of estafa under Article 315, par. 1(b) is the appropriation or conversion of money or
property received to the prejudice of the owner. The words "convert" and "misappropriate"
connote an act of using or disposing of another’s property as if it were one’s own, or of devoting it to
a purpose or use different from that agreed upon. To misappropriate for one’s own use includes not
only conversion to one’s personal advantage, but also every attempt to dispose of the property of
another without right.(Wilma Tabaniag v People of the Philippines, GR. No. 184500)

BP 22 vis-à-vis ESTAFA
BP 22 ESTAFA
Even though the check was issued in The check should be issued concurrently
payment of pre- existing obligation, and reciprocally in payment of the
liability is incurred. exchange consideration, not for a pre-
existing obligation
Damage or deceit is immaterial to Damage to the offended and deceit of
criminal liability offender are essential elements.
Crime against public interest Crime against property
Only the drawer is liable and if drawer Not only the drawer but even indorsee

6
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

was a juridical entity, the officer thereof
who signed the check shall be liable. The
indorser is not liable
Drawer is given five banking days from
notice of dishonor to make good the cash
value of the check to avoid criminal
liability
It is malum prohibitum
may incur liability if he was aware at the
time of the indorsement of the
insufficiency of funds
Drawer is given only three calendar days
after notice of dishonor to make good the
cash value to avoid liability
It is malum in se

PERJURY

Chua’s declaration under oath for naturalization that he is of good moral character and residing at
Sampaloc, Manila are false. This information is material to his petition for naturalization. He
committed perjury for this willful and deliberate assertion of falsehood which is contained in a
verified petition made for a legal purpose (Chua v. People, G.R. No. 142011, March 14, 2003).

MALVERSATION OF PUBLIC FUNDS OR PROPERTY

May a private individual be held liable for malversation of public funds?

Yes. A public officer who is not in charge of public funds or property by virtue of her official
position, or even a private individual, may be liable for malversation or illegal use of public funds or
property if such public officer or private individual conspires with an accountable public
officer to commit malversation or illegal use of public funds or property (Barriga v. Sandiganbayan,
G.R. Nos. 161784-86 April 26, 2005).

Demand is Not an Element of Malversation but A Requisite of Application of Presumption

While demand is not an element of the crime of malversation, it is a requisite for the application of
the presumption of malversation. The presumption being referred to under Article 217 of the RPC
as amended by R.A. 1060 “The failure of a public officer to have duty forthcoming any public funds or
property with which he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly authorized officer, shall be prima
facie evidence that he has put such missing funds or property to personal use”. Without this
presumption, the accused may still be proven guilty based on direct evidence of malversation.
There is no proof that Pescadera misappropriated the GSIS contributions for his personal use. The
prosecution merely relied on the presumption of malversation which was disproved because there
was no demand on him by the Provincial Auditor or by the Special Audit Team to account for the
GSIS contributions. Thus, he is acquitted (Estino v. People, G.R. Nos. 163957-58, April 7, 2009, J.
VELASCO Jr.).

DEATH UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES

Art. 247 only requires that the death caused be the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming
the accused after chancing upon his spouse in the basest act of infidelity. But the killing should
have been actually motivated by the same blind impulse, and must not have been influenced by
external factors. The killing must be the direct by-product of the accused's rage.(People vs. Abarca,
G.R. No. 74433 September 14, 1987)

By raising death under exceptional circumstance as his defense, Roger admits that he killed the
victim. Roger must prove that he actually surprised his wife and Florencio in flagrante delicto, and
that he killed the man during or immediately thereafter. However, all that Roger established was
Florencio’s promiscuity, which was inconsequential to the killing. Physical evidence shows that
Florencio lay dead near another person’s house– not Roger’s – house. When found, the body of
Florencio was fully clothed in a shirt and a pair of pants, all its buttons intact. Thus, his defense is
without merit (People v. Puedan, G.R. No. 139576, September 2, 2002).

