Criminal Law Book 1(RPC R.A.

3815)
1) Classical (or Juristic) Theory
• Basis of criminal liability is free will and the purpose of penalty is retribution
• Man is essentially a moral creature with absolute free will to choose between good and evil,
thereby placing more stress upon the effect or result of felonious act than upon the man, the
criminal himself
• It has endeavored to establish a mechanical and direct proportion
between crime and penalty (“oculo pro oculo, dente pro dente”)
• There is scant regard to the human element.
(2) Positivist (or Realistic) Theory
• Man is subdued occasionally by a strange and morbid phenomenon which constrains him to
do wrong.
Definition
Criminal Law is a branch or division of law which defines crimes, treat of their nature and
provide for their punishment.
Crime is an act committed or omitted in violation of public law forbidding or commanding it.
Act us non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea”
The act cannot be criminal where the mind isnot criminal.
This is true to a felony characterized by dolo, but nota felony resulting from culpa.
This maxim is not an absolute one because it is not applied to culpable felonies, or those that
result from negligence.
“Mens Rea” in layman’s terms: “bulls-eye” of a crime. Synonymous with criminal or deliberate
intent, but that is not correct. It still depends on the elements of the crime. You can only
detect the mens rea of a crime by knowing theparticular crime committed. Without reference
to a particular crime, this term is meaningless. Ex. In theft, mens rea is taking the property
with intent to gain. In falsification, mens rea, isthe effect of the forgery with intent to pervert
the truth.

1
Sources of Criminal law

1. RPC (Act No. 3815)

2. Special Laws
Power to enact laws/Limitations
It is vested in congress
Its limitations:
1. Congress cannot pass irrepealable laws
2. No ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted
3. Rights against self incrimination.
Historical Background
RPC is the mere revisions of the old Penal Code in force in the Philippines from July 14, 1887
which was based on the Spanish Penal Code of 1870. (U.S. Vs. Tamparong 31 Phil 321. The Old
Penal laws were supplemented and remain in full force until December 31, 1931. The Old
Penal Code was revised in English translation and took effect from January 1, 1932 up to
present with various amendments contained in different special laws
Construction of Penal Laws
• Liberally in favor of the accused
• Strictly against the State
• Doctrine of Equipoise – when the evidence of the prosecution and of the defense is equally
balanced, the scale should be tilted in favor of the accused in obedience to the constitutional
presumption of innocence. Doctrine of Pro Reo – when a circumstance is susceptible to two
interpretations, one favorable to the accused and the other against him, that interpretation
favorable to him shall prevail.

Characteristics of Philippine Criminal Law

1. Generality: Criminal Law applies to all persons who commit felonies in Philippine
Territory, regardless of nationality, gender, age or other personal circumstances.
Exceptions:
1.) Treaty Stipulations (US military Bases Provisions, Visiting Forces Agreement, EDCA)
2.) Laws of preferential application (R.A. 75)
2
3.) Principles of Public International Law
2.) Territoriality
Exceptions: Article 2 of the RPC
1.) Committing an offense on board a Philippine ship or airship
2.) Counterfeiting
3.) Introduction of counterfeited banknotes of the Philippines
4.) Commission of the crimes in the performance of the their functions
5.) Crimes against national security and law of nations
Jurisdiction on Vessel
1.) French Rule: Nationality Test
2.) English Rule: Territoriality Test
Doctrinal Case: U.S. vs. Ah Ching 35 Phil 978) Carrying opium while in terminal point is
criminally liable in our courts of justice.
If landed in Philippine soil ( U.S. vs. Look Chao 18 Phil 573
Crime committed in Manila Bay (People vs. Wong Cheng 46 Phil 729
Characteristics of Philippine Criminal Law
3.) Prospectively: Criminal laws applies straight forward.
Exceptions: Ex Post Facto Laws that are favorable to the accused or convict.
Exception vs. Exception: When the accused or convict is a recidivist, habitual delinquent or
guilty of some criminal repititions
Felonies
Article 3 Felonies are acts or omissions punishable by law (delitos)
Felonies are committed not only by 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 acts results from imprudence, negligence, lack of foresight, or lack of skills.
Imprudence: Arise from deficiency of action to avoid injury by means of lack of skill.

3
Negligence: Failure to foresee the impending injury due to insufficiency of perception based
on lack of foresight
Elements of Dolo
1.) Criminal Intent
2.) Freedom
3.) Intelligence
Elements of Culpa
1.) Criminal Intent
2.) Freedom
3.) Negligence
Types of Felonies: Intentional and Culpable
Distinction between negligence and imprudence
(1)In negligence, there is deficiency of action;
(2)In imprudence, there is deficiency of perception
Concept of Motive and Intent
Intent: A state of mind which exists where circumstances indicate that an offender actively
desired a certain criminal consequence or specific result to follow his act or his failure to act.
(means to attain a specific purpose.
Motive: The reason why the accused committed the acts complained of. Motive is not
essential in proving ones guilt (People vs. Aposaga October 30, 1981
When it is necessary?
a.) There is doubt in the identity of the assailant (People vs. Gadiana, G.R. No. 92509, March
13, 1991, 195 SCRA 211, 214-215)
b.) In ascertaining the truth between two antagonistic theories or version of killing (People vs.
Boholst-Caballero, No. L- 23249, November 25, 1974, 61 SCRA180, 191)

4
When motive is essential
1.) The identity of the assailant is in question
2.) To determine the voluntariness of a particular acts
3.) To determine from which side the unlawful aggression commence, as where the accused
invoke self-defense, hence unlawful aggression by his opponent is an essential element
(Borqilla v. CA January 7, 1987
4.) Where the accused contends that the accused acted in defense of a stranger
5.) To determine the specific nature of the crime (Killing linked to rebellion: People vs.
Geronimo, People vs. Oliva 2001
6.) When the evidence is circumstantial
Felonies may be classified
As Mala inse which is wrong in itself and therefore condemnable. (Murder)
As Mala Prohibita which is wrong only because it is prohibited and is not inherently immoral
but becomes wrong only because it is prohibited by a positive law to maintain an orderly
society. (Illegal possession of firearms or acts punishable under special law hence intent is not
generally required.
A case where offense punishable under special law is considered malum inse.
1. Although defined by SPL, it is malum in se because the crimes constitutive of plunder
are mala in se. Under the law, mitigating and extenuating circumstances are applicable to
plunder.
2. The predicate crimes are punishable by RP to death.
3. Plunder is inherently immoral and wrong.
Concept: Mistake of Fact: (U.S. vs. Ah Chong)
Elements: 1.) Acts committed without criminal intent
2.) There is no negligence on the part of the accused
3.) That the act should have been lawful
Concepts: Mistake of Fact
Is a misapprehension of fact on the part of the person who caused injury to another.

5
Elements:
1.) That the act done would have been lawful had the facts been as the accused believed them
to be;
2.) That the intention of the accused in performing the act should be lawful; and
3.) That the mistake must be without fault or carelessness on the part of the accused

Article 4
Who are criminally liable?
1.) By any person committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different from which
he intended:
INSTANCES:
1.) Error in Personnae: Mistake in Identity
2.) Abberatio Ictus: Miscarriage or mistake in the blow
3.) Praeter Intentionem: The injury is greater than what is intended
REQUISITES OF ARTICLE 4 PAR.1
1.) That the intentional felony has been committed
2.) That the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct natural and logical consequence
of the felony committed by the offender
Concept of proximate cause: Cause unbroken by any intervening factor produces the injury
and without which the result would not have occurred.
EL QUE ES CAUSA DELA CAUSA ES CAUSA DEL CAUSADO- He who is the cause of the cause is
the cause of the evil caused

Article 4 Paragraph B
Concept of Impossible crime: By any person performing an act which would be an offense
against persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or
on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.
 Ex. Offender saw a naked woman lying on the beach. He inserted his penis into her
vagina. It turned out she was dead. Impossible crime, because you cannot rape a dead
person.

