CRIMINAL LAW1- 1D 1 Ann Margaret Lorenzo CRIMINAL LAW 1 GENERAL PRINCIPLES Criminal Law?

note that the usual title of the case involves the People of the Philippines : means that there is wrong that is public as opposed one that is private Regulating socially harmful behavior. DEFINITION: Criminal law is that branch of public substantive law which defines crimes, treats of their nature and provides for their punishment. A. Nature of Criminal Law Defines the extent of the power of the State to regulate socially harmful behavior and at the same time express the limit of this power Assumes that one acts out of free will (without this assumption, how can we morally hold wrongdoers accountable?) People v Genosa The woman killed her husband. There is, however, substantial proof of spousal abuse, although it did not immediately precede the crime. The defense raises the theory of Battered Wife Syndrome. If basis of criminal law assumes free will, how can we hold Marivic Genosa guilty (say she is guilty beyond reasonable doubt) of murdering her husband, if free will could have been impaired if the defense is correct in invoking such psychological theory [remember the theory wherein the victim of abuse may have a notion of her life being threatened and she believes that the abusive spouse is omniscient and omnipresent] which will then lead her to a reasonable invocation of self-defense? SC: A person is criminally liable for a felony committed by him. Under the classical theory on which our penal code is mainly based, the basis for criminal liability is human free will. Man is essentially a moral creature with an absolute free will to choose between good and evil. When he commits a felony the act is presumed to have been done voluntarily, i.e. with freedom, intelligence and intent. Man, therefore, should be adjudged or held accountable for wrongful acts so long as free will appears unimpaired. (quoting Justice Puno in People v Estrada) Hence, it is important to determine whether the accused acted freely, intelligently, and voluntarily when she killed her husband. Such determination by experts should form part of her defense, whether it supports her novel defense of Battered Wife Syndrome or not. B. Purpose of Criminal Law To inform the people what is allowed and what is not (dos and donts) To prescribe punishment ~ retribution and prevention [this is the regulation aspect: because just coming out with a list of dos and donts will not regulate behavior. So there is threat of pain in general/ unfavorable circumstances] 2 Schools of Thought on Punishment (See Jimenez Bar 2010 Criminal Law Bar Reviewer for other 2 theories) *** note also that what was discussed in class was slightly different from what the Reviewer said. There, what we defined as classical, the term used is utilitarian. For comparative purposes, see Reviewer.)

CRIMINAL LAW1- 1D 2 Ann Margaret Lorenzo 1. Classical Theory- penalties for retribution should be aimed at actual and potential wrongdoers - Man will try to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. So the threatened pain should be greater than the idea of pleasure or gain to be had in doing the crime so people will be discouraged. 2. Positivist Theory- the basis for criminal liability is the sum total of social and economic phenomena to which the offense is expressed. [important factor in determining the penalty: a. relationship of the accused to his/her family and b. the relationship of the accused to society and state. *whether he/she is the provider, he/she is a productive member of society, etc.] - Takes into consideration different factors in commission of crime in determining punishments. *** RPC is largely based on classical theories but present form reflect positivist influence. (i.e. Indeterminate Sentence Law, parole, crediting good behavior) State Authority to Punish Crimes Article 2 Section 5 of 1987 Constitution (Declaration of Principles and State Policies)
Section 5. The maintenance of peace and order, the protection of life, liberty, and property, and promotion of the general welfare are essential for the enjoyment by all the people of the blessings of democracy.

C. Characteristics of Criminal Law STATUTORY- the crime must be described and defined. Ex. David v Arroyo --- General Orders No. 5- penalizes acts of terrorism but there is no statutory definition (declared unconstitutional)
Art. 3. Definitions. Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies (delitos). Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo) but also by means of fault (culpa). There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and there is fault when the wrongful ac t results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skill. Art. 5. Duty of the court in connection with acts which should be repressed but which are not covered by the law, and in case s of excessive penalties. Whenever a court has knowledge of any act which it may deem proper to repress and which is not punishable by law, it shall render the proper decision, and shall report to the Chief Executive, through the Department of Justice, the reasons which induce the court to believe that sai d act should be made the subject of legislation.

