Criminal Law: Chapter 1 of the RPC scientific forms of positivism are individual and

sociological positivism. Biological positivism is

i. Fundamental Principles based on pseudoscience.
a. What is Criminal Law c. Eclectic or Mixed
Criminal law is a branch of law which defines It is a combination of positivist and classical
crimes, treats of their nature, and provides for thinking wherein crimes that are economic and
their punishment. social in nature should be dealt in a positive
manner, thus, the law is more compassionate.
b. Distinguish Crime, Felony, Offenses, This is the theory that we abide our criminal
Infractions laws to.
d. Utilitarian or Protective
CRIME -The generic term used to refer to a affirms that the primary function of punishment
wrongdoing punished either under the Revised is the protective of society against actual and
Penal Code (RPC) or under a special law. It is an potential wrongdoers. If the circumstances are
act committed or omitted in violation of a public capable of two or more inferences, the
law forbidding or commanding it. (Bouvier’s presumption of innocence must prevail and the
Law Dictionary, 2012, as cited in Reyes, 2017) court must acquit.

FELONY- Acts and omissions punishable by law Classical Theory Positivist Theory
are felonies (delitos). Felonies are committed 1. Man is essentially 1. Man is subdued
not only by means of deceit (dolo) but also by a moral creature with occasionally by a
means of fault (culpa). an absolutely free strange and morbid
will to choose phenomenon which
OFFENSE- is an unlawful act: (a) that is between good and conditions him to do
prescribed as a criminal offense by law; (b) evil. wrong contrary to his
whose characteristics are specified by law; and volition.
(c) for which a penalty is prescribed by law. 2. Basic criminal 2. Crime is essentially
liability is human free a social and moral
INFRACTION- is the least serious offense. As will and the purpose phenomenon and
such, infractions do not lead to jail time, of the penalty is penalty is imposed
probation, or create a criminal record. Most retribution. for self-defense.
infractions are for violations of traffic laws, 3. Crime is a juridical 3. Basis of criminal
municipal codes, or administrative regulations. entity and the responsibility is his
penalty is an evil and dreadfulness or
a means of juridical dangerous state.
ii. Theories in Criminal Law tutelage.
a. Classical or Juristic
posits that a human person is essentially a
moral creature with an absolute free will to iii. Limitations
choose between good and evil. It asserts that a. Constitutional Limitations
one should only be adjudged or held The constitutional provision limiting the power
accountable for wrongful acts if free will of Congress to enact penal laws are the
appears unimpaired. following:
b. Positivist or Realistic
The positivist theory in criminology states that 1. The law must not be an ex post facto law or it
individuals commit crimes because of natural should not be given a retroactive effect.
causes that are out of their control. The two
2. The law must not be a bill of attainder, prevail (People vs. Samonte, G. R. No. 36559,
meaning it cannot provide punishment without July 26, 1932)
judicial proceedings.

3. The law must not impose cruel, unusual or vi. Applicability of the RPC
degrading punishment. a. Extra-territoriality
Article 2:
No person shall be held to answer for a criminal 1) Those who commit an offense
offense without due process of law. while on a Philippine ship or
airship
iv. Legal Maxims - A ship or airship owned by the
a. Nullum crimen nulla poena sine Philippines or carrying a Philippine
lege flag is an extension of the Republic
(There is no crime when there is no law of the Philippines. Thus, while such
punishingthe same) No matter how ship or airship is outside of the
wrongful, evil, or bad the act is, if there country, any crime or offense made
is no law defining the act, thesame is on such vehicles shall be considered
not considered a crime. as if made under Philippine
b. Actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit territory.
rea
“An act does not make a person guilty unless FRENCH RULE ENGLISH RULE
there is a guilty mind.” It highlights that both according to which according to
the physical act and the corresponding guilty crimes committed which, crimes
intention are necessary to establish criminal aboard a foreign perpetrated
liability merchant vessels under such
c. Actus me invito factus non est should not be circumstances
meus actus prosecuted in the are in general
"the act any person commit against his/her will courts of the triable in the
is not his/her act." country within courts of the
whose territorial country within
d. El que es causa de la causa es
jurisdiction they territory they
causa del mal causado
were committed, were committed.
“He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of unless their
the evil caused'. commission
affects the peace
v. Rule on Construction of Penal Laws and security of the
a. In dubio, pro reo territory
when in doubt, the judge must rule in favor of
the accused.
b. Doctrine of Stare Decisis 2) Those who forge or counterfeit
“to stand by things decided,” is a legal principle any coin or currency note of the
that directs courts to adhere to previous Philippine Islands or obligations and
judgments (or judgments of higher tribunals) securities issued by the
while resolving a case with allegedly Government of the Philippine
comparable facts. Islands;
c. Spanish text prevail
In cases of doubt in the interpretation of the 3) Those who are liable for acts
Revised Penal Code, the Spanish text should connected with the introduction
into these islands of the obligations
 and securities mentioned in the
presiding number;