6
Inherent impossibility: Application of the rule
1.) When one tries to kill another by putting in his soup which the offender believes to be an
arsenic when in truth and in fact it was a sugar.
2.) When one tries to kill somebody not knowing to be dead.
3.) Stealing his own lost property
Reasons for punishment: To stifle ones criminal tendencies under the context of positivist
school of thought.
Scenario
Antonio Lucas lost his radio watch to a pickpocket and because of his fear that the incident will
be known to his parents he entered the house of Cardo De leon, he took the watch and go
home. Unknowingly it was his own lost watch.
a.) What crime did Lucas committed if any?
b.) Assuming aside from the watch he took another belonging by means of force. What crime
did Lucas committed?
c.) Assuming Lucas saw a vault and was able to open it but it was empty, What crime did Lucas
committed if any?
Scenario
X with intent to kill Y fired a shot at the back of X using his revolver but it jammed. What crime
did x committed if any?
Dr. Cuatico planned to kill his wife by using injurious substance to the food of his wife. When
the latter ate her food she suffered severe vomiting, Dr. Cuatico because of his conscience
took an anti- dote and injected the same to his wife and immediately brought the latter to the
nearby hospital. His wife survived.
What crime did Dr. Cuatico committed?
Answer:
Article 5 Duty of the courts
a.) Duty to report to the DOJ the acts that needs to be repressed.
b.) Render his decision accordingly

7
Article 6 Stages of the Commission of the felony
Consummated: All elements are present
Frustrated: Performed all the acts of execution which would produce felony as a consequence
but nevertheless do not produce it by reason of causes independent to the will of the
perpetrator.
Attempted: Commences the act of committing a felony directly by overt acts, and does not
perform all the acts of execution which would produce the felony by reason of some cause or
accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.
Development of Crimes
Preparatory acts generally not punishable.
a.) Buying a poison
b.) Carrying Flammable
c.) Carrying a firearm to be used in killing
But if the poison is mixed in a milk which is about to be consumed by the victim would you
consider that as a preparatory or attempted?
Formula
Commencement of subjective phase = Attempted
After the subjective Phase but the objective is not realized = frustrated
After subjective Phase and the crime is committed= Consummated
Derivatives: During SP before its end= AS
End of SP before OP= FS
SP+OP= CS
Felonies: Stages
Arson: If part of the building has started to burn or has been charred. CONSUMMATED (People
vs. Hernadez 54 Phil 122)
If rags were set afire in order to burn the building but no part thereof was burned.
FRUSTRATED (U.S. vs Valdez 39 Phil 240; 1928

8
If the contents were burned but the building was untouched by the fire: Consummated (U.S.
vs. Go Foo Suy et. al. 25 Phil 187)
Burning of hospital supplies and equipment but no part of the building were burned it was
held as ATTEMPTED. (People vs. Garcia CA 40 O.G. 558
Where rags soaked with gasoline inside the building were found but no fire has started due to
timely discovery of the acts of the accused it was held to be ATTEMPTED. (People vs. Go Kay
CA 54 O.G. 2225
It would appear that the case of people vs. Garcia was incorrectly decided in view of the ruling
in Go Foo Suy ruling
Theft:
Performed overt act of stealing but does not perform all the acts of execution which would
produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
desistance. (ATTEMPTED)
Stealing 30 rifles in a military camp and the accused was arrested in the military checkpoint it
was held to be. (FRUSTRATED, People vs. Dino and People vs. Mallari)
Stealing of 9 pieces of hospital linen and the accused was apprehended at the checkpoint of
the camp, it was held to be (CONSUMMATED) People vs. Espirito
Reason. In Dino case the accused is not yet free to dispose the rifle it is deem necessary for
him to go out of the camp to accomplish his purpose, whereas in Espirito case the accused can
freely dispose of the linen without leaving the camp.
Homicide or Murder:
The accused struck the knife at the back of the victim thereby hitting the chair instead it was
held to be frustrated murder though there was no wound. (people vs. Borinaga 55Phil 433)
The accused fired several shot at the victim but failed to hit the target no fatal wound was
inflicted it was held to be attempted murder even if the target was hit but not fatally
wounded. (People vs. Kalalo, People vs. Pillones, People vs, Tamani)
Bribery:
If the officer returned the bribed money it is frustrated (People vs. Diego Quing Lee 62Phil959)
If the officer rejected the money it is attempted. (U.S. vs. Basa, People vs, Te Tong)
Earlier case: Bribery is always consummated.

9
If the officer accepted and returned the money for whatever reason it is consummated and if
he rejected it the officer is not guilty of any crime, however the giver is guilty of an attempted
corruption of public official. (Pozar vs. CA G.R. 62439 1984)
Rape: Slight penetration of labia Majora of the female genital it was held to be consummated
(People vs. Basas, People vs. Mariano 2001
Frustrated Rape: Contained in the case of People vs. Erinia 50 Phil 998, R.A. 2632 , R.A.
4111which imposes the penalty of death when rape was attempted or frustrated and
homicide is consummated. Even R.A. 7659 The Death Penalty Law of 1994 contained the word
frustrated rape.
Frustrated was formallay deleted by R.A. 8353
Recent jurisprudence: Attempted and Consummated only
When Stages not required
a.) Crimes punished by special law unless expressly specified;
b.) Crimes by omission;
c.) Formal crimes: Consummated at a single instant
Rape
The Anti-Rape Law transformed and reclassified
rape as a felony against persons, under Title Eight, Chapter Two, Book II of the same Code. The
criminalization of the penetration of a person’s sex organ or anal orifice and the insertion of a
person’s penis into the mouth or anal orifice of another, whether man or woman, and the
classification thereof as rape (sexual assault) were designed to prevent not only the physical
injuries inflicted on the victim but also his subjection to personal indignity and degradation
and affront to the psychological integrity
associated with an unwanted violation. People vs.
 Nequia, 412 SCRA 628 (2003)
 In cases of rape where there is a positive testimony and a medical certificate, both
should in all respects complement each other; otherwise, to rely on the testimonial
evidence alone, in utter disregard of the manifest variance in the medical certificate,
would be productive of unwarranted or even mischievous results. It is necessary to
carefully ascertain whether the penis of the accused in reality entered the labial
threshold of the female organ to accurately conclude that rape was consummated.
10
 Failing in this, the thin line that separates attempted rape from consummated rape will
significantly disappear.

Under Art. 6, in relation to Art. 335, of the Revised Penal Code, rape is attempted when the
offender commences the commission of rape directly by overt acts, and does not perform all
the acts of execution which should produce the crime of rape by reason of some cause or
accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. All the elements of attempted rape - and
only of attempted rape - are present in the instant case, hence, the accused should be
punished only for it. People vs. Campuhan, 329 SCRA 270 (2000)
CONCEPTS
Formal Crimes- are those crimes committed at a single instant only.
Material crimes- are those crimes committed in different stages
Art. 7. When light felonies are punishable.
Light felonies are punishable only when they have been consummated, with the exception of
those committed against person or property.
Light felonies under the Revised Penal Code:
Slight physical injuries (Art.266)
• Theft (Art. 309, par.7,8)
• Alteration of boundary marks (Art.313)
• Malicious mischief (Art. 328 par.3; Art
329, par.3)
• Intriguing against honor (Art. 364)
Arresto menor (imprisonment)
Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit a Felony Article 8
Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony are punishable only in the cases in which the law
specially provides a penalty therefor. A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to
an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. There is
proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony proposes its execution to some
other person or persons. A mere conspiracy or proposal is not a felony, except when the law
specifically provides a penalty therefor.
11
Requisites of Conspiracy:
• That two or more persons came to an agreement;
• The agreement concerned the commission of a felony;
• That the execution of the felony be decided upon.
Cases where mere conspiracy is a felony:
• Conspiracy to commit treason (Art.115)
• Conspiracy to commit coup d’etat, rebellion or insurrection (Art.136)
• Conspiracy to commit sedition (Art.141)
• Monopolies and combinations in restraint of trade (Art.186)
Quantum of evidence: A conspiracy must be established by positive and conclusive evidence.
Requisites of proposal:
That a person has decided to commit a felony, and
• That he proposes its execution to some other person or persons.
Cases where mere proposal is a felony:
• proposal to commit treason (Art.115)
• proposal to commit coup d’etat, rebellion or insurrection (Art.136)

