CRIMINAL LAW PRACTICE TEST 1 (30 Items; 4 Hours)

A, B and C are members of SFC Fraternity. While eating in a seaside restaurant, they were
attacked by X, Y and Z, members of a rival fraternity. A rumble ensued in which the
abovenamed members of the two fraternities assaulted each other in a confused and
tumultuous manner resulting in the death of A. As it cannot be ascertained who actually killed A,
the members of the two fraternities who took part in the rumble were charged for death caused
in a tumultuous affray. Will the charge prosper? Explain.

II

Bruno was charged with homicide for killing the 75-year old owner of his rooming house. The
prosecution proved that Bruno stabbed the owner causing his death; and that the killing
happened at 10 in the evening in the house where the victim and Bruno lived. Bruno, on the
other hand, successfully proved that he voluntarily surrendered to the authorities; that he
pleaded guilty to the crime charged; that it was the victim who first attacked and did so without
any provocation on his (Bruno's) part, but he prevailed because he managed to draw his knife
with which he stabbed the victim. The penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal.

Assuming a judgment of conviction and after considering the attendant circumstances, what
penalty should the judge impose? (7%)

III

While walking alone on her way home from a party, Mildred was seized at gun point by Felipe
and taken on board a tricycle to a house some distance away. Felipe was with Julio, Roldan,
and Lucio, who drove the tricycle.

At the house, Felipe, Julio, and Roldan succeeded in having sexual intercourse with Mildred
against her will and under the threat of Felipe's gun. Lucio was not around when the sexual
assaults took place as he left after bringing his colleagues and Mildred to their destination, but
he returned everyday to bring food and the news in town about Mildred's disappearance. For
five days, Felipe, Julio and Roldan kept Mildred in the house and took turns in sexually
assaulting her. On the 6th day, Mildred managed to escape; she proceeded immediately to the
nearest police station and narrated her ordeal.

What crime/s did Felipe, Julio, Roldan, and Lucio commit and what was their degree of
participation? (7%)

IV

Roman and Wendy are neighbors. On Valentine's Day, without prior notice, Roman visited
Wendy at her condo to invite her to dinner, but Wendy turned him down and abruptly left,
leaving her condo door unlocked. Roman attempted to follow, but appeared to have second
thoughts; he simply went back to Wendy's condo, let himself in, and waited for her return. On
Wendy's arrival later that evening, Roman grabbed her from behind and, with a knife in hand,
forced her to undress. Wendy had no choice but to comply. Roman then tied Wendy's hands to
her bed and sexually assaulted her five (5) times that night.

Roman was charged with, and was convicted of, five (5) counts of rape, but the judge did not
impose the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count. Instead, the judge sentenced Roman
to 40 years of imprisonment on the basis of the three-fold rule.

Was the judge correct? (7%)

V.

William is the son-in-law of Mercedes who owns several pieces of real property. In 1994,
William's wife, Anita, died. In 1996, William caused the preparation of a Special Power of
Attorney (SPA) giving him the authority to sell two (2) parcels of land registered in the name of
Mercedes. The signature of Mercedes in the SPA was forged and, through this forged SPA and
without the consent and knowledge of Mercedes, William succeeded in selling the two (2)
parcels for Php 2,000,000. He pocketed the proceeds of the sale.

Mercedes eventually discovered William's misdeeds and filed a criminal complaint. William was
subsequently charged with estafa through falsification of public document.

Was the criminal charge proper? (7%)

VI.

May a public officer charged under Section 3(b) of Republic Act No. 3019 ["directly or indirectly
requesting or receiving any gift, present, share, percentage or benefit, for himself or for any
other person, in connection with any contract or transaction between the government and any
other party, wherein the public officer in his official capacity has to intervene under the law"] also
be simultaneously or successively charged with direct bribery under Article 210 of the Revised
Penal Code? Explain. (4%)

VII.

A widower of ten years, septuagenarian Canuto felt that he had license to engage in voyeurism.
If not peeping into his neighbors’ rooms through his powerful single-cylinder telescope, he would
trail young, shapely damsels along the hallways of shopping malls. While going up the
escalator, he stayed a step behind a mini-skirted one, and in a moment of excitement, put his
hand on her left hip and massaged it. The damsel screamed and hollered for help. Canuto was
apprehended and brought up on inquest. What charge/s, if any, may he be held responsible for?
Explain. (5%)

VIII.