GENERAL- Principle of Generality; applicable not only to citizens but also to aliens in the Philippines  New Civil Code, Article 14
Art. 14. Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the principles of public international law and to treaty stipulations .

TERRITORIAL- Principle of Territoriality; French Rule vs English Rule

Art. 2. Application of its provisi ons. Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but also outside of i ts jurisdiction, against those who: 1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands; 3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding number; 4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the exercise of th eir functions; or 5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations , defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.

French Rule

CRIMINAL LAW1- 1D 3 Ann Margaret Lorenzo  Merchant vessels in foreign waters- crimes are not triable in that country, unless their commission affects peace and security of that countrys territory English Rule  Crimes are triable in the country to which the foreign waters belong, unless they merely affect things in within the vessel or it is just an internal matter. *** The difference is the burden of proof of proving jurisdiction. In the French Rule, the foreign state has to prove jurisdiction, while in the English Rule, jurisdiction is assumed. People v Tulin How do you deal with Cheong San Heong (Singaporean)? ~ Remember that the person who profits from the crime is also an accessory (he bought the oil) ~ his defense is that his part of the crime was not committed while in Philippine territory *** Exceptions to principle of territoriality: we will extend Philippine criminal law jurisdiction if crime is a. against law of nations and b. against national security. Piracy is against the law of nations (See Article 3 above.) so Supreme Court can have jurisdiction. SC: There are two laws involved. PD 532 and RA 7659. Sir: There is inconsistency: Applied extraterritoriality but punished under Philippine domestic laws. PROSPECTIVE- laws in general are prospective in nature because criminal law intends to regulate future behavior and retroactivity does not serve the purp ose of regulating behavior when the acts sought to be punished were already committed. Acts or omissions will only be subject to a penal law if they are committed after a penal law has taken effect. Exception to the Rule:  Penal laws favorable to the accused are given retroactive effect
Art. 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws. Penal Laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as they favor the persons guilty of a felony, who is not a habitual criminal, as this term is defined in Rule 5 of Article 62 of this Code, although at the time of the publication of such laws a final sentence has been pronounced and the convict is serving the same.

~ If judgment is final and hes still in prison- apply retroactivity for the purpose of commuting sentence, etc ~ If judgment is pending- apply retroactivity ~ If judgment is final but he already served sentence and paid fine- do not apply anymore Exception to the exception to the rule : 1. if the law specifically says it shall not be applied retrospectively 2. if criminal was a habitual criminal as defined by Article 62 of RPC.
Last paragraph of Article 62: For the purpose of this article, a person shall be deemed to be a habitual delinquent, if within a period of ten years from the date of his release or l ast conviction of the crimes of serious or less serious physical injuries, robo, hurto, estafa or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener.

CRIMINAL LAW1- 1D 4 Ann Margaret Lorenzo *** These 4 Characteristics of criminal law are not unique to it. However, the next one sets criminal law apart. MORALLY CONDEMNABLE- penalty carries with it moral condemnation Ex. In a civil award for damages- it does not carry with it a moral condemnation of society. The fine paid is in itself the punishment. In criminal law, the punishment is sentence and/or fine + moral condemnation. *** Remember that the subject of criminal law is that: it must be wrong. D. Sources of Criminal Law     Revised Penal Code Special laws Presidential issuances when they exercised legislative powers Penal provisions of other statutes, like the New Civil Code, etc.

Based on social contract theory- people gave their consent for State to govern [implement laws, enforceexercise powers within certain limits.] E. Constitutional Limits on Criminal Law: (-these limitations must be maintained otherwise they will cause greater harm.) 1. Right of due process if the State is going to deprive a person of life, liberty or property without this. Right to notice and hearing (1987 Constitution Art 3 Sec 1) Bill of Rights
No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, pr property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.