Cases on Conspiracy:
Direct proof is not essential to establish conspiracy; which may be inferred from the acts the
assailants before, during and after the commission of the crime. In a conspiracy, it is not
necessary to show that all the conspirators actually committed all the elements of the crime
charged; what is important is that all of them performed specific acts with such closeness and
coordination as to indicate an unmistakably common purpose or design to commit the crime.
Thus, the act of one becomes the act of all, and each of them will thereby be deemed equally
guilty of all the crimes committed. People vs.Caraang, 418 SCRA 321 (2003)
Previous agreement to commit a crime is not essential to establish conspiracy, it being
sufficient that the condition attending its commission and the acts executed may be indicative

12
of a common design to accomplish a criminal purpose and objective. If there is a chain of
circumstances to that effect, conspiracy has been established. People vs. Esponilla, 404 SCRA
421 (2003)
The existence of conspiracy cannot be presumed. Similar to the physical act constituting the
crime itself, the elements of conspiracy must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. People vs.
Samudio, 353 SCRA 746 (2001)
Implied Conspiracy
In conspiracy, direct proof of a previous agreement to commit a crime is not necessary. It may
be deduced from the mode and manner by which the offense was perpetrated, or inferred
from the acts of the accused themselves when such point to a joint purpose and design,
concerted action and community of interest. Conspiracy may be inferred from the conduct of
the accused before, during or after the commission of the crime. People vs. Liad, 355 SCRA 11
(2001)
Kinds of Conspiracy
1. Express
2. Implied

Art. 9. Grave felonies, less grave felonies and light felonies.

Grave felonies are those to punishment or penalties which in any of their periods are afflictive,
in accordance with Article 25 of this Code.
Less grave felonies are those which the law punishes with penalties which in their maximum
period are correctional, in accordance with the above-mentioned article.
Light felonies are those infractions of law for the commission of which a penalty of arresto
menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos or both, is provided.
Capital punishment: Death (now prohibited under R.A. 9346)

Article 11 Justifying Circumstances

Description: There is no crime committed, the act being justified. No criminal liability and no
civil liability except paragraph 4
Art.11(1) Self-defense

13
Reason why penal laws make self-defense lawful because it would be quite impossible for
the State in all case to prevent aggression upon its citizens and offer protection to the person
unjustly attacked.

Requisites of self-defense:
1. Unlawful aggression, (indispensable)
ACTUAL
SUDDEN Attack
UNEXPECTED
Immediate or Imminent
Possible exception: LIBEL (varying opinion)
Article 11 Justifying Circumstances
Threat is not an unlawful aggression.
2. Reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawful aggression,
and
3. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.
Unlawful aggression is a condition sine qua non for the justifying circumstance of self-defense.
It contemplates an actual, sudden and unexpected attack, or imminent danger thereof, and
not merely a threatening or intimidating attitude. The person defending himself must have
been attacked with actual physical force or with actual use of weapon. Of all the elements,
unlawful aggression, i.e., the sudden unprovoked attack on the person defending himself, is
indispensable. People vs. Rubiso, 399 SCRA 267 (2003)

Cases
It is axiomatic that the mere thrusting of one’s hand into his pocket as if for the purpose of
drawing a weapon is not unlawful aggression. Even the cocking of a rifle without aiming the
firearm at any particular target is not sufficient to conclude that one’s life was in imminent
danger. Retaliation is different from self-defense. In retaliation, the aggression that was begun
by the injured party already ceased to exist when the accused attacked him. In self-defense,

14
the aggression was still existing when the aggressor was injured by the accused. People vs.
Vicente, 405 SCRA 40 (2003)
Art.11(2) Defense of Relatives
The natural impulse of any person who has killed someone in defense of his person or relative
is to bring himself to the authorities and try to dispel any suspicion of guilt that the authorities
might have against him. Balunueco vs. CA, 410 SCRA 76 (2003)
In the case at bar, petitioner (Ricardo) utterly failed to adduce sufficient proof of the existence
of a positively strong act of real aggression on the part of the deceased (Senando), with the
exception of his self-serving allegations.
Art.11(3) Defense of Stranger
With the absence of unlawful aggression that can be attributed to the victim, it becomes
unnecessary to determine the remaining requisites for they obviously have no leg to stand on.
Thus, in this case, the defense of stranger will not lie, complete or incomplete. Almeda vs. CA,
80 SCRA 575
When the victim fell down and staggered after petitioner shot him pointblank in the head, any
supposed unlawful aggression by the former, assuming that it has begun, had ceased. If so, the
one making the defense has no more right to kill or even wound the former aggressor.
Art.11(4) “State of Necessity Doctrine”
Requisites:
1.) That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists;
2. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it;
3. That there be no other practical and less harmful means of preventing it.
Art.11(5) Fulfillment of a Duty/ Lawful Exercise of a Right or Office
The reasonableness of the resistance is also a requirement of the justifying circumstance of
self-defense or defense of one's rights under paragraph 1 of Article 11, Revised Penal Code.
When the appellant fired his shotgun from his window, killing his two victims, his resistance
was disproportionate to the attack. People vs. Narvaez, 121 SCRA 389 (1983)
See Art. 429 of the New Civil Code
Art. 429 The owner has the right to enjoy and dispose of a thing, without other
limitations than those established by law.

15
Art.11 (6) Obedience to a Lawful Order of a Superior
An individual is justified in performing an act in obedience to an order issued by a superior if
such order, is for some lawful purpose and that the means used by the subordinate to carry
out said order is lawful (Reyes, Revised Penal Code, Vol. 1, 1981 ed., p. 212). Notably, the
alleged order of Hiong's superior Chua Kim Leng Timothy, is a patent violation not only of
Philippine, but of international law. Such violation was committed on board a Philippine-
operated vessel. Moreover, the means used by Hiong in carrying out said order was equally
unlawful. People vs. Tulin, 364 SCRA 10 (2001)

7th Justifying Circumstance

Starting year 2004 thru R.A. 9262, additional justifying circumstance: BATTERED WOMAN
SYNDROME was introduced.
To consider a valid “battered woman syndrome” at least 2 cycles of the following are
completed:
1. Tension building phase
2. (Acute) physical aggression
3. Reconciliation (tranquility)
It is equally important to determine whether appellant Genosa had acted freely, intelligently
and voluntarily when she killed her spouse. The Court, however, cannot properly evaluate her
battered-woman-syndrome defense, absent expert testimony on her mental and emotional
state at the time of the killing and the possible psychological cause and effect of her fatal act.
People vs. Genosa, 341 SCRA 493 (2000)
BURDEN OF PROOF
In ordinary cases, the accuser is the first to present evidence. In cases of self-defense, defense
of relatives, or defense of stranger, the accused has the burden of proof.
This is called Reverse Trial (Admission and Avoidance)

Art. 12. Circumstances which exempt from criminal liability.

No criminal liability
No civil liability except Par.4 and 7
Nature: Wanting in the agent of the crime there is an actor but there is no crime

16
Imbecility (always exempt) exists while a person of advanced age, has a mental development
of a child between 2 and 7 years of age.
Insanity (exempt, except if on lucid intervals) when there is a complete deprivation of
freedom and intelligence of the will. Mere abnormality is not enough.
Crazy (not an exemption) is not the same as insane. The popular conception of the word
“crazy” is being used to describe a person or an act unnatural or out of the ordinary. A man
may behave in a crazy manner but it does not necessarily and conclusively prove that he is
legally so. People vs. Florendo, 413 SCRA 132 (2003)

Effects of Insanity to the Accused:

a) At the time of the commission of the Crime – exempting.
b) During trial – criminal proceedings will be suspended.
c) After judgment or while serving sentence – the execution of judgment or sentence will be
suspended and the court shall order the accused to be committed to a hospital.