A asked financial support from her showbiz friend B who accommodated her by issuing in her
favor a postdated check in the sum of P90,000.00. Both of them knew that the check would not
be honored because B’s account had just been closed. The two then approached trader C
whom they asked to change the check with cash, even agreeing that the exchange be
discounted at P85,000.00 with the assurance that the check shall be funded upon maturity.
Upon C’s presentment of the check for payment on due date, it was dishonored because the
account had already been closed.

What action/s may C commence against A and B to hold them to account for the loss of her
P85,000.00? Explain. (5%)

IX

May a public officer charged under Section 3(b) of Republic Act No. 3019 ["directly or indirectly
requesting or receiving any gift, present, share, percentage or benefit, for himself or for any
other person, in connection with any contract or transaction between the government and any
other party, wherein the public officer in his official capacity has to intervene under the law"] also
be simultaneously or successively charged with direct bribery under Article 210 of the Revised
Penal Code? Explain. (4%)

X.

Proserfina, an assistant public high school principal, acted to facilitate the release of salary
differentials and election duty per diem of classroom teachers with the agreement that they
would reimburse her for her expenses.

Did Proserfina commit a crime? Explain. (5%)

XI

1. n 1982, the Philippine National Bank (PNB), then a government banking institution, hired
Henry dela Renta, a CPA, as Regional Bank Auditor. In 1992, he resigned and was
employed by the Philippine Deposit Insurance Corporation (PDIC), another government-
owned and controlled corporation. In 1995, after the PNB management unearthed many
irregularities and violations of the bank's rules and regulations, dela Renta was found to
have manipulated certain accounts involving trust funds and time deposits of depositors.
After investigation, he was charged with malversation of public funds before the
Sandiganbayan. He filed a motion to dismiss contending he was no longer an employee
of the PNB but of the PDIC.

Is dela Renta's contention tenable? 2.5%

2. After his arraignment, the prosecution filed a motion for his suspension pendente lite, to
which he filed an opposition claiming that he can no longer be suspended as he is no
longer an employee of the PNB but that of the PDIC.

Explain whether he mayor may not be suspended. 2.5%

XII
1. While the 5.5. Nagoya Maru was negotiating the sea route from Hongkong towards
Manila, and while still 300 miles from Aparri, Cagayan, its engines malfunctioned. The
Captain ordered the ship to stop for emergency repairs lasting for almost 15 hours. Due
to exhaustion, the officers and crew fell asleep. While the ship was anchored, a
motorboat manned by renegade Ybanags from Claveria, Cagayan, passed by and took
advantage of the situation. They cut the ship's engines and took away several heavy
crates of electrical equipment and loaded them in their motorboat. Then they left
hurriedly towards Aparri. At daybreak, the crew found that a robbery took place. They
radioed the Aparri Port Authorities resulting in the apprehension of the culprits.

What crime was committed? Explain. 2.5%

2. Supposing that while the robbery was taking place, the culprits stabbed a member of the
crew while sleeping.

What crime was committed? Explain. 2.5%

XIII

Commissioner Marian Torres of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) wrote solicitation
letters addressed to the Filipino-Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry and to
certain CEOs of various multinational corporations requesting donations of gifts for her
office Christmas party. She used the Bureau's official stationery. The response was
prompt and overwhelming so much so that Commissioner Torres' office was
overcrowded with rice cookers, radio sets, freezers, electric stoves and toasters. Her
staff also received several envelopes containing cash money for the employees'
Christmas luncheon.

Has Commissioner Torres committed any impropriety or irregularity? What laws or

XIV

Jaime, Andy and Jimmy, laborers in the noodles factory of Luke Tan, agreed to kill him
due to his arrogance and miserliness. One afternoon, they seized him and loaded him in
a taxi driven by Mario. They told Mario they will only teach Luke a lesson in Christian
humility. Mario drove them to a fishpond in Navotas where Luke was entrusted to Emil
and Louie, the fishpond caretakers, asking them to hide Luke in their shack because he
was running from the NBI. The trio then left in Mario's car for Manila where they called
up Luke's family and threatened them to kill Luke unless they give a ransom within 24
hours. Unknown to them, because of a leak, the kidnapping was announced over the
radio and TV. Emil and Louie heard the broadcast and panicked, especially when the
announcer stated that there is a shoot-to-kill order for the kidnappers. Emil and Louie
took Luke to the seashore of Dagat-dagatan where they smashed his head with a shovel
and buried him in the sand. However, they were seen by a barangay kagawad who
arrested them and brought them to the police station. Upon interrogation, they confessed
and pointed to Jaime, Andy, Jimmy and Mario as those responsible for the kidnapping.
Later, the 4 were arrested and charged.
 What crime or crimes did the 6 suspects commit? 5%

XV.