Procedural due process- notice, hearing Substantive due process- law itself must be fair White Light Corporation v City of Manila When one comes across cases with government vs peoples rights- you have to balance States power (could be police power) and rights of individuals Issue: Why does the law violate the constitution?  ARGUMENT- OVERBREADTH DOCTRINE (language of ordinance is so broad- you condemn the renting out a room for less than 12 hours. What about those with legitimate purposes in using these rooms for less than 12 hours?) 2. Right to speech, expression, or of the press 1987 Constitution Article 3 Section 4
Section 4. No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.

Barnes v Glen Theatre Law against total nude dancing protecting people against secondary effects of adult entertainment: sexual assaults, prostitution, criminal activity

CRIMINAL LAW1- 1D 5 Ann Margaret Lorenzo Petitioners grounds 1. Timed mechanism, all were consenting adults no one who will go there will be surprised or unaware of its contents 2. These requirements limit the dancers abilities to express themselves, and earn more in the process. 3. Violation of First Amendment SCs decision a. Does not limit expression of eroticism but the statute limits the secondary evils brought on by public nudity b. Balancing act of both arguments is to wear pasties and g-strings. *** Balance States police power with right to free expression. 3. Right to religion Article 3 Section 5 of 1987 Constitution
Section 5. No law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. The free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession and worship, without discrimination or preference, shall forever be allowed. No religio us test shall be required for the exercise of civil or political rights.

Estrada v Escritor (not a criminal case; an administrative case) Sanction is not criminal in nature but administrative dismissal from service ISSUE: In exercising her religious rights, did Escritor commit immoral conduct subject to administrative sanctions? ( Remember facts: She works in a court. She lived with man not her husband, she is single but husband has a wife he is separated from. But they have lived for a long time together and pledged faithfulness to each other in accordance with their religion, so in their religion they are not committing a moral wrong.) Ruling of the Court: There was diligent fulfillment of the requirements of her religion, not just invoking it to escape sanction. Therefore, valid invocation of religion. Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v Smith Issue: Can their invocation of religious reasons excuse their violation of the use of the prohibited drug (peyote)? And therefore enable them to collect unemployment benefits Ruling: 1. Religion cannot exempt them from sanction in this case. They were dismissed based on misconduct and religion cannot save them from this misconduct. They cant collect unemployment benefits. *** Why do we exempt religious behaviors violative of laws? State recognizes that it cannot supplant the importance of religion. *** Important here is the determination of the balance of the respect for religion and States police power. 4. NO Ex Post Facto Laws

CRIMINAL LAW1- 1D 6 Ann Margaret Lorenzo - law that retroactively makes criminal conduct what was previously not criminal when performed or increased punishment for crimes already committed. Article 3 Section 22 of 1987 Constitution
Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted .

US v Diaz-Conde Condes granted a loan to Oliveros and Lianco with specified interest rate. 4 months after contract, Usury Law was passed. Issue: Whether the Usury Law can be applied to the loan or not. Ruling: Law does not apply retroactively. It would criminalize what was not criminal conduct when executed. 5. No Bill of Attainder shall be passed. - by fulfilling a set criterion, possessing a characteristic, youre already guilty. No trial needed Article 3 Section 22 of 1987 Constitution
Section 22. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.

People v Ferrer Instead of defining a subversive act, the anti-subversive act said mere membership in NPA was already a subversive act, they need not do anything more. (NPA= Subversive) This law punishes those who continue active membership or will join after passage of the law. Issue: Anti-Subversion Act was alleged to be a bill of attainder. Ruling: Not a bill of attainder. Case remanded back to lower court. Trivia: Judge Ferrer resigned because of this. Sir agrees with him that it is a bill of attainder. 6. No Excessive Fines or cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment
Section 19. (1) Excessive fines shall not be imposed, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment inflicted. Neither shall death penalty be imposed, unless, for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, the Congress hereafter provides for it. Any death penalt y already imposed shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua. (2) The employment of physical, psychological, or degrading punishment against any prisoner or detainee or the use of substandard or inadequate penal facilities under subhuman conditions shall be dealt with by law.