7
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE

In robbery with homicide, the original criminal design of the malefactor is to commit robbery, with
homicide perpetrated on the occasion or by reason of the robbery. The intent to commit robbery
must precede the taking of human life. The homicide may take place before, during or after the
robbery. Absence of proof of an attempt to stop the killing of one of the victims, plus the finding of
conspiracy, make accused-appellants liable as principals for the crime of Robbery with Homicide
(People v. Diu, G.R. No. 201449, April 3, 2013).

ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS IN RELATION TO

VIOLATION OF ANTI-SEXUAL HARASSMENT ACT

Violation of Anti-Sexual Harassment Act can be committed even by means of words alone while in
the crime Acts of Lasciviousness, there is a need for an act of making physical contact with the
body of another person for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification other than, or without
intention of, sexual intercourse. The contact may be by the body of the accused such as the lips,
hands, foot or by means of any object or instrument. Therefore, a person charged with Acts of
Lasciviousness can still be punished under Anti-Sexual Harassment Act (Sec. 3(a) R.A. 7877 & Art.
336 RPC).

RAPE

If the intention is to rape the victim, accused cannot be convicted of the complex crime of forcible
abduction with rape. Forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape if the real objective
of the accused is to rape the victim (People v. Cayanan, G.R. No. 200080, September 18, 2013).

The Court convicted the accused therein for only one count of rape despite the three successful
penetrations because there is no indication in the records from which it can be inferred that the
accused decided to commit those separate and distinct acts of sexual assault other than his lustful
desire to change positions inside the room where the crime was committed. (People vs. Aaron,
G.R. NOS. 136300-02. September 24, 2002)

If there are 3 penetrations occurred one after the other at an interval of five (5) minutes wherein
the accused would rest after satiating his lust upon his victim and, after he has regained his
strength, he would again rape the victim Hence, it can be clearly inferred from the foregoing that
when the he decided to commit those separate and distinct acts of sexual assault upon the
victim, he was not motivated by a single impulse but rather by several criminal intent. Hence,
his conviction for three (3) counts of rape is indubitable. (Lucena vs. PeopleG.R. No. 190632,
February 26, 2014)

RAPE IN CONNECTION WITH SECTION 5(B), R.A. NO. 7610

Rape through sexual assault under paragraph 2 Art 266-A under the RPC is punishable by prision
mayor. However, if the victim is under 12 years of age, the offense that should be charged is rape
through sexual assault in relation to Sec. 5 (b) of R.A. No. 7610, wherein the imposable penalty
is reclusion temporal in its medium period. This is because having sexual intercourse with a child
under 12 years of age is child abuse, and is punished by a special law. It is a progression from the
RPC to provide greater protection for children (Ricalde v. People, G.R. No. 193660, January 21,
2015).

If the intention is to rape the victim, accused cannot be convicted of the complex crime of forcible
abduction with rape. Forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape if the real objective
of the accused is to rape the victim (People v. Cayanan, G.R. No. 200080, September 18, 2013).

8
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

Art. 294: REMEMBER THE SEQUENCE (when all are present, homicide absorbs all because it is first
in sequence)
1. Robbery with homicide
2. Robbery with Rape
3. Robbery with Mutilation
4. Robbery with Arson
5. Robbery with Unnecessary violence and intimidation
6. Simple robbery

Rape with Homicide - When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on
the occasion thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death. (266-B (3)

Robbery with Rape – The main intent was to commit the crime of robbery and in the commission
thereof, it was accompanied by rape.

QUALIFIED THEFT

The fact that accused-appellant as assistant cashier of Metrobank had custody of the aforesaid
checks and had access not only in the preparation but also in the release of Metrobank cashier’s
checks (and took the amount indicated therein) suffices to designate the crime as qualified theft as
he gravely abused the confidence reposed in him by the bank as assistant cashier (People v.
Salonga, (2001) as cited in PNB v. Tria, G.R. No. 193250 April 25, 2012, J. VELASCO JR.).