Ana has been a bar girl/GRO at a beer house for more than 2 years. She fell in love with
Oniok, the bartender, who impregnated her. But Ana did not inform him about her
condition and, instead, went home to Cebu to conceal her shame. However, her parents
drove her away. So, she returned to Manila and stayed with Oniok in his boarding
house. Upon learning of her pregnancy, already in an advanced state, Oniok tried to
persuade her to undergo an abortion, but she refused. Because of their constant and
bitter quarrels, she suffered birth pangs and gave birth prematurely to a live baby girl
while Oniok was at his place of work. Upon coming home and learning what happened,
he prevailed upon Ana to conceal her dishonor. Hence, they placed the infant in a shoe
box and threw it into a nearby creek. However, an inquisitive neighbor saw them and
with the help of others, retrieved the infant who was already dead from drowning. The
incident was reported to the police who arrested Ana and Oniok. The 2 were charged
with parricide under Article 246 of the Revised Penal Code. After trial, they were
convicted of the crime charged.

Was the conviction correct? 5%

XVI.

In an event sponsored by the Liberal Party at Plaza Miranda in Quiapo, Manila, Guillen planted
a hand grenade near the stage and threw another one toward former President Noynoy Aquino
in an apparent assassination attempt born out of Guillen's spite for the former President over
the latter's perceived failure to fulfill his promises of “Daang Matuwid.” General Castaneda
managed to kick the grenade off the stage. However, its explosion caused the death of Simeon
Varela (Barrela). It also caused the injuries of Alfredo Eva, Jose Fabio, Pedro Carillo, and Emilio
Maglalang.

a. What crime/s are committed?

XVII
On 13 March 2007, at around 8:00 a.m., Police Officer 1 Matthew Garabiles (POI Garabiles)
and P02 Alejandro Santos (P02 Santos), in civilian clothes, were on their way to Camp Olivas,
Pampanga, riding a motorcycle along Olongapo-Gapan National Road.While they were at
Barangay Malapit San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, a speeding blue Toyota Corolla (Corolla) with plate
no. WHK 635, heading towards the same direction, overtook them and the car in front of them, a
maroon Honda CRV (CRY) with plate no. CTL 957.
When the Corolla reached alongside the CRV, the passenger on the front seat of the Corolla
shot the CRV and caused the CRV to swerve and fall in the canal in the road embankment.
Four (4) armed men then suddenly alighted the Corolla and started shooting at the driver of the
CRV, who was later identified as Cabiedes. During the shooting, a bystander, Bulanan, who
was standing near the road embankment, was hit by a stray bullet. The four armed men hurried
back to the Corolla and immediately left the crime scene. PO 1 Garabiles and P02 Santos
followed the Corolla but lost track of the latter. Later, both Cabiedes and Bulanan died from fatal
gunshot wounds: Cabiedes was pronounced dead on arrival (DOA) at the Good Samaritan
General Hospital due to three (3) gunshot wounds on the left side of his chest while Bulanan
died on the spot after being shot in the head.
a. What is/are the crimes committed in the case of Cabiedes? Are there conspiracy?
b. What is the crime committed when a stranger was killed by a stray bullet in an ambush
as in the case of Bulanan? Explain the legal basis.