Art. 12, Pars. 2 & 3 of Revised Penal Code has been amended by Sec.6 of R.A. No.
9344
SEC. 6. Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility. - A child fifteen (15) years of age or under at
the time of the commission of the offense shall be exempt from criminal liability. However, the
child shall be subjected to an intervention program pursuant to Section 20 of this Act. A child
above fifteen (15) years but below eighteen (18) years of age shall likewise be exempt from
criminal liability and be subjected to an intervention program, unless he/she has acted with
discernment, in which case, such child shall be subjected to the appropriate proceedings in
accordance with this Act. The exemption from criminal liability herein established does not
include exemption from civil liability, which shall be enforced in accordance with existing laws.

Art. 12, Par. 4 Performing a Lawful Act with Due Care

The legal provision pertinent to accident, contemplates a situation where a person is in fact in
the act of doing something legal, exercising due care, diligence and prudence, but in the
process produces harm or injury to someone or to something not in the least in the mind of
the actor – an accidental result flowing out of a legal act. Indeed, accident is an event that
happens outside the sway of our will, and although it comes about through some act of our
will, it lies beyond the bounds of humanly foreseeable consequences. In short, accident
presupposes the lack of intention to commit the wrong done. (Talampas vs. People, G.R. No.
180219, November 23, 2011)

17
Art. 12, Par. 5 Under the Compulsion of an Irresistible Force
The accused acts only not without a will but is against his will. The irresistible force must be
either physical force or violence and must come from a third person and produces an effect
upon the individual that in spite of all resistance, it reduces him to a mere instrument and as
such incapable of committing a crime.

Art. 12, Par. 6 Under the Impulse of an Uncontrollable Fear of an Equal or greater
Injury
The fear must be insuperable and the person who acts under insuperable fear is completely
deprived of freedom.
Actus me invito factus non est meus factus – “an act done against my will is not my act”.
Art. 12, Par. 7 Prevented by some Lawful Insuperable Cause
Insuperable cause – a cause which prevents a person to do what the law requires. It applies to
felonies by omission.
Prescribed filing of cases, within:
12 hours for light felony
18 hours for less grave felony
36 hours for grave felony

ADDITIONAL EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES: (by reason of jurisprudence)

• Absolutory causes – are those where the act committed is a crime but for reasons of public
policy the accused is exempt from criminal liability. (Article 332provides for an absolutory
cause in the crimes of theft, estafa (or swindling) and malicious mischief. It limits the
responsibility of the offender to civil liability and frees him from criminal liability by virtue of
his relationship to the offended party.
• Instigation – as exempting circumstances for law and peace officers; does not apply to
private persons.
ENTRAPMENT
Signifies that ways and means are resorted to by peace officers to apprehend a person who
has committed a crime. (Not exempting)

CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH MITIGATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY

18
BASIS: Diminution of intelligence
Art. 13, Par. 1
• Incomplete self-defense
• incomplete defense of relatives
• incomplete defense of stranger
• incomplete accident
There must always be unlawful aggression.
Art. 13, Par. 2
Par.2. Impliedly repealed by R.A. 9344 or the Juvenile Justice Welfare Act of 2006

Art. 13, Par. 2

15 and below
Exempting Above 15 but under 18 Exempting unless he acted with discernment; if acted
with discernment, the penalty is reduced by 1 degree lower than that imposed (Art. 68 of RPC
as amended by RA 9344) Minor delinquent under 18 Sentence is suspended (PD 603,PD 1179,
RA 9344) 70 years or over (Generic) Mitigating and no imposition of death penalty* *if
already imposed, sentence is suspended and commuted

Art. 13, Par. 3 Praeter Intentionem

BASIS: Diminution of intent
Intention, being an internal state, must be judged by external acts. Intention may be
ascertained considering:
• The weapon used
• The part of the body injured
• The nature of injury inflicted, and,
• The manner of attack; which may show that the accused intended the wrong committed.

Art. 13, Par. 4

BASIS: Diminution of intelligence or intent
Par.4 that sufficient provocation or threat on the part of the offended party immediately
preceded the act.
19
Provocation
• Any unjust or improper conduct or act of the offended party, capable of exciting, inciting, or
irritating any one;
• any act of the offended party that excites or stirs up emotions or actions;
Requisites of provocation:
1. That the provocation must be sufficient;
2. That it must originate from the offended party;
3. That the provocation must be immediate to the act; i.e. to the commission of the crime by
the person who is provoked.
“Immediate” means that there is no interval of time between the provocation and
commission of the crime. People vs. Pagal, 79 SCRA 570.

Art. 13, Par. 5

Par.5 That the act was committed in the immediate vindication of a grave offense to the one
committing the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants, or relatives by affinity within the same
degrees.
Requisites:
1. Grave offense done to the one committing the felony;
2. Felony is committed in vindication of such grave offense.
A lapse of time is allowed between the grave offense and the vindication.

Cases
Accused-appellant was urinated on by the victim in front of the guests. The act of the victim,
which undoubtedly insulted and humiliated accused appellant, came within the purview of a
“grave offense” under Article 13, paragraph 5, of the Revised Penal Code. Thus, this mitigating
circumstance should be appreciated in favor of accused-appellant. People vs. Espina, 361
SCRA 701 (2001)

Art. 13, Par.6 That of having acted upon an impulse so powerful as naturally to
have produced passion or obfuscation.
Rules for application (Par.6)
20
1. The act is committed in a spirit of lawlessness; or,
2. The act is committed in a spirit of revenge.
The act of the offended party must be unlawful or unjust. Exercise of a right or fulfillment of a
duty is not a proper source of passion or obfuscation.
When Mitigating
. Act producing passion or obfuscation, time not far from commission of crime
• Rivalry for the hand of a woman
When not Mitigating
• After 24 hours had passed
• Jealousy with non-spouse or illegitimate relationship

Paragraph 7
That the offender had voluntarily surrendered himself to a person in authority or his agents, or
that he had voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court prior to the presentation of the
evidence for the prosecution.
Voluntary surrender cannot be appreciated where the accused fled immediately after the
killing and took him more than a month-and-a half to surrender to the authorities. Peolple vs.
Almendras, 372 SCRA 737

Cases
The appellant’s alleged surrender to the barangay chairman was not voluntary. On the
contrary, it was solely motivated by self-preservation from what he feared was an imminent
retaliation from the immediate relatives of Alfredo. Consequently, the same cannot be
appreciated in his favor. People vs. dela Cruz, 416 SCRA 24 (November 18, 2003)
Voluntary plea of guilty, to be mitigating:
• The offender spontaneously confessed his guilt
• The confession of guilt was made before a competent court
•The confession of guilt was made prior to the presentation of evidence by the prosecution

Art. 13, Par. 8

21
That the offender is deaf and dumb, blind or otherwise suffering some physical defect which
thus restricts his means of action, defense or
communication with his fellow beings.

BASIS: Diminution of voluntariness

The physical defect referred to in this paragraph must affect the means of action, defense or
communication of the accused. It must relate to the offense committed. The fact that the
accused is deaf is not mitigating in homicide or rape.

Paragraph 8
Physical defects to be appreciated the following must concur:
a.) It must restrict his freedom of action and understanding
b.) it is believed that blindness to be appreciated as mitigating, it must be complete
c.) If totally blind or deaf and dumb the accused need not prove such restrictions.