FENCING

The crime of fencing only applies to proceeds of theft or robbery. It does not apply to other crimes
of gain like estafa. The crime committed by a person who took a share of the proceeds of a crime
other than robbery or theft would make him only an accessory (Notes and Cases in Special Penal
Laws, Boado, 2015. p. 418).

BIGAMY

Lack of Knowledge of the Previous Marriage May be a Defense

In bigamy, both the first and second spouses may be the offended parties depending on the
circumstances, as when the second spouse married the accused without being aware of his previous
marriage. Only if the second spouse had knowledge of the previous undissolved marriage of
the accused could she be included in the information as a co-accused. Hence, it is a defense on
the part of the second spouse in a prosecution for Bigamy that he or she does not know that the
other spouse has a prior subsisting marriage (People vs. Nepomuceno, G.R. No. L-40624 June 27,
1975).

Void Second Marriage is not a Defense

Santiago’s affirmative defense in this criminal case of bigamy, is that her marriage with Santos was
void for having been secured without a marriage license. But as elucidated earlier, they themselves
perpetrated a false Certificate of Marriage by misrepresenting that they were exempted from the
license requirement based on their fabricated claim that they had already cohabited as husband and
wife for at least five years prior their marriage. Santiago married Santos while knowing fully well
that they had not yet complied with the five-year cohabitation requirement under the Family Code.
Consequently, it will be the height of absurdity for this Court to allow Santiago to use her illegal act
to escape criminal conviction for bigamy (Santiago v. People, G.R. No. 200233, July 15, 2015).

NOTE: Do not confuse this ruling with the exception held in Morigo v. People, G.R. No. 145226,
February 6, 2004, where the SC considered as a valid defense the declaration of nullity of the first

9
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

marriage on the ground of lack of marriage ceremony previous or subsequent to the celebration of
the second marriage, as a valid defense. It was held that the mere act of signing a marriage contract
bears no semblance to a valid marriage and thus, needs no judicial declaration of nullity. Hence,
bigamy is not committed. IN CONTRAST with Santiago v. People, the accused raised the defense that
the second marriage was void for having been celebrated without a valid marriage license. The SC
did not consider this as a valid defense because the accused are estopped from raising lack of
marriage license; they themselves misrepresented that they were exempted from the license
requirement based on their fabricated claim that they had already cohabited as husband and wife
for at least five years prior their marriage.

PREMATURE MARRIAGE DECRIMINALIZED

R.A. 10655 (March 13, 2015) decriminalized the crime of premature marriage. Article 1 of the said law
provides that “without prejudice to the provisions of the Family Code on paternity and filiation, Article
351 of Act No. 3815, otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code, punishing the crime of premature
marriage committed by a woman, is hereby repealed”.

LIBEL

For a libel charge to prosper, the words imputed must be defamatory. Malice is necessarily
rendered immaterial. To determine whether a statement is defamatory, the words used are to be
construed in their entirety and should be taken in their plain, natural and ordinary meaning as
they would naturally be understood by persons reading them, unless it appears that they were used
and understood in another sense. A charge is sufficient if the words are calculated to induce the
hearers to suppose and understand that the person or persons against whom they were uttered
were guilty of certain offenses or are sufficient to impeach the honesty, virtue or reputation or to
hold the person or persons up to public ridicule. Here, the phrase "CADIZ FOREVER, BADING AND
SAGAY NEVER" is not defamatory because it does not tend to induce suspicion on Salvador’s
character, integrity and reputation as mayor of Cadiz City. (Lopez v. People, G.R. No. 172203, 14
February 2011).