XVIII

AAA is a mental retardate and was 12 years and 11 months old at the time of the rape incident.
She and appellant, who was then 17 years old, are neighbors − their respective houses are
adjoining each other. In the afternoon of 9 December 2002, AAA and her friend, Analiza, were in
front of the sari-sari store of AAA’s mother, BBB, while appellant was inside the fence of their
house adjacent to the said sari-sari store. Shortly, thereafter, appellant invited AAA to go with
him to the kiln at the back of their house. AAA acceded and went ahead.
Upon seeing appellant and AAA going to the kiln, Analiza, pretending to look for her one peso
coin, followed them until she reached a papaya tree located three and a half meters away from
the place. Analiza hid under the papaya tree and from there she saw appellant undress AAA by
removing the latter’s shorts and panty. Appellant, however, glanced and saw Analiza.
Frightened, Analiza ran away and went back to the sari-sari store of BBB without telling BBB
what she saw. Appellant proceeded to satisfy his bestial desire. After undressing AAA, appellant
made her lie down. He then placed himself on top of AAA and made push and pull movements.
Afterwards, appellant stopped, allowed AAA to sit down for a while and then sent her home.
When AAA arrived at their house around 7:30 p.m., she was asked by her mother, BBB, where
she came from and why she came home late. AAA replied that she was at the back of their
house as appellant brought her there and had sexual intercourse with her. The following day,
BBB brought AAA to the police station
a. What is the crime committed?
b. Is proof of force or intimidation necessary for the conviction for the crime of rape of a
mental retardate?
XIX
On January 23, 1999, at around 6:30 in the evening, Modesto, Rita and Randy were preparing
to have their supper in their home. Joining them were Modesto and Rita's two young
grandchildren, aged 5 and 7 years old. They were about to eat their dinner when Marlon, Robert
and Ronald suddenly barged into the house and closed the door. Each of the three intruders
was armed with a short handgun. Marlon poked his gun at Modesto while Robert and Ronald
simultaneously grabbed and hog-tied the victim. A piece of cloth was placed in the mouth of
Modesto.4 Marlon, Robert and Ronald herded Modesto out of the house on their way towards
the direction of Paldit, Sison, Pangasinan. Rita and Randy were warned by the intruders not to
leave the house. Leon and Manuel, who were also armed with short handguns, stayed put by
the door to the house of Modesto and ordered Rita and Randy to stay where they were. Leon
and Manuel left the house of Modesto only at around 7:00 a.m. the following day, January 24,
1999. Modesto was found on January 27 th already dead. The prosecutor filed the following
information:
That on or about January 23, 1999, in the evening at Brgy. Bila, Sison, Pangasinan, and
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, armed with
 short firearms barged-in and entered the house of Modesto Delim and once inside with
intent to kill, treachery, evident premedidation (sic), conspiring with one another, did then
and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously grab, hold, hogtie, gag with a piece of cloth,
brought out and abduct Modesto Delim, accused Leon Delim and Manuel Delim stayed
in the house guarded and prevented the wife and son of Modesto Delim from helping the
latter, thereafter with abuse of superior strength stabbed and killed said Modesto Delim,
to the damage and prejudice of his heirs.
What crime/s is/are committed?
XX
Mrs. Maria Socorro Mutuc-Sarmiento owns a bakeshop in Araneta Avenue, Quezon City called
Nika Cakes and Pastries. She has a driver of her own just as her husband does (Ibid., pp. 4-6).
At around 5:00 in the afternoon of January 13, 1988, the accused Isabelo Puno, who is the
personal driver of Mrs. Sarmiento's husband (who was then away in Davao purportedly on
account of local election there) arrived at the bakeshop. He told Mrs. Socorro that her own
driver Fred had to go to Pampanga on an emergency (something bad befell a child), so Isabelo
will temporary (sic) take his place (Id., pp. 8-9). Mrs. Socorro's time to go home to Valle Verde in
Pasig came and so she got into the Mercedes Benz of her husband with Isabelo on (sic) the
wheel. After the car turned right in (sic) a corner of Araneta Avenue, it stopped. A young man,
accused Enrique Amurao, boarded the car beside the driver. Once inside, Enrique clambered
on top of the back side of the front seat and went onto where Ma. Socorro was seated at the
rear. He poke (sic) a gun at her.

Beloy turned the car around towards Metro Manila. Later, he changed his mind and turned the
car again towards Pampanga. Ma. Socorro, according to her, jumped out of the car then,
crossed to the other side of the superhighway and, after some vehicles ignored her, she was
finally able to flag down a fish vendors van. Her dress had blood because, according to Ma.
Socorro, she fell down on the ground and was injured when she jumped out of the car. Her
dress was torn too. Both accused were, day after, arrested.

a. What crime/s was/were committed?