Art. 13, Par. 9

Such illness of the offender as would diminish the exercise of the will power of the offender
without however, depriving him of the consciousness of his acts.
Basis: Diminution of will Power
The Supreme Court in the Marivic Genosa case only appreciated “battered woman’s
syndrome” only as a mitigating circumstance that diminishes will power.
After the Genosa case RA 9262 was enacted and now a new Justifying Circumstance. The
battered woman does not incur both criminal and civil liabilities. (Also see p.12)

Art. 13, Par. 10

Any other circumstances similar in nature and analogous to those above mentioned.
Examples:
• extreme poverty, as similar to state of necessity
• impulse of jealousy, similar to passion and obfuscation
• voluntary return of funds in malversation, similar to voluntary surrender
Voluntary return of stolen items; similar to voluntary surrender
22
• over 60 years old with failing sight, analogous to a person over 70 years of age and voluntary
surrender

ARTICLE 14:CIRCUMSTANCE WHICH AGGRAVATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Kinds of Aggravating Circumstances
1. Generic – that apply to all crimes. It increases the penalty up to maximum period prescribed
in the crime. It may be offset by mitigating circumstance Ex. Dwelling, nighttime, recidivism
2. Specific – that apply to specific crimes. Ex. Ignominy in crimes against chastity or cruelty and
treachery in crimes against persons
3. Qualifying – change the nature and gives the name exclusive of the crime. It must be
alleged, otherwise will be treated only as generic aggravating circumstance. It cannot be offset
by a mitigating circumstance. Ex. Alevosia or evident premeditation to qualify killing of a
person to murder
4. Inherent – those that must of necessity accompany commission of the crime. Ex. Evident
premeditation is inherent in

ARTICLE 14:CIRCUMSTANCE WHICH AGGRAVATE CRIMINAL LIABILITY

Par 1That advantage be taken by the offender of his public position.
Par 2 That crime be committed in contempt of or with insult to public authorities.
Requisites:
1. That the public authority is engaged in the exercise of his functions;
2. That he who is thus engaged in the exercise of said functions is not the person against
whom the crime is committed;
3. The offender knows him to be a public authority;
4. His presence has not prevented the offender from committing the criminal act.
Par. 3
Crime committed with insult or disregard of the respect due to the offended party on account
of his rank, age or sex or committed in the dwelling.

23
As if to add insult to Rebecca's injury, accused appellant presented a witness, one Isabelo
Goloya, who in his affidavit would have us believe that Rebecca is a woman of such loose
morals that she would consent to have sex with him, a married man, in a public place. People
vs. dela Torre, 373 SCRA 1104 (1997)

Par 3
What aggravates the commission of the crime in one’s dwelling?
• The abuse of confidence which the offended party reposed in the offender by opening the
door to him; and
• The violation of the sanctity of the home by trespassing therein with violence or against the
will of the owner. Offended party must not give provocation.
If provocation was:
• Given by the owner of the dwelling;
• Sufficient; and,
• Immediate to the commission of the crime. Then dwelling is NOT aggravating.

Paragraph 4
That the crime With abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness
Abuse of confidence, requisites:
1. That the offender had trusted the offender.
2. That the offender abused such trust by committing the crime against the offended party.
3. That the abuse of confidence facilitated the commission of the crime.
Ungratefulness must be obvious, i.e. manifest and clear

Art. 14, Par. 5 and 6

Par. 5 Committed in the place of the Chief Executive or where public authorities
are engaged in the discharge of their duties or place dedicated to religious
worship
In these cases, the offender must have the intention to commit a crime when he
entered the place.
24
Art. 14, Par. 6
Nighttime/ uninhabited place/ by a band As to nighttime, this circumstance is considered
aggravating only when
(1) It was especially sought by the offender; or
(2) The offender took advantage of it; or
(3) It facilitated the commission of the crime by ensuring the offender’s immunity from
identification or capture. The mere fact that the killing was committed at night would not
suffice to sustain nocturnity for, by, and of itself. People vs. Avendano, 396 SCRA 309 (2003)

Concepts
Nighttime – (Viada) that period of darkness beginning at the end of dusk and ending at dawn.
Uninhabited place – one where there are no houses at all, a place at a considerable distance
from town, or where the houses are scattered at a great distance from each other.
Uninhabited place answers the issue: Whether or not in the place of the commission of the
offense there was a reasonable possibility of the victim receiving some help.
Band – whenever more than three armed malefactors shall have acted together in the
commission of an offense (all must be principals by direct participation).

Art. 14, Par. 7

Conflagration, shipwreck, earthquake, epidemic or other calamity or misfortune.
BASIS: Reference to the time of the commission of the crime.
REASON: Debased form of criminality met in one who, in the midst of a great calamity, instead
of lending aid to the afflicted, adds to their suffering by taking advantage of their misfortune
to despoil them.

Art. 14, Par. 8

In aid of armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity
Requisites:
1. That the armed men or person took part in the commission of the crime, directly or
indirectly;
2. That the accused availed himself of their aid or relied upon them when the crime was
committed.
25
 Aid of armed men vs. Band

AID OF ARMED MEN BY A BAND

Up to 3 armed malefactors Requires 4 or more armed malefactors

Enough that offender relied on aid Actual and direct participation necessary

Aid of armed men includes armed Women

Art. 14, Par. 9

Recidivist (generic aggravating circumstance)
BASIS: Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by his inclination to crimes.
Requisites:
1. The offender is on trial for an offense;
2. That he was previously convicted by a final judgment of another crime;
3. That both the first and the second offenses are embraced in the same title of Code;
4. That the offender is convicted of the new offense.
No recidivism if the subsequent conviction is for an offense committed before the offense
involved in prior conviction.

Art. 14, Par. 10

Reiteration
Requisites:
1. The accused is on trial for an offense;

26
2. That he previously served sentence for another offense which the law attaches an equal or
greater penalty, or for two or more crimes to which it attaches lighter penalty than that for the
new offense; and
3. That he is convicted of the new offense.

Forms of Habituality/Repetitions
Recidivism Art 14 Reiteracion Habitual Quasi-Recidivism Art
p9 Art 14 p10 Delinquency (Art. 160
62, Par.5)

Offender previously Offender if within a period of any person who shall

previously 10 years from the
convicted by final commit a felony after
date of conviction
punished having been:
judgment or last release of a
person for any
crimes of:

Offense must be Offenses are Serious Physical Convicted of a final

not embraced Injury, Less Serious judgment
embraced in the
in the same
same title Estafa, Robbery,
title of the
Theft, Falsification
of the Code Code

If present, always Not always Before beginning to

aggravating; serve sentence, or
aggravating
While serving the
depends on
same sentence
discretion of
the court

Art. 14, Par. 11

Price/Reward/Promise
BASIS: Greater perversity of the offender, as shown by motivating power itself. If without
previous promise it was given voluntarily after the crime had been committed as an expression
of his appreciation for the sympathy and aid shown by other accused, it should not be taken
into consideration for the purposes of increasing the penalty. US vs. Flores, 28 Phil. 29, 34)

27
RA 8294 – Amending PD 1866 (firearms, ammunitions, and explosives) and providing
 aggravating circumstances therefor. (See R.A. 10591)

Art. 14, Par. 12

Inundation, fire, explosion, stranding of a vessel or intentional damage thereto, derailment of
a locomotive, or by use of any other artifice involving great waste and ruin.
When there is no actual design to kill a person in burning a house, it is plain arson even if a
person is killed.

Art. 14, Par. 13

Evident Premeditation
Requisites, the prosecution must prove:
1. The time when the offender determined to commit the crime;
2. An act manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his determination;
3. A sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution, to allow him to reflect
upon the consequence of his act and to allow conscience to overcome the resolution of his
will.

Case
Evident premeditation cannot be appreciated. The two accused allegedly planned to kill Waje
at 7:00 o'clock in the morning and the killing took place at 9:00 A.M. The two accused did not
have sufficient time to reflect during the two hours that preceded the killing. People vs.
Crisostomo, G.R.
No. L-38180, October 23, 1981
People vs. dela Cruz, 398 SCRA 415 (February 28, 2003) Elements was not prove

Art. 14, Par. 14

28
Art. 14, Par. 15
Advantage be taken of superior strength/ means be employed to weaken defense
Applicable only for crimes against persons (e.g. homicide). Sometimes with crimes against
persons and property (robbery with rape).
Abuse of superior strength cannot likewise be appreciated even if there were at least two
assailants as superiority in number vis-a-vis that of the victim does not of itself warrant a
finding of abuse of superior strength. There must exist proof that the attackers deliberately
took advantage of their superior strength. People vs. Cantojos, 370 SCRA 105 (2001)

Art. 14, Par. 16

Treachery – there is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against person,
employing means, method or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially
to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended
party might make.
Requisites:
1. That at the time of attack, the victim was not in a position to defend himself; and
Craft Fraud Disguise

involves the use of insidious words or machinations resorting to any

intellectual trickery or use to induce the victim to act in device to conceal
cunning on the part of a manner which would enable identity.
the accused. the offender carry out his design.