LIBEL- PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION

Before a statement would come within the ambit of a privileged communication, it must be
established that:

a. The person who made the communication had a legal, moral or social duty to make the
communication, or at least, had an interest to protect, which interest may either be his own
or of the one to whom it is made;
b. the communication is addressed to an officer or a board, or superior, having some interest or
duty in the matter, and who has the power to furnish the protection sought; and
c. The statements in the communication are made in good faith and without malice

The memorandum is not simply addressed to an officer, a board or a superior, rather, the
communication was addressed to all the staff of the agency who obviously do not have the power to
furnish the protection sought. The irresponsible act of furnishing the staff a copy of the
memorandum is enough circumstance which militates against the Lagaya’s pretension of good
faith and performance of a moral and social duty (Lagaya v. People, G.R. No. 176251, July 25,
2012).

10
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

LIBEL vis-à-vis ORAL DEFAMATION vis-à-vis SLANDER BY DEED

Libel Oral Defamation Slander By Deed

Is a public and malicious Any act, omission, condition It is a crime against honor
imputation even if true of a or circumstances against a which is committed by
crime, vice or defect, real or person done orally in public performing any act which
imaginary or any act or tending to cause dishonor, casts dishonor, discredit or
omission, condition, status, discredit, contempt or contempt to another
or circumstance tending to ridicule. person.
cause dishonor, discredit, or
contempt of a natural or a
juridical person, or blacken
the memory of one who is
dead.

ANTI-HAZING LAW

The crucial ingredient distinguishing hazing from crimes against persons is the infliction by a
person of physical or psychological suffering on another, with the latter’s consent, and in
furtherance of his admission or entry into an organization (People v. Bayabos, G.R. Nos. 171222 &
174786, February 18, 2015).

The failure by school authorities to take any action to prevent the offenses as provided by the
law exposes them to criminal liability as accomplices in the criminal acts. Thus, the institution and
its officers cannot stand idly by in the face of patently criminal acts committed within their sphere
of responsibility. They bear the commensurate duty to ensure that the crimes covered by the Anti-
Hazing Law are not committed (People v. Bayabos, G.R. Nos. 171222 & 174786, February 18, 2015).

Death penalty vis-à-vis Minority

For purposes of determining the proper penalty because of the privileged mitigating circumstance
of minority, the penalty of death is still the penalty to be reckoned with. The penalty next lower
in degree to death prescribed for qualified rape is reclusion perpetua because the latter immediately
follows the former in the respective graduated scale prescribed in Article 71 of the RPC. Hence,
reclusion perpetua is the imposable penalty for qualified rape committed by a minor. Thus, the
penalty for attempted qualified rape is reclusion temporal the penalty next lower in two degrees
than death penalty. (People vs. Bon, G.R. No. 166401, October 30, 2006.)

PROBATION

Effects of Probation

Probation shall suspend the execution of principal penalty of imprisonment, and accessory penalty
of disqualification (Villareal vs. People, G.R. No. 151258, December 01, 2014) but not the
implementation of the civil aspect of the judgment (Budlong, vs. Palisok, GR No. 60151, June 24,
1983).

Non-Probationable Penalty

When a judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty is appealed or reviewed, and

such judgment is modified through the imposition of a probationable penalty, the defendant shall
be allowed to apply for probation based on the modified decision before such decision becomes
final. The application for probation based on the modified decision shall be filed in the trial court

11
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

where the judgment of conviction imposing a non-probationable penalty was rendered, or in the
trial court where such case has since been re-raffled (Sec. 4, PD 968, as amended by RA 10707).

Indeterminate Sentence Law – Disqualified offenders

NOTE: Since those disqualified are habitual delinquents, rescidivists are entitiled to avail the ISL.
(People vs. Venus, G.R. No. 45141, September 15, 1936).

ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN ACT

Battered Woman Syndrome

Refers to a scientifically defined pattern of psychological and behavioral symptoms found in women
living in battering relationships as a result of cumulative abuse (Sec. 3(c), RA 9262).