Carl or Muymoy, 5-year old son of the victim, testified that on the night of the incident, he, his
younger sister Cheche, and his mother and father, were sleeping on the ground floor of their
house. He saw appellant, whom he calls "Nonoy," enter their house and stab her mother with a
knife, while he (Carl) peeped through a chair. Although there was no light at the ground floor,
there was light upstairs. After his mother got stabbed, his father chased the appellant. Carl saw
blood come out of his mother’s lower chest. His father then brought her to the hospital. Carl
positively identified the appellant, a neighbor who often goes to their house, as the one who
stabbed his mother. On cross-examination, he related that the assailant took money from his
father’s pocket. He likewise admitted that he did not see very well the perpetra tor because
there was no light. Upon being asked by the trial court, Carl stated that although there was no
light when his mother was stabbed, he was sure of what he saw since there was light at their
second floor, which illumined the ground floor through the stairway.
a. Is Carl, a 5-year old child, competent and credible to testify as a witness?
 b. What is/are the crime/s committed?
XXII

Complainant Rosita Lim is the proprietor of Bueno Metal Industries, located at 301 Jose Abad
Santos St., Tondo, Manila, engaged in the business of manufacturing propellers or spare parts
for boats. Manuelito Mendez was one of the employees working for her. Sometime in February
1991, Manuelito Mendez left the employ of the company. Complainant Lim noticed that some of
the welding rods, propellers and boat spare parts, such as bronze and stainless propellers and
brass screws were missing. She conducted an inventory and discovered that propellers and
stocks valued at P48,000.00, more or less, were missing. Complainant Rosita Lim informed
Victor Sy, uncle of Manuelito Mendez, of the loss. Subsequently, Manuelito Mendez was
arrested in the Visayas and he admitted that he and his companion Gaudencio Dayop stole
from the complainant's warehouse some boat spare parts such as bronze and stainless
propellers and brass screws. Manuelito Mendez asked the complainant's forgiveness. He
pointed to petitioner Ramon C. Tan as the one who bought the stolen items and who paid the
amount of P13,000.00, in cash to Mendez and Dayop, and they split the amount with one
another. Complainant did not file a case against Manuelito Mendez and Gaudencio Dayop. An
information was filed against petitioner charging him with violation of Presidential Decree No.
1612 (Anti-Fencing Law).
Is the petitioner guilty of fencing?
XXIII

Minda the collector for GF Food House received a check from Mr. Singson. Instead of
despositing the check to GF Food House’s account, Minda deposited it to the account of her
brother-in-law. However, the check bounced back. Minda then went to Mr. Singson to inform
him of the worthless check. Minda was able to persuade Mr. Singson to give her the payment in
cash instead of check. However, Mr. Singson was able to know of Minda’s scheme, thus, he
went to the NBI to help set up an entrapment operation whereby he will give his payment in
cash to Minda using marked money. NBI arrested Minda during the entrapment operation. What
is/are the crime/s committed?
XXIV

Chief of Police Captain Godofredo Monsod and Captain Jocjoc Oanis received information that
escaped convict Anselmo Balagtas was with certain bailarina named Irene in Cabanatuan They
were instructed to arrest Balagtas and, if overpowered, to arrest him dead or alive. Upon
investigation, Chief of Police located a bailarina named Irene in Cabanatuan. When they arrived
at Irene's house, Oanis approached one Brigida Mallare, who was then stripping banana stalks,
and asked her where Irene's room was. Brigida indicated the place and upon further inquiry also
said that Irene was sleeping with her paramour. Defendants Oanis and Galanta then went to the
room of Irene, and an seeing a man sleeping with his back towards the door where they were,
simultaneously or successively fired at him with their .32 and .45 caliber revolvers. Awakened
by the gunshots, Irene saw her paramour already wounded, and looking at the door where the
shots came, she saw the defendants still firing at him. Shocked by the entire scene. Irene
fainted; it turned out later that the person shot and killed was not the notorious criminal Anselmo
Balagtas but a peaceful and innocent citizen named Serapio Tecson, Irene's paramour. 
 a. Was there mistake of fact?
b. What mitigating, aggravating and qualifying circumstance/s can be appreciated from the
case if there are any?