29
2. That the offender consciously adopted the particular means, method or form on the attack
employed by him.

Cases
The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by an aggressor without the
slightest provocation on the part of the victim, thus depriving the latter of any real chance to
put up a defense, and thereby ensuring the commission of the attack without risk to the
aggressor. People vs. Escarlos, 410 SCRA 463 (2003) In the case at bar, it was established that
appellant came from behind, went towards the right of the victim, and suddenly stabbed the
victim’s chest while holding the latter’s left shoulder. Evidence shows that, first, at the time of
attack, the victim was not in a position to defend himself, as he was unarmed and totally
unsuspecting when appellant suddenly held and stabbed him; and second, appellant
consciously and deliberately adopted the particular means of attack, as he was seen
surreptitiously following the victim with a balisong tucked under his waist. Clearly therefore,
treachery attended the crime.

People vs. Alfon, 399 SCRA 64 (2003)

The presence of treachery, though, should not result in qualifying the offense to murder, for
the correct rule is that when it obtains in the special complex crime of robbery with homicide,
such treachery is to be regarded as a generic aggravating circumstance, robbery with homicide
definition and special penalty in the Revised Penal Code. People vs. Cando, 334 SCRA 331
(2000)

Summary of rules on treachery:

(1) When aggression is continuous, treachery must be present at the beginning of the assault;
(2) When the assault was not continuous, in that there was interruption, it is sufficient that
treachery was present at the moment the fatal blow was given. In treachery, intent is
immaterial, and must always be appreciated even if it was not the person the accused
intended to kill.

Art. 14, Par. 17

30
Ignominy – pertains to moral order, which adds disgrace and obloquy to the material injury
caused by the crime. But it was incorrect to appreciate adding ignominy to the offense
because the victim was already dead when his body was dismembered.
This aggravating circumstance requires that the offense be committed in a manner that tends
to make its effects more humiliating to the victim, that is, add to his moral suffering. People
vs. Carmina, G.R. No. 81404, January 28, 1991)

Art. 14, Par. 18

That crime be committed after an unlawful entry. There is unlawful entry when an entrance is
effected by a way not intended for the purpose. To effect entrance, not for escape.

Art. 14, Par. 19

That as a means to the commission of the crime, a wall, roof, floor, door, or window be
broken. The act of entering through the window, which is not the proper place for entrance
into the house, constitutes unlawful entry. Also to effect entrance, not for escape.
Exceptions under Rules of Criminal Procedure
• Under Rule 113, Section 11, to make an arrest
• Under Rule 126, Section 7, if refused admittance to the place

Art. 14, Par. 20

Crime be committed with aid of persons under 15 years of age or by means of motor vehicles,
airships, or other similar means.
NOTE: 15 years now 18 years of age Motor vehicles: do not include bicycle under this
aggravating circumstance.

Art. 14, Par. 21

Deliberately augmented by causing other wrong cruelty)
Cruelty – when the culprit enjoys and delights in making his victim suffer slowly and gradually,
causing him unnecessary physical pain in the consummation of the criminal act. People vs.
Dayug, 49 Phil. 423, 427
Requisites:
1. That the injury caused be deliberately increased by causing other wrong;
31
2. That the other wrong be unnecessary for the execution of the purpose of the offender.

Other aggravating circumstances

a.) When committed by a Syndicate
Sec.23, RA 7659
The maximum penalty shall be imposed if the offense was committed by any group who
belongs to an organized/syndicated crime group. An organized/syndicated crime group means
a group of two or more persons collaborating, confederating or mutually helping one another
for purposes of gain in the commission of any crime.
b.) When committed under the influence of drugs Sec.25 RA 9165
c.) Use of unlicensed firearm in homicide or Murder People vs. Malinao, G.R. No. 128148,
February 16, 2004
d.) When the owner, driver, passenger of a carnapped vehicle is killed/rape
Section 14 of RA 6539 People vs. Garcia and Bernabe, G.R. No. 138470, April 1, 2003

Article 15 Alternative Circumstances

Alternative circumstances are:
• Relationship
• Intoxication
• Degree of instruction and education of the offender

RELATIONSHIP
Crimes When Mitigating When aggravating
Against
Persons

Less serious Physical injuries, Less serious physical injuries, slight physical
slight physical injuries, if the injuries, if the offended party is higher in
32
 When mitigating When aggravating

If not habitual When habitual

offended party is lower in degree; When admitted: ascendants,

degree; descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted
brothers or sisters, relatives by affinity within
the same degrees;

Chastity N/A Always aggravating

Property Robbery, Usurpation, Fr N/A (No criminal, only civil liability on theft,
insolvency, Arson swindling and malicious mischief)

INTOXICATION
If not habitual When habitual

If not habitual When habitual

Not subsequent to the plan Intentional

DEGREE OF INSTRUCTION
When mitigating When aggravating

Low degree High degree

When schooling was confined in studying When offender took advantage of the
and finishing only degree

PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FOR FELONIES

Art. 16. Who are criminally liable. — The following are criminally liable for grave and less
grave felonies:
1. Principals.
33
2. Accomplices.
3. Accessories.
The following are criminally liable for light felonies:
1. Principals
2. Accomplices.

PERSONS CRIMINALLY LIABLE FORFELONIES

Three Types of Principals:
1. Principals by direct participation
2. Principals by inducement
3. Principals by indispensable cooperation Accessories are not liable for light
felonies
Rules relative to light felonies:
• Punishable only when consummated (Art.7, RPC)
• Punishable if committed against persons or property, even if attempted or frustrated (Art.7,
RPC)
• Only principals and accomplices are liable for light felonies (Art.16, RPC)
• Accessories are not liable for light felonies, even if committed against persons or property
(Art.16, RPC)

Only natural persons can be active subject of crime.

Juridical persons are criminally liable under certain special laws Examples:
• B.P. Blg. 68 – Corporation Code
• Com. Act No. 146 – Public Service Law
• B.P. Blg. 178 – Revised Securities Act
• B.P. 881 – Omnibus Election Code

Art. 17. Principals. — The following are considered principals:

1. Those who take a direct part in the execution of the act;

34
 2. Those who directly force or induce others to commit it;
3. Those who cooperate in the commission of the offense by another act without which it
would not have been accomplished.

Rules
In conspiracy (committing felony), act of one is act of all. It may exist even without evident
premeditation.
In abduction, all are liable even if only one acted with lewd design. (lewd = obscene)
In multiple rape, each rapist is equally liable for the other rapes.

Art. 18. Accomplices

Accomplices are those persons who, not being included in Art. 17, cooperate in the
execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts.
Quasi collective criminal responsibility – between collective criminal responsibility and
individual criminal responsibility, where some of the offenders in the crime are criminal and
the others are accomplices. In case of doubt, the participation of the offender will be
considered that of an accomplice rather than of a principal.

DISTINCTIONS
Conspirators/ Accomplices Accessories
Principals

Know and agree with Know and agree The accessory does not take direct part
criminal design
with criminal or cooperate in, or induce, the commission of
crime.
design

Decided upon such Came to know The accessory does not cooperate in
course of action
after principals the commission of the offense by acts
decided either prior thereto or simultaneous
therewith.

35
Decided that crime be Concur only by The participation of the accessory in all
committed performing previous or
cases always takes place after the
simultaneous acts
commission of the crime.

The authors of the Merely instruments

crime
whose acts not
essential

P.D. 1612
P.D. No. 1612 (Anti-Fencing Law of 1979)
Fencing – the act of any person who, with intent to gain for himself or for another, shall buy,
receive, possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in any other
manner deal in any article, item, object, or anything, of value which he knows, or should be
known to him, to have been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery and theft.
Here the accused is considered Principal Presumption: Mere possession of stolen items

Art. 20. Accessories who are exempt from criminal liability

The penalties prescribed for accessories shall not be imposed upon those who are such with
respect to their spouses, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural, and adopted brothers
and sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees, with the single exception of
accessories falling within the provisions of paragraph 1 of the next receding article.
1. By profiting by the effects of the crime;
2. By assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime.