People vs Dela Cruz Dela Cruz sold a can of milk 10 cents more than the ceiling price. He was sentenced for 5 years imprisonment and 5,000 pesos. Plus no retail for 5 years. He appealed saying its excessive punishment. Issue: Was the punishment unjust? Ruling: Yes. Especially considering the circumstances of the accused. Fortunately, we can still decrease penalty and still be within the bounds of the law. 2,000 fine and 6 months imprisonment.

CRIMINAL LAW1- 1D 7 Ann Margaret Lorenzo People vs Echegaray Death penalty has been challenged- cruel, inhuman and degrading Before the wording of the law forbade cruel and unusual penalty- now forbids cruel, inhuman, and degrading penalty. Issue: Excessive punishment? SC: It is the penalty prescribed by law. 7. Non-imprisonment for debt or non-payment of poll-tax Article 3 Section 20 of 1987 Constitution
Section 20. No person shall be imprisoned for debt or non-payment of a poll tax.

F. Construction/ Interpretation 1. Liberality in favor of the accused People v Sultan Sultan declared hold-up. He raped her after he took her home, then after a break her raped her again. Issue: Was the 2nd rape committed considered an aggravating circumstance under Art 14? Ruling: No. Article 294 already condemns a person to reclusion perpetua for robbery with rape. In this case, victim was raped twice. But since additional rapes, no matter how cruel, do not count as aggravating circumstances, the Court must construe the penal law in favor of the offender. This is how Court will treat it unless there is a law providing additional rapes or homicides be considered aggravating. 2. Whenever conflict between Spanish RPC text and English RPC text arises, Spanish prevails 3. Retroactive application if favorable to the accused People v Valdez He was charged with murder and illegal possession separately. Amendatory law said in such cases, illegal possession would only be an aggravating circumstance not a separate crime. Issue: Can the amendatory law be applied? Ruling: The unfavorable part of the law, in so far as it raises his penalty, cannot be applied (imprisonment to death) The favorable part which says if illegal firearm is used in murder, you wont be charged with separate crime of illegal possession, can be applied.

4. Prescribed but undeserved penalties --- judges should give the penalty prescribed by law. If he/she thinks it is not just, recommend Executive Clemency.

CRIMINAL LAW1- 1D 8 Ann Margaret Lorenzo People v Formigones Formigones killed his wife with a bolo without any apparent reason or provocation. He was convicted of parricide by lower court but his defense appealed saying prison guards have noted he seemed insane. SC: He is not imbecile, just dumb or feebleminded. Being such warrants a mitigating circumstance in his favor. But since reclusion perpetua or death is the penalty for parricide regardless of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance, the penalty is reclusion perpetua still. But in view of the mitigating circumstance, the Court brought case to the attention of Chief Executive to either commute his sentence or extend clemency as he may see fit. People v Veneracion A seven year-old was raped and killed. Punishment of six accused should have been death, according to RPC. Judge does not want to impose death penalty, imposed reclusion perpetua instead. (That time, death penalty was still imposed). Should he have imposed death penalty, and in not doing so did he gravely abuse his discretion? SC: YES. We are a government of laws, not of men. Hence, judges are bound to follow the rule of law and ought to to protect and enforce it without fear or favor, resist encroachment by government, political parties, or even the interference of their own personal beliefs. Since the applicable law in force at the time was R.A.7659 and Sec. 11 of that statute provided that the penalty imposable was not reclusion perpetua (as determined by the lower court) but death, it left no room for the exercise of discretion on the part of the trial judge. If the law is clear, it must be applied. As long as that penalty remains in the statute books, and as long as our criminal law provides for its imposition in certain cases, it is the duty of judicial officers to respect and apply the law regardless of their private opinions. Also, as per ROC, after determination of guilt, judges are mandated to impose the proper penalty and civil liability provided for by the law on the accused.