XXV
In the morning of February 4, 1979, Sulpicio Intod, Jorge Pangasian, Santos Tubio and Avelino
Daligdig went to Salvador Mandaya’s house in Katugasan, Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental
and asked him to go with them to the house of Bernardina Palangpangan. Thereafter, Mandaya
and Intod, Pangasian, Tubio and Daligdig had a meeting with Aniceto Dumalagan. He told
Mandaya that he wanted Palangpangan to be killed because of a land dispute between them
and that Mandaya should accompany the four (4) men, otherwise, he would also be killed.

At about 10:00 o’clock in the evening of the game day, Petitioner, Mandaya, Pangasian, Tubio
and Daligdig, all armed with firearms, arrived at Palangpangan’s house in Katugasan, Lopez
Jaena, Misamis Occidental. At the instance of his companions, Mandaya pointed the location of
Palangpangan’s bedroom. Thereafter, Petitioner, Pangasian, Tubio and Daligdig fired at said
room. It turned out, however, that Palangpangan was in another City and her home was then
occupied by her son-in-law and his family. No one was in the room when the accused fired the
shots. No one was hit by the gun fire.
a. What crime/s are committed?

XVI
a. Distinguish a complex crime under Article 48 of the RPC from special complex
crime or composite crime.
b. Is there an attempted or frustrated stage in the component crime of special
complex crime?

XVII
What happens to light felonies in complex crime and special complex crime or composite crime?
XVIII
What is the crime when the accused killed a person although his intention is only to inflict
physical injury (praeter intentionem)?
XXIX
Petitioner is an economist working with the Asian Development Bank (ADB). Sometime in 1994,
for allegedly uttering defamatory words against fellow ADB worker Joyce Cabal, he was
charged before the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Mandaluyong City with two counts of
grave oral defamation docketed as Criminal Cases Nos. 53170 and 53171. Petitioner was
arrested by virtue of a warrant issued by the MeTC. After fixing petitioner's bail at P2,400.00 per
criminal charge, the MeTC released him to the custody of the Security Officer of ADB. The next
day, the MeTC judge received an "office of protocol" from the Department of Foreign Affairs
(DFA) stating that petitioner is covered by immunity from legal process under Section 45 of the
Agreement between the ADB and the Philippine Government regarding the Headquarters of the
ADB (hereinafter Agreement) in the country. Based on the said protocol communication that
petitioner is immune from suit, the MeTC judge without notice to the prosecution dismissed the
two criminal cases. The latter filed a motion for reconsideration which was opposed by the DFA.
When its motion was denied, the prosecution filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus with
the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pasig City which set aside the MeTC rulings and ordered the
latter court to enforce the warrant of arrest it earlier issued. After the motion for reconsideration
was denied, petitioner elevated the case to this Court via a petition for review arguing that he is
covered by immunity under the Agreement and that no preliminary investigation was held before
the criminal cases were filed in court.
Whether or not invocation of immunity from suit will result to automatic dropping of charges?

XXX
:Petitioner Norma A. Del Socorro and respondent Ernst Johan Brinkman Van Wilsem contracted
marriage in Holland on September 25, 1990.2 On January 19, 1994, they were blessed with a
son named Roderigo Norjo Van Wilsem, who at the time of the filing of the instant petition was
sixteen (16) years of age.
Unfortunately, their marriage bond ended on July 19, 1995 by virtue of a Divorce Decree issued
by the appropriate Court of Holland.4 At that time, their son was only eighteen (18) months old.5
Thereafter, petitioner and her son came home to the Philippines.6
According to petitioner, respondent made a promise to provide monthly support to their son in
the amount of Two Hundred Fifty (250) Guildene (which is equivalent to Php17,500.00 more or
less).7 However, since the arrival of petitioner and her son in the Philippines, respondent never
gave support to the son, Roderigo. Because of the foregoing circumstances, petitioner filed a
complaint affidavit with the Provincial Prosecutor of Cebu City against respondent for violation of
Section 5, paragraph E(2) of R.A. No. 9262 for the latter’s unjust refusal to support his minor
child with petitioner.
a. Whether or not a foreign national has an obligation to support his minor child under
Philippine law?
b. Whether or not a foreign national can be held criminally liable under R.A. No. 9262 for
his unjustified failure to support his minor child?