Penalties
Art. 21. Penalties that may be imposed. — No felony shall be punishable by any penalty not
prescribed by law prior to its commission.

Art. 22. Retroactive effect of penal laws.

36
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.

Art. 23. Effect of pardon by the offended party.

A pardon of the offended party does not extinguish criminal action except as provided in
Article 344 of this Code; but civil liability with regard to the interest of the injured party is
extinguished by his express waiver. Pardon by under Article 344 is only a bar to criminal
prosecution.
In the crimes of Adultery, Concubinage, Seduction, Abduction, Rape and Acts of
Lasciviousness (ACSARAL), “express” pardon by the offended party relieves criminal liability.

Art. 24. Measures of prevention or safety which are not considered penalties. —
The following shall not be considered as penalties:
The arrest and temporary detention of accused persons,
The commitment of a minor to any of the Institutions,
Suspension from the employment of public office,
Fines and other corrective measures Deprivation of rights and the reparations which the civil
laws may establish in penal form.

Penalties: Its Scales

Art. 25. Penalties which may be imposed. —
The penalties which may be imposed according to this Code, and their different classes, are
those included in the following:
Capital Punishment: Death (Not in effect: R.A, 9346)
Afflictive Penalties: RP, RT, PTAD, PTSD, and PM
Correctional Penalties: PC S AM D
Light penalties: arresto menor, Public censure
Common to the preceding Classes: Bond to keep the peace

Article 26

37
Art. 26. When afflictive, correctional, or light penalty. — A fine, whether imposed as a single
of as an alternative penalty, shall be considered an afflictive penalty, if it exceeds 6,000 pesos;
a correctional penalty, if it does not exceed 6,000 pesos but is not less than 200 pesos; and a
light penalty if it less than 200 pesos.

Where destierro imposed

Serious physical injuries or death under exceptional circumstances (Art.247)
• Failure to give bond for good behavior (Art.284)
• Penalty for concubine in concubinage (Art.334)
• In case where after reducing penalty by one or more degrees, destierro is the proper penalty.
Bond for good behavior (Art.284) is required of a person making grave or light threat.

Penalties
Article 28 Computation of penalties
Article 29
(Period of preventive imprisonment; Full credit deduction; 4/5 if certification is signed. If
detained for a period of equal penalty as expected he must be released. If imposable penalty is
destierro he must be released after 30 days

Article 30 to 34: Effects of accessory penalties

Art. 36. Pardon; its effect
A pardon shall not work the restoration of the right to hold public office, or the right of
suffrage, unless such rights be expressly restored by the terms of the pardon. A pardon shall in
no case exempt the culprit from the payment of the civil indemnity imposed upon him by the
sentence.

Article 37
Costs includes:
1. Fees, and
2. Indemnities, in the course of judicial proceedings.

Art. 38.
Pecuniary liabilities; Order of payment.
38
a.) reparation
b.) Indemnification of consequential damages.
c.) The fine.
d.) The cost of the proceedings

Article 39 Subsidiary penalties

Rules in summarized forms:
Subsidiary penalty – is a subsidiary personal liability to be suffered by the convict who has no
property to meet the fine, at the rate of one day for each eight pesos.

Amended by R.A. No. 10159

If the convict has no property with which to meet the fine mentioned in paragraph 3 of the
next preceding article, he shall be subject to a subsidiary personal liability at the rate of one
day for each amount equivalent to the highest minimum wage prevailing in the Philippines at
the time of rendition of judgment of conviction by the trial court.

Rules
If the penalty is Prision Correccional or Arresto with Fine:
2. If penalty imposed is Fine only:
3. If penalty is higher than Prision Correccional – no subsidiary imprisonment.
4. If penalty imposed is not to be executed by confinement but fixed duration – same
deprivations as 1, 2 and 3.
5. If financial circumstances of the convict should improve, he should still pay the fine,
notwithstanding the fact that the convict suffered subsidiary personal liability therefor.
The culprit cannot be made to undergo subsidiary imprisonment unless the judgment
expressly so provides. (People vs. Fajardo, 65 Phil. 539, 542)

Art. 47
In what cases the death penalty shall not be imposed. — The death penalty shall be imposed
in all cases in which it must be imposed under existing laws, except in the following cases:
a.) When the guilty person be more than seventy years of age.
b.) When upon appeal or revision of the case by the Supreme Court

39
c.) When the guilty person is below 18 yrs of age at the time of commission of the crime.
d.) When upon appeal or automatic review of the case by the Supreme Court, the vote of eight
members is not obtained for imposition of death penalty.
e.) When the convict is pregnant in no case death penalty cannot be imposed within 1 year
from the finality of the judgment
Complex Crime Article 48
Complex crime is only one crime.
Kinds of complex crimes:
1. When a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies.
(Compound crime or delito compuesto)
2. When an offense is a necessary means for committing the other.
(Complex crime proper or delito complejo)

CONCEPTS
Composite crimes: There are two or more acts committed but the law provide a single penalty
only. (Ex: Complex Crimes)
Plurality of Crimes-Consists in the successive execution by the same individual of different
criminal acts upon any of which no conviction has yet been made.

KINDS OF PLURALITY OF CRIMES

1.) Formal or ideal plurality- Two or more acts committed but there is only one penalty.
2.) Real or material plurality-There are different crimes in law as well as in law as well as in the
conscience of the offender. Two or more acts two or more penalties

Absorption Rule
Murder, arson and robbery are mere ingredients of the crime of rebellion, as a means
‘necessary’ for the perpetration of the offense. Such common offenses are absorbed or
inherent in the crime of rebellion. In as much as the acts specified in Article 135 constitute one
single crime, it follows that said acts offers no occasion for the application Article 48, which
requires therefore the commission of at least two crimes. (People vs. Hernandez, 99 Phil. 515)

Single Larceny Doctrine

40
Single Larceny Doctrine – from the doctrine that taking of property or properties belonging to
the same or different persons by a series of act or acts arising from single criminal intent or
resolution constitutes only one crime. The courts have abandoned separate “larceny doctrine”
which is the opposite. Same place same time Single criminal impulse Santiago vs.
Garchitorena, 228 SCRA 214

Case
The plaint of petitioner's counsel that he is charged with a crime that does not exist in the
statute books, while technically correct so far as the Court has ruled that rebellion may not be
complexed with other offenses committed on the occasion thereof, must therefore be
dismissed as a mere flight of rhetoric. Read in the context of Hernandez, the information does
indeed charge the petitioner with a crime defined and punished by the Revised Penal Code:
simple rebellion. (Enrile vs. Salazar, 186 SCRA 217)

Ordinary Complex Crime Special Complex Crime

Composed of 2 or more crimes punished in Made up of 2 or more crimes which are

different provisions of the Revised Penal considered as components of a single
Code indivisible offense

Penalty imposable is the most serious Penalty imposable is specifically provided by

crime in its maximum period law

Distinctions
Special Complex Crimes
a.) Robbery with homicide, Art.294 par.1
b.) Rape with homicide, Art.335
c.) Kidnapping with homicide, Art.267 (as amended by R.A. No. 7659)
d.) Robbery with Rape

Article 49
Penalty for the crime not intended (Error in Personnae)
Penalty for the crime committed be higher than that intended: Penalty for intended crime
shall be imposed.
Penalty committed is lower than that intended: The lighter penalty shall be imposed
41
Article 46 and 50 to 57

ACCUSED Consummatted Frustrated Attempted

Principal 0 (46) 1 (50) 2 (51)

Accomplices 1 (52) 2 (54) 3 (56)

Accessories 2 (53) 3 (55) 4 (57)

Article 58 Additional Penalty for Accessories and Article 59

With abuse of public function (Grave felony): APD
Less Grave Felony: ATD
Article 59: Penalty for impossible crime: Arresto Mayor or fine from 200 to 500 pesos

Article 61 Graduated Scale

The lower penalty shall be taken from the graduated scale (no. 1) in Article 71:
1. Death
2. Reclusion Perpetua RP
3. Reclusion Temporal RT
4. Prision Mayor PM
5. Prision Correccional PC
6. Arresto Mayor AMa
7. Destierro D
8. Arresto Menor AMe
9. Public Censure C
10. Fine F
The indivisible penalties are (1) death, (2) reclusion perpetua and (3) public censure.

Article 70
42
Art. 70. Successive service of sentence. When the culprit has to serve two or
more penalties, he shall serve them simultaneously
The Three-Fold Rule*
1. Maximum duration of the convict’s sentence: 3 times the most severe penalty
imposed
2. Maximum duration: shall not exceed 40 years
3. Subsidiary imprisonment: This shall be excluded in computing for the maximum
duration.
*The three-fold rule shall apply only when the convict is to serve 4 or more
sentences successively.

Article 25, 70 and 71

Art.icle 25 Article 70 Article 71

Penalties are Classifies penalties for Provides for the scales which
purpose of Successive should be observed in
classified into:
service of sentence, graduating the penalties by
(1) principal and according to their degrees in accordance with
(2) Accessory penalties. The severity. Art. 61
principal penalties are
subdivided into correctional
and light.

43
 Destierro classified as Destierro is placed under Destierro is placed
correctional penalty; Arresto Menor according
Above Arresto Menor.
Arresto Menor is a light to severity.
penalty.

Article 89
How criminal liability is totally extinguished. — Criminal liability is totally extinguished:
1. By the death of the convict, as to the personal penalties and as to pecuniary penalties,
liability therefor is extinguished only when the death of the offender occurs before final
judgment.
2. By service of the sentence;
3. By amnesty, which completely extinguishes the penalty and all its effects;
4. By absolute pardon;
5. By prescription of the crime;
6. By prescription of the penalty;
7. By the marriage of the offended woman, as provided in Article 344 of this Code.

Art. 90. Prescription of crime

Prescription of the crime – is the forfeiture or loss of the right of the State to prosecute the
offender after the lapse of a certain time.
Prescription of the penalty – is the loss or forfeiture of the Government to execute the final
sentence after the lapse of a certain time. There be final judgment period of time prescribed
by law for its enforcement has lapsed.
Marriage of the offender with the offended woman must be contracted in good faith. Hence,
marriage contracted only to avoid criminal liability is devoid of legal effects. (People vs.
Santiago, 51 Phil. 68, 70)

Prescription of Crimes (Article 90)

44
 Penalty (RPC) Prescription

Death, Reclusion Perpetua or Reclusion Temporal 20 years

Perpetual or Temporary Absolute/Special 15 years

Disqualification, Prision Mayor

Prision Correccional, Suspension, Destierro 10 years

Arresto mayor 5 years

Libel 1 year

Oral defamation; Slander by deed 6 months

Arresto Menor, Public Censure (including Simple 2 months
Slander, fines not exceeding P200.00)

Cases
Q1: X committed a crime for which the law provides a fine of P200.00 as penalty. What is the
prescriptive period of crime
A1: Two months. The issue here is not prescription of penalty.
If Prescription of Crime Article 9 prevails over Article 26
Q2: X was convicted, cannot pay the fine of P200.00 and was made to serve subsidiary
imprisonment. While serving sentence, he escaped, evading the sentence. What is the
prescriptive period?
A2: 10 years. The issue here is prescription of penalty.
If Prescription of Penalty Article 26 prevails over Article 9.

Article 94
Art. 94. Partial Extinction of criminal liability. Criminal liability is extinguished
partially:
1. By conditional pardon;
2. By commutation of the sentence; and
45
3. For good conduct allowances which the culprit may earn while he is serving his
sentence.
Article 95 and 96
Article 95 speaks of obligations incurred by person granted a conditional pardon.
Article 96 speaks of the effects of commutation of service, i.e. substituting the original
sentence with lesser periods.

Article 97
Art. 97. Allowance for good conduct. — The good conduct of any prisoner in any penal
institution shall entitle him to the following deductions from the period of his sentence:

Deductions for good conduct

(During) Sentence Deduction (for every month of good conduct)

2 years 5 days (20)

3-5 years 8 days (23)
6-10 years 10 days (25)
11 + 15 days (30)
(See amendments: plus 15 under Note: No allowance for good conduct while prisoner is released under
RA 10592) conditional pardon.
(Additional)
At any time during the period of imprisonment, he shall be allowed
another deduction of fifteen days, in addition to numbers one to four
hereof, for each month of study, teaching or mentoring service time
rendered.

46
Article 98
Article 98 provides for a deduction of 1/5 of the period of sentence if after evading a sentence
under Art. 158 gives himself up to authorities within 48 hours after the passing of calamity.

Amendment on Article 98 under R.A. 10592

ART. 98. Special time allowance for loyalty. – A deduction of one fifth of the period of his
sentence shall be granted to any prisoner who, having evaded his preventive imprisonment or
the service of his sentence under the circumstances mentioned in Article 158 of this Code,
gives himself up to the authorities within 48 hours following the issuance of a proclamation
announcing the passing away of the calamity or catastrophe referred to in said article. A
deduction of two-fifths 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 enumerated in Article 158 of this Code.
"This Article shall apply to any prisoner whether undergoing preventive imprisonment or
serving sentence."
(This privilege can still be enjoyed even if the case is on appeal)

Article 99 Amendment
"ART. 99. Who grants time allowances. – Whenever lawfully justified, the Director of the
Bureau of Corrections, the Chief of the Bureau of Jail Management and Penology and/or the
Warden of a provincial, district, municipal or city jail shall grant allowances for good conduct.
Such allowances once granted shall not be revoked."

Article 100 and 101

Article 100 Civil liability of a person guilty of felony. Every person criminally liable for a
felony is also civilly liable.

Article 101 specified the rules regarding civil liability in certain cases.
Civil liability of persons exempt from criminal liability
• No civil liability in Par.4 of Art.12 which provides for injury caused by mere accident.
• Also no civil liability in Par.7 of Art.12 (when prevented by insuperable cause)
• There is no civil liability under justifying circumstances. Except paragraph 4

47
Article 102 and 103
Article 102 refers to subsidiary civil liability of innkeepers, tavern keepers, and
proprietors of establishments.
It is not necessary that the effects of the guest be actually delivered to the innkeeper. It is
enough that they are within the inn.

Article 103 refers to subsidiary civil liability of other persons (particularly schools
and industries)
Elements:
1. The employer, teacher, person or corporation is engaged in any kind of industry.
2. Any of their servants, pupils, workmen, apprentices or employees commits a felony while in
the discharge of his duties.

3. The said employee is insolvent* and has not satisfied his civil liability.

Article 104 What includes civil liability

Restitution – in theft, the culprit is duty bound to return the property taken. (Applicable only
for crimes against property)
Reparation – in case of inability to return the property stolen, the culprit must pay the value of
the property stolen; in case of physical injuries, the reparation of the damage caused would
consist in the payment of hospital bills and doctor’s fees to the offended party.
Indemnifications for consequential damages –the loss of his salary or earning.

Damages
Damages recoverable in case of death
1. In recent cases, SC raised it to P75,000.00 (People vs. Lucero, G.R. No. 179044, December 6,
2010)

48
2. For the loss of the earning capacity of the deceased (Art. 2206 par.1, NCC) 3. Support in
favor of the person to whom the deceased was obliged to give, such person not being an heir
of the deceased. (Art. 2206 par.2, NCC)
4. Moral damages for mental anguish in favor of the spouse, descendants and ascendants of
the deceased. (Art. 2206 par.3, NCC)
5. Exemplary damages in certain cases. (Art. 2230, NCC)
Rape with Homicide imposed* with:
• P100,000.00 civil indemnity
• P75,000.00 moral damages
• P25,000.00 temperate damages
• P100,000.00 exemplary damages
*In People vs. Gumimba G.R. No. 174056 Feb. 27, 2007
Temperate damages – to be awarded if the court finds that some pecuniary loss has been
suffered but its amount cannot be proven with certainty.

Sources
2012 CRIMINAL LAW 1 (REVIEWER) | ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW
Criminal Law Conspectus By: Atty. Florence Regalado 2007 edited 2014
Revised Penal Code: Annotated JLR

49