4) While being public officers or

employees, those who commit an
offense in the exercise of their Characteristics of Criminal Law
functions; or
I. Generality
5) Those who commit any of the General Rule: Criminal law is binding on all
crimes against national security and persons who live or sojourn in Philippine
the law of nations under the RPC.
territory and no foreigner enjoys in this country
b. Exterritoriality
extraterritorial right to be exempted from its
the privilege granted to some
laws and jurisdiction. (New Civil Code, Article
aliens, esp. diplomats, of being exempt
from the jurisdiction of the state in 14)
which they reside. the right or privilege Exception to the general rule:
of a state to exercise authority in
certain circumstances beyond the limits 1. Treaty stipulations and international
of its territory. agreements, e.g., PH-US Visiting Forces
c. Intraterritoriality Agreement and Asian Development- Philippines
the application of a law or Agreement (1966);
regulation within the territory of a
particular jurisdiction. It means that the 2. Laws of Preferential Application, e.g., R.A. No.
law or regulation is applicable and 75 penalizes acts which would impair the
enforceable within the boundaries of proper observance by the Republic and its
that jurisdiction. inhabitants of the immunities, rights, and
privileges of duly accredited foreign diplomatic
vii. Sources of Criminal Law representatives in the Philippines. (2014 BAR);
a. Revised Penal Code
It contains the general penal laws of the 3. The principles of public international law;
Philippines
b. Special Penal Laws 4. Parliamentary Immunity: Members of the
it is a penal law which punishes acts not defined Congress are not liable for libel or slander in
and penalized by the RPC. They are statutes connection with any speech delivered on the
enacted by the legislative branch which are floor of the house during a regular or special
penal in character but are not amendments to session. (Sec. 11, Art. IV, 1987 Constitution);
the RPC.
c. Presidential Penal Decrees 5. Public vessels of foreign friendly power; or

it is a legal proclamation issued by the 6. Members of foreign country stationed in the

president, according to certain procedures Philippines with its consent.
(usually established in a constitution or other
governing document). It has the force of law. Examples:

Mala in Se Crimes Acts wrong in themselves a. Sovereigns and other Chiefs of States.

Mala Prohibita Crimes Acts which would not be b. Ambassadors, ministers, plenipotentiary,
wrong but for there is a law prohibiting it, such act ministers residents, and charges d’ affaires.
would be wrong if committed.
II.Territoriality inapplicable to pending actions or existing

General Rule: Penal laws of the Philippines are causes of action. (Tavera v. Valdez, 1 Phil.
enforceable only within its territory. (Revised
463, 470-471)
Penal Code,Article 2)
2. Where the offender is a habitual criminal
Exception to the General Rule: The RPC shall be
enforced outside of the jurisdiction of the under Rule 5, Article 62, Revised Penal
Philippines against those who:
Code. (Revised Penal Code, Article 22)
1. Should commit an offense while on a
Philippine ship or airship; Habitual Criminal

2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or ● A person shall be deemed to be a habitual

currency not of the Philippines or obligations delinquent if within a period of ten years from
and securities issued by the Government of the the date of his release or last conviction of the
Philippines; crimes of serious or less serious physical
injuries, robbery, theft, estafa, or falsification,
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the he is found guilty of any said crimes a third time
introduction into these islands of the or oftener. (Revised Penal Code, Article 62[5],
obligations and securities mentioned in the last par.)
preceding number;

4. While being public officers or employees,

should commit an offense in the exercise of Pro Reo Principle
their functions; or In dubio, pro reo — “When in doubt, rule for
5. Should commit any of the crimes against the accused.” The Court explained that in
national security and the law of nations, defined interpreting and applying criminal law, all
in Title One of Book Two of the RPC. (Revised doubts should be resolved in favor of the
Penal Code, Article 2) accused. (Intestate Estate of Vda. de
Carungcong v. People, G.R. No. 181409,
[February 11, 2010], 626 PHIL 177-211)
III. Prospectivity Basis: In consonance with the constitutional
General Rule: A penal law cannot make an act guarantee that the accused shall be presumed
punishable in a manner in which it was not innocent unless and until his guilt is established
punishable when committed. (Revised Penal beyond reasonable doubt. (Id.)
Code, Article 21)

Exception: Whenever a new statute dealing Application of the Pro Reo Principle
with crime establishes conditions more lenient
or favorable to the accused, it CAN be given a 1. Rule of Lenity — The rule applies when the
retroactive effect. (Revised Penal Code, Article court is faced with two possible interpretations
22) of a penal statute, one that is prejudicial to the
accused and another that is favorable to him.
Exception to the exception: The rule calls for the adoption of an
1. Where the new law is expressly made interpretation which is more lenient to the
accused. (Buenafe v. Commission on Elections, entitled, such as the protection of a former
G.R. Nos. 260374 & 260426, [June 28, 2022]) conviction or acquittal, or a proclamation of
amnesty. (In re: Kay Villegas Kami, Inc., G.R. No.
Note: If there is no ambiguity, the rule of lenity
L-32485, [October 22, 1970], 146 PHIL 429-435)
cannot be applied.
Interpretation of Penal Laws
2. Equipoise Rule — Where the evidence on an
issue of fact is in question or there is doubt on a. Penal laws are strictly construed against the
which side the evidence weighs, the doubt Government and liberally in favor of the
should be resolved in favor of the accused. accused. (People v. Atop, G.R. Nos. 124303-05,
[February 10, 1998], 349 PHIL 825-845)
● If inculpatory facts and circumstances are
capable of two or more explanations, one ● In case of ambiguity in construction of penal
consistent with the innocence of the accused laws, it is well-settled that such laws shall be
and the other consistent with his guilt, then the construed strictly against the government, and
evidence does not fulfill the test of moral literally in favor of the accused. (People v.
certainty and will not justify a conviction. Soriano, G.R. No. 142565, [July 29, 2003], 455
PHIL 77-100)

b. As the Revised Penal Code was originally

Ex Post Facto Law
approved and enacted in Spanish, the Spanish
No ex post facto law… shall be enacted. (Article text is controlling. (People v. Santos y Entienza,
III, Section 22, 1987 Constitution) G.R. No. 117873, [December 22, 1997], 347 PHIL
723-740)
An ex post facto law is one which:
c. Offenses which are or in the future may be
1) Makes criminal an act done before the punishable under special laws are not subject to
passage of the law and which was innocent the provisions of this Code. (Revised Penal
when done, and punishes such an act; Code, Article 10)
2) Aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than ● This Code shall be supplementary to such
it was, when committed; laws, unless the latter should specially provide
3) Changes the punishment and inflicts a the contrary. (Id.)
greater punishment than the law annexed to
the crime when committed;
Retroactive Effect of Penal Laws
4) Alters the legal rules of evidence, and
authorizes conviction upon less or different General Rule: Penal laws generally should not
testimony than the law required at the time of be applied retroactively. (See Revised Penal
the commission of the offense; Code, Article 21)

5) Assuming to regulate civil rights and Exception: If the penal law is more favorable to
remedies only, in effect imposes penalty or the accused. (Revised Penal Code, Article 22)
deprivation of a right for something which when
Reason : The sovereign in enacting a
done was lawful; and
subsequent penal law more favorable to the
6) Deprives a person accused of a crime of some accused, has recognized that the greater
lawful protection to which he has become severity of the former law is unjust (See People
v. Moran, G.R. No. 17905, [January 27, 1923],
44 PHIL 387-437).

Retroactivity applies even if the person guilty of

the felony is already serving a sentence
(Escalante v. Santos, G.R. No. 36828, [February Felonies and Criminal Liability
2, 1932], 56 PHIL 483-488).
i. Concept of Felonies
Retroactivity applies in these situations:
Felonies
1. The crime has been committed and
prosecution begins; Acts and omissions punishable by the Revised
Penal Code. (See Revised Penal Code, Article 3)
2. Sentence has been passed, but service has
not begun; Elements of felonies:

3. The sentence is being carried out (Id.). 1. There must be an act or omission.

2. The act or omission must be punishable by

the Revised Penal Code.
Exception to the Exception:
3. The Act is performed or the omission is
1. The law, though favorable to the accused was incurred by means of dolo or culpa. (People v.
stipulated to be non-retroactive; and Gonzales, G.R. No. 80762, March 19, 1990)
2. The accused is a habitual delinquent. (Revised According to
Penal Code, Article 22) A person is a habitual
delinquent if: 1. Gravity — grave, less grave, light;

a. Person was last convicted of crimes 2. Mode of commission — Intentional and

of serious or less serious physical culpable;
injuries, robbery, theft, estafa, or 3. Their nature — Mala in se and mala
falsification; prohibita;
b. Person was convicted of any of the 4. The law punishing them — Felonies, o􀎛enses
said crimes for a third time or oftener; and infractions.
and
Kinds of Felonies
c. Conviction was within a period of 10
years from the last release or
conviction.

(Revised Penal Code, Article 62 [5], last par.)

Requisites of felonies committed by means of Distinction between intent and motive
dolo (malice):
Intent Motive
1. Freedom Intent is the purpose to Motive is the moving
use a particular means power which impels
2. Intelligence; and to effect a definite one to action for a
result. definite result
3. Intent Generally, considered Not an essential
as an essential element element of a crime,
Freedom — An act done with deliberation and and, hence, need not
with power to choose between two things. be proved for purposes
of conviction.
Intelligence — Concerns the ability to
determine the morality of human acts, as well
as the capacity to distinguish between a licit and Motive, when relevant and when need not be
an illicit act. (Id.) established:

Intent — Involves an aim or a determination to 1. Motive becomes material only when the
do a certain act. It does not refer to mere will, evidence is circumstantial or inconclusive, and
for the latter pertains to the act, while intent there is some doubt on whether a crime has
concerns the result of the act. (Id.) been committed or whether the accused has
committed it.
NOTE: If there is lack of intelligence,
theoffender is exempt from liability. 2. Where the identification of the accused
proceeds from an unreliable source and the
Distinction between general intent and specific
testimony is inconclusive and not free from
intent
doubt.

3. In ascertaining the truth between two

antagonistic theories or versions of the killing

4. Motive is relevant where the identity of the

person accused of having committed a crime is
in dispute, where there are no eyewitnesses,
and where suspicion is likely to fall upon a
number of persons.

5. When the act is alleged to be committed in

defense of a stranger but it must not be induced
by revenge, resentment, or other evil motive.

6. Evidence of guilt of the accused is

inconclusive

7. The act could give rise to variant crimes

 4. Malicious mischief

Requisites of felonies committed by means of Mens rea

culpa (Ne-F-In):
It is the criminal intent or evil mind. In general,
1. Criminal Negligence on the part of the the definition of a criminal offense involves not
offender, that is, the crime was the result of only an act or omission and its consequences
negligence, reckless imprudence, lack of but also the accompanying mental state of the
foresight, or lack of skill; actor.
2. Freedom of Action on the part of the Examples:
offender, that is, he was not acting under
duress; and 1. In theft, the mens rea is the taking of
property belonging to another with intent to
3. Intelligence on the part of the offender in gain.
performing the negligent act.
2. In falsification, the mens rea is the
1.Negligence commission of forgery with intent to pervert
the truth.
Deficiency in perception or lack of foresight, or
failure to pay proper attention and to use due 3. In robbery, the mens rea is the taking of
diligence in foreseeing injury or damage to be property belonging to another coupled with the
caused. employment of intimidation or violence upon
persons or things.
2.Imprudence
3.Intent
Deficiency in action or lack of skill, or failure to
take necessary precaution to avoid injury to Refers to the use of a particular means to effect
another. the desired result. It is a mental state, the
existence of which is demonstrated by the overt
Negligence vs. Imprudence
acts of a person.
NEGLIGENCE IMPRUDENCE
Deficiency of action Deficiency of
perception

Lack of foresight Lack of skill

Examples of Crimes which CANNOT be

Committed through Culpa (Negligence or
Imprudence)

1. Murder

2. Treason

3. Robbery
 How criminal liability is incurred How to determine Proximate Cause
Criminal liability is incurred by any person: Proximate Cause
1. Committing a felony although the wrongful That cause, which, in natural and continuous
act done be different from that which he sequence, unbroken by any efficient intervening
intended (Art. 4(1), RPC); and cause, produces the injury, and without which
2. Performing an act which would be an offense the result would not have occurred.
against persons or property, were it not for the As a rule, the offender is criminally liable for all
inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or the consequences of his felonious act, although
on account of the employment of inadequate or not intended, if the felonious act is the
ineffectual means. (Art. 4(2), RPC) proximate cause of the felony.

Requisites for the Application of the Proximate

Cause Doctrine (Art 4 (1), RPC)

1. That an 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.

When Considered as the “direct, natural, and

logical consequence” of the Felonious Act

1. Blow was efficient cause of death;

2. Blow accelerated death; or

3. Blow was the proximate cause of death.

Example:

Q: In an act to discipline his child, the father

claims that the death of his child was not
intended by him. Is his contention correct?

A: NO. He is liable under Art. 4(1) of the RPC. In

order that a person may be criminally liable for
a felony different from that which he intended
to commit, it is indispensable that:
(a) a felony was committed; and Example: X and Y are crew members of a cargo
vessel. They had a heated argument. X, with a
(b) the wrong done to the aggrieved person be
big knife in hand, threatened to kill Y. The victim
the direct consequence of the crime committed
Y, believing himself to be in immediate peril,
by the perpetrator beating his son and inflicting
threw himself into the water. Y died of
upon him physical injuries, he committed a
drowning. In this case, X is liable for homicide
felony.
for the death of Y. Even if other causes
As a direct consequence of the beating cooperated in producing the fatal result, as long
suffered by the child, the latter expired. His as the wound inflicted is dangerous, that is,
criminal liability for the death of his son is, calculated to destroy or endanger life, the actor
thus, clear. is liable. It is important that there be no
efficient intervening cause.
Requisites of Proximate Cause
Instances when the Felony Committed is NOT
1. The direct, natural, and logical cause; the Proximate Cause of the Resulting Injury
2. Produces the injury or damage; 1. When there is an efficient intervening cause
3. Unbroken by any efficient intervening cause; between the felony committed and the
and resulting injury; or

4. Without which the result would not have 2. When the resulting injury or damage is due to
occurred. the intentional act of the victim.

Difference between Immediate Cause and Efficient Intervening Cause

Proximate Cause It is an intervening active force which is a
Immediate Cause Proximate Cause distinct act or fact absolutely foreign from the
may be a cause does not require that felonious act of the accused.
which is far and the offender needs
EXAMPLES
remote from the to actually touch the
consequence which body of the offended Q: Cruz and Villacorta were regular customers
sets into motion party. It is enough at Mendeja’s store. At around two o’clock in the
other causes that that the offender morning of Jan. 23, 2002, while Cruz was buying
resulted in the generated in the bread at Mendeja’s store, Villacorta suddenly
felony. mind of the offended
appeared and, without uttering a word, stabbed
party the belief that
Cruz on the left side of Cruz’s body using a
made him risk
himself. sharpened bamboo stick. When Villacorta fled,
Mendeja chased Villacorta but failed to catch
him. When Mendeja returned to her store, she
saw Aron removing the broken bamboo stick
If a man creates in another person’s mind an from Cruz’s body. Mendeja and Aron then
immediate sense of danger, which causes such brought Cruz to Tondo Medical Center and was
person to try to escape, and, in doing so, the treated as an outpatient. Cruz was later brought
latter injures himself, the man who creates such to the San Lazaro Hospital on Feb. 14, 2002,
a state of mind is responsible for the resulting where he died the following day of tetanus
injuries.
infection secondary to stab wound. What is the that the act of B of working in his farm where
proximate cause for the death of Cruz? the soil is filthy, using his own hands, is an
efficient supervening cause which relieves A of
Answer: The proximate cause of Cruz’s death is
any liability for the death of B. A, if at all, is only
the tetanus infection, and not the stab wound.
liable for physical injuries inflicted upon B.
There had been an interval of 22 days between
the date of the stabbing and the date when
Cruz was rushed to San Lazaro Hospital,
exhibiting symptoms of severe tetanus
infection. If Cruz acquired severe tetanus
infection from the stabbing, then the symptoms
would have appeared a lot sooner than 22 days Circumstances which are NOT considered as
later. Cruz’s stab wound was merely the remote Efficient Intervening Causes
cause, and its subsequent infection with tetanus 1. The weak physical condition of the victim;
might have been the proximate cause of Cruz’s
death. The infection of Cruz’s stab wound by 2. The nervousness or temperament of the
tetanus was an efficient intervening cause later victim;
or between the time Cruz was stabbed to the
time of his death. 3. Causes which are inherent in the victim,
such as the victim’s inability to swim;
Q: A and B had a quarrel and started hacking
each other. B was wounded at the back. Cooler 4. Refusal of the injured party to be subjected
heads intervened and they were separated. to medical attendance;
Somehow, their differences were patched up. A
5. Erroneous or unskillful medical treatment;
agreed to shoulder all the expenses for the
or
treatment of the wound of B and to pay him his
lost income. B, on the other hand, signed a 6. Delay in the medical treatment.
forgiveness letter in favor of A and on that
NOTE: Although the above-mentioned
condition, he withdrew the complaint that he
circumstances may have intervened in the
filed against A. After so many weeks of
commission of the crime, the offender is still
treatment in a clinic, the doctor pronounced the
liable for the resulting crime as it is the
wound already healed. Thereafter, B went back
proximate cause.
to his farm. Two months later, B came home
chilling. Before midnight, he died out of tetanus Because of such proximate cause, his act
poisoning. The heirs of B filed a case of remains, and these circumstances are
homicide against A. Is A liable? inefficient.
Answer: NO. Taking into account the incubation
period of tetanus bacteria, medical evidence
When Death is Presumed to be the Natural
was presented that tetanus bacteria is good
Consequence of Physical Injuries Inflicted
only for two weeks. That if, indeed, the victim
had incurred tetanus infection out of the wound The following facts must be established:
inflicted by A, he would not have lasted two
months. What brought about tetanus to infect 1. That the victim at the time the physical
the body of B was his working in his farm using injuries were inflicted was in normal health;
his bare hands. Because of this, the SC ruled
2. That death may be expected from the The essence of an impossible crime is the
inherent impossibility of accomplishing the
physical injuries inflicted;
crime or the inherent impossibility of the means
3. That death ensued within a reasonable time. employed to bring about the crime.

There must be either:

(1) legal impossibility, or

(2)physical impossibility of accomplishing the

intended act in order to qualify the act as an
impossible crime.
Impossible Crime Inherent Impossibility
Requisites of Impossible Crime That under any and all circumstances, the crime
1. Act performed would be an Offense against could not have materialized.
Persons or Property; Kinds of Inherent Impossibility
Examples of Crimes against Persons: 1. Legal Impossibility – occurs where the
Parricide, murder, homicide, infanticide, intended acts, even if completed, would not
abortion, physical injuries, rape amount to a crime (e.g., killing a person who is
already dead)
Examples of Crimes against Property:
2. Physical or Factual Impossibility – occurs
Robbery, brigandage, theft, usurpation, when extraneous circumstances unknown to
fraudulent insolvency, swindling the accused prevented the consummation of
(estafa), malicious mischief. the intended crime (e.g., pickpocketing an
empty wallet)
2. Act was done with Evil intent;
Employment of Inadequate Means
3. Accomplishment is Inherently impossible or
means employed is either inadequate or It is the use of means whose quality or quantity
ineffectual; and is insufficient to produce the intended felony.
4. Act performed should Not constitute a NOTE: The difference between
violation of another provision of the RPC. attempted/ frustrated crime and
impossible crime is that in
NOTE: The offender must believe that
attempted/frustrated crime the means
he can consummate the intended
are sufficient and adequate, but the
crime. A man stabbing another who he
intended crime was not produced.
knew was already dead cannot be liable
for an impossible crime. Employment of Ineffectual Means
NOTE: There is no impossible crime of The means employed cannot in any way
kidnapping. produce the intended crime (e.g., poisoning a
person with sugar)

Essence of an Impossible Crime EXAMPLES

Q: Fernando Adlawan. Hesson and Junello, Penalty Imposed on Impossible Crimes
together with Fernando went to Fernando’s
The penalty imposed shall be that of arresto
house. Junello approached Fernando and asked
mayor or a fine. (Art. 59, RPC)
for a cigarette lighter. After Fernando gave
Junello the lighter, the latter struck Fernando on
the nape with a piece of firewood. Junello then
took a bolo and hacked Fernando's body on the
side. Fernando lost consciousness and as he laid
motionless on the ground, Hesson stabbed him
twice in the chest using a knife.

Both Hesson and Junello were charged with

murder. However, according to Hesson, he must Reason for Penalizing Impossible Crimes
only be charged with the commission of an
impossible crime as Fernando was already dead To teach the offender a lesson because of his
when he stabbed him. Is he correct? criminal perversity. Although objectively, no
crime is committed, but subjectively, he is a
A: NO. The requisites of an impossible crime criminal.
are:
NOTE: It is a principle of criminal law that the
(1) that the act performed would be an offense offender will only be penalized for an
against persons or property; impossible crime if he cannot be punished
(2) that the act was done with evil intent; and under some other provision of the RPC. An
impossible crime is a crime of last resort.
(3) that its accomplishment was inherently
impossible, or the means employed was either Q: Four culprits, all armed with firearms and
inadequate or ineffectual. with intent to kill, went to the intended victim’s
house and after having pinpointed the latter’s
The third element, inherent impossibility of bedroom, all four fired at and riddled said room
accomplishing the crime, was explained as with bullets, thinking that the intended victim
occurring where the intended acts, even if was already there as it was about 10:00 in the
completed, would not amount to a crime. The evening. It so happened that the intended
victim's fact of death before he was stabbed by victim did not come home that evening and so
Hesson was not sufficiently established by the was not in her bedroom at that time. Was it an
defense. While Sario testified that he thought impossible crime or attempted murder?
Fernando was already dead after he was hacked
by Junello because the former was already lying A: Impossible crime. The factual situation in this
on the ground motionless, this statement case presents a physical impossibility which
cannot sufficiently support the conclusion that, rendered the intended crime impossible of
indeed, Fernando was already dead when accomplishment. Under Art. 4 of the RPC, such
Hesson stabbed him. Sario's opinion of is sufficient to make the act an impossible
Fernando's death was arrived at by merely crime.
looking at the latter's body. No other act was In the instant case, however, their acts
done to ascertain this, such as checking of constitute malicious mischief.
Fernando's pulse, heartbeat or breathing.
Q: A, a collector of Mega Foam failed to remit no crime resulted, because their act of trying to
to the company a check which was given to her poison Jun is criminal.
as payment for a merchandise. She tried to
Impossible Crime – a Formal Crime
deposit the check, but found out that the check
bounced. What crime was committed? By its very nature, an impossible crime is a
formal crime. It is either consummated or not
A: Impossible crime of theft. The evil intent
consummated at all. There is therefore no
cannot be denied, as the mere act of unlawfully
attempted or frustrated impossible crime.
taking the check meant for Mega Foam showed
her intent to gain or be unjustly enriched. Were
it not for the fact that the check bounced, she
would have received the face value thereof,
which was

not rightfully hers. Therefore, it was only due to

the extraneous circumstance of the check being
unfunded, a fact unknown to the accused at the
time, that prevented the crime from being
produced. The thing unlawfully taken by the
accused turned out to be absolutely worthless,
because the check was eventually dishonored,
and Mega Foam had received the cash to
replace the value of said dishonored check.

Q: Buddy always resented his classmate, Jun.

One day, Buddy planned to kill Jun by mixing
poison in his lunch. Not knowing where he can
get poison, he approached another classmate
Jerry to whom he disclosed his evil plan.
Because he himself harbored resentment
towards Jun, Jerry gave Buddy a poison, which
Buddy placed on Jun’s food. However, Jun did
not die because unknown to both Buddy and
Jerry, the poison was actually powdered milk.
What crime or crimes, if any, did Jerry and
Buddy commit?
Duty of the Courts with regard to excessive
penalty and for an act not covered by law.
A: Jerry and Buddy are liable for the so-called
impossible crime because, with intent to kill, “ARTICLE 5. Duty of the Court in Connection
they tried to poison Jun and thus perpetrate with Acts Which Should Be Repressed but
murder, a crime against persons. Jun was not Which are Not Covered by the Law, and in
poisoned only because the would-be killers Cases of Excessive Penalties. — Whenever a
were unaware that what they mixed with the court has knowledge of any act which it may
food of Jun was powdered milk, not poison. deem proper to repress and which is not
Criminal liability is incurred by them although punishable by law, it shall render the proper
decision, and shall report to the Chief (a) preparatory acts;
Executive, through the Department of Justice,
(b) acts of execution.
the reasons which induce the court to believe
that said act should be made the subject of a. Preparatory Acts – those that do not have a
penal legislation. direct connection with the crime which the
offender intends to commit
In the same way the court shall submit to the
Chief Executive, through the Department of General Rule: These are ordinarily not
Justice, such statement as may be deemed punishable.
proper, without suspending the execution of
the sentence, when a strict enforcement of the Exceptions:
provisions of this Code would result in the i. When expressly provided for; or
imposition of a clearly excessive penalty,
taking into consideration the degree of malice ii. When they are considered in themselves as
and the injury caused by the offense.” independent crimes (e.g., possession of
picklocks under Art. 304, which is a preparatory
Stage of Execution of Felony act to the commission of robbery under Arts.
“ARTICLE 6. Consummated,, Frustrated, and 299 and 302).
Attempted Felonies. — Consummated felonies, b. Acts of Execution – punishable under the RPC
as well as those which are frustrated and
attempted, are punishable.

A felony is consummated when all the Stages of Acts of Execution (C-F-A)

elements necessary for its execution and 1. Consummated
accomplishment are present; and it is
frustrated when the offender performs all the 2. Frustrated
acts of execution which would produce the
3. Attempted
felony as a consequence but which,
nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of
causes independent of the will of the
Purpose of the Classification of Felonies
perpetrator.
To bring about a proportionate penalty and
There is an attempt when the offender
equitable punishment.
commences the commission of a felony
directly by overt acts, and does not perform all NOTE: The penalties are graduated according to
the acts of execution which should produce the their degree of severity. The stages may not
felony by reason of some cause or accident apply to all kinds of felonies. There are felonies
other than his own spontaneous desistance.” which do not admit of division.
Stages in Committing a Crime

1. Internal Acts – mere ideas in the mind of a Phases of Felony

person are not punishable. Had they been
carried out, they would constitute a crime. 1. Subjective Phase – that portion of execution
of the crime starting from the point where the
2. External Acts – include: offender begins up to that point where he still
has control over his acts. If the subjective phase
has not yet passed, the felony would be a mere fatal and would cause his death were it not for
attempt. If it already passed, but the felony is the timely medical attention given to him. Is
not produced, as a rule, it is frustrated. Olarte, Ario, and Pasquin guilty of Frustrated
Homicide?
NOTE: If it reaches the point where he
has no more control over his acts, the A: YES. All the elements of frustrated homicide
subjective phase has passed. are present. First, their intent to kill is
manifested by the weapon used which is a
2. Objective Phase – the offender has
pointed sharp object.
performed until the last act and is no longer in
control of its natural course. Second, the victim suffered numerous fatal
wounds, but he did not die due to the timely
medical assistance given to him.

Third, none of the qualifying circumstances for

Consummated Felony murder is present.

A felony is consummated when all the acts

necessary for its accomplishment and execution
Q: A, a doctor, conceived the idea of killing his
are present. (Art. 6, RPC)
wife, B. To carry out his plan, he mixed arsenic
Frustrated Felony with the soup of B. Soon after taking the
poisonous food, A suddenly had a change of
A felony is frustrated when the offender heart and washed out the stomach of B. A also
performs all the acts of execution which would gave B an antidote. Is A liable for frustrated
produce the felony as a result, but which parricide?
nevertheless do not produce it by reason of
causes independent of the will of the A: NO. The cause which prevented the
perpetrator. (Art. 6, RPC) consummation of the crime was not
independent of the will of the perpetrator. It
EXAMPLES cannot be considered attempted parricide
Q: X stabbed Y in the abdomen penetrating the because A already performed all acts of
liver and chest of Y. Y was rushed to the execution. A can only be liable for physical
hospital, was given immediate medical injuries.
treatment, and survived. Is X liable for
consummated homicide?
Q: Jessiriel Leyble was waylaid and shot with a
A: NO, because the prompt medical treatment firearm by the group of Eden Etino, et al. Etino
received by the offended party saved his life. only fired a single shot at close range, but did
not hit any vital part of the victim’s body. The
victim's wounds, based on his Medical
Q: Villostas went to a nearby videoke bar to buy Certificate, were located at the right deltoid
cigarettes. Once inside the bar, he was stabbed (through and through) and the left shoulder. It
by Olarte, Ario, and Pasquin on different parts appears that Leyble did