NOTE: In order to be classified as a battered woman, the couple must go through the battering cycle
at least twice. (People v. Genosa, G.R. No. 135981, January 15, 2004).

3 Phases of Cycle of Violence

1. Tension-Building Phase - minor battering occurs - it could be verbal or slight physical abuse or
another form of hostile behavior.
2. Acute battering incident - characterized by brutality, destructiveness and, sometimes, death.
The battered woman deems this incident as unpredictable, yet also inevitable.
3. Tranquil, loving or (at least nonviolent) phase - the couple experience profound relief. On one
hand, the batterer may show a tender and nurturing behavior towards his partner. On the other
hand, the battered woman tries to convince herself that the battery will never happen again
(People v. Genosa, G.R. No. 135981 January 15, 2004).

ARSON

ATTEMPTED ARSON

A person, intending to burn a wooden structure, collects some rags, soaks them in gasoline and
places them beside the wooden wall of the building. When he is about to light a match to set fire to
the rags, he is discovered by another who chases him away. The crime committed is attempted
arson, because the offender commences the commission of the crime directly by overt acts (placing
the rags soaked in gasoline beside the wooden wall of the building and lighting a match) but he dies
not perform all the acts of execution (the setting of fire to the rags) due to timely intervention of
another who chases away the offender (Reyes, 2012).

The crime of arson was consummated, notwithstanding the fact that the fire was afterwards
extinguished, for, once the fire has been started, the consummation of the crime of arson does not
depend upon the extent of the damage cause (People vs. Hernandez, G.R. No. L-31770 December 5,
1929).

ARSON vis-à-vis MURDER vis-à-vis MURDER/HOMICIDE AND ARSON

Arson Murder Murder/Homicide and

If the main objective is the
burning of the building or
edifice, but death results by
reason or on the occasion of
arson.
If the main objective is to kill
a particular person who may
be in a building or edifice,
when fire is resorted to as
the means to accomplish
Arson
If the main objective is to kill
a particular person, but fire
is resorted to as a means to
cover up the killing, then
there are two separate and

12
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

such goal. distinct crimes committed.

NOTE: There is no complex crime of arson with multiple homicide (People v. Malngan, G.R. No.
170470, September 26, 2006).

BP 22

Generally, only the full payment of the value of the dishonored check during the five-day
grace period would exculpate the accused from criminal liability under BP 22. But, the Court
then considers such payment of the dishonored checks to have obliterated the criminal
liability of the accused. The Court acknowledges the existence of extraordinary cases where, even
if all the elements of the crime or offense are present, the conviction of the accused would prove to
be abhorrent to society's sense of justice. The fact that the issuer of the check had already paid the
value of the dishonored check after having received the subpoena from the Office of the Prosecutor
should have forestalled the filing of the Information in court. The spirit of the law which, for BP 22
is the protection of the credibility and stability of the banking system, would not be served by
penalizing people who have evidently made amends for their mistakes and made restitution for
damages even before charges have been filed against them. In effect, the payment of the checks
before the filing of the information has already attained the purpose of the law (Lim vs. People, G.R.
No. 190834, November 26, 2014).

COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT (RA 9165)

ILLEGAL POSSESSION vis-à-vis ILLEGAL USE OF DANGEROUS DRUGS

Section 11 or Possession of Dangerous Section 15 or Use of Dangerous Drugs

Drugs
It is the proper charge if only residue is It is the proper charge if another separate
found in the possession of the accused and quantity of dangerous drugs, other than
the accused is found positive for use in the mere residue, is found in the possession of
confirmatory test. the accused.
Source: Dela Cruz vs. People, G.R. No. 200748, July 23, 2014.

Simultaneous possession of shabu and marijuana

Under R.A. 9165, the distinction between regulated and prohibited drugs has been removed and
both are now classified as dangerous drugs. Thus, an accused may only be convicted of a single
offense of possession of dangerous drugs if he or she was caught in possession of different kinds
of dangerous drugs in a single occasion. This interpretation is more in keeping with the intention of
the legislators as well as more favorable to the accused (David vs. People, G.R. No. 181861 October
17, 2011).

ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT vis-à-vis PLUNDER ACT

Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Plunder Act

Act
As to covered No limitation. Exceeding P5O Million,
amounts provided that there are at least
two series or combinations.
As to penalties imprisonment for not less than one life imprisonment with
year nor more than ten years, perpetual absolute
perpetual disqualification from disqualification from holding
public office, and confiscation or any public office (Sec. 2, RA

13
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

forfeiture in favor of the 7080)

Government of any prohibited
interest and unexplained wealth
manifestly out of proportion to his
salary and other lawful income (Sec.
9, RA 3019)
As to Any public officer against whom any
suspension and criminal prosecution under a valid
loss of benefits information under this Act or under
the provisions of the Revised Penal
Code on bribery is pending in court,
shall be suspended from office.
Should he be convicted by final
judgment, he shall lose all
retirement or gratuity benefits
under any law (Sec. 13, RA 3090).
As to 20 years (Sec. 11, RA 3090 as
prescription amended by 10910)
period
Any public officer against whom
any criminal prosecution under
a valid information under this
Act in whatever stage of
execution and mode of
participation, is pending in
court, shall be suspended from
office. Should he be convicted
by final judgment, he shall lose
all retirement or gratuity
benefits under any law (Sec. 5,
RA 7080).
20 years (Sec. 6, RA 7080)

ILL-GOTTEN WEALTH vis-à-vis UNEXPLAINED WEALTH

Ill-Gotten Wealth Unexplained Wealth

As to source Section 1(d) of RA 7080 or Plunder Section 8 of RA 3019 or the
Law Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices
Act
As to definition Ill-gotten wealth means any asset, An amount of property and/or
property, business enterprise or money manifestly out of
material possession of any person, proportion to the salary and to
acquired directly or indirectly the other lawful income of the
through dummies, nominees, agents, public officer or employee.
subordinates and/or business
associates through any combination
or series of unlawful schemes (i.e.
Through misappropriation of public
funds, and etc.)
As to who has The prosecution has the burden ofThe accused has the burden
the burden of proof that the property is acquired
proof, because the law creates a
proof through the means stated in the presumption against the public
definition (People vs. Estrada, G.R.
officer or employee who
Nos. 164368-69, April 2, 2009) acquires property grossly
disproportionate to his income
(Republic vs. IAC, G.R. No. 74225,
April 17, 1989)
LIBEL vis-à-vis ORAL DEFAMATION vis-à-vis SLANDER BY DEED

Libel Oral Defamation Slander by Deed

Any act, omission, It is a crime against

Is a public and malicious condition or honor which is

imputation even if true circumstances against committed by

of a crime, a person performing any act

14
 CRIMINAL LAW UST LAST MINUTE TIPS 2018

vice or defect, real or done orally in public which casts dishonor,

imaginary or tending to discredit or

any act or omission, cause dishonor, contempt to another

condition, discredit, person.

status, or circumstance
tending to contempt or ridicule.

cause dishonor,
discredit, or

contempt of a natural or
a juridical

person, or blacken the

memory of

one who is dead.

COMPREHENSIVE LAW ON FIREARMS AND AMMUNITION

USE OF LOOSE FIREARM IN THE COMMISSION OF A CRIME (SEC. 29)

AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE ABSORBED DISTINCT AND SEPARATE

OFFENSE
If inherent in the commission of a If in furtherance of, or If crime is committed without
crime incident to, or in using the loose firearm
connection with the crime
of rebellion of
insurrection, or attempted
coup d’ etat

Imitation firearm refers to a replica of a firearm, or other device that is so substantially similar in
coloration and overall appearance to an existing firearm as to lead a reasonable person to believe
that such imitation firearm is a real firearm (Sec. 3 (q), RA 10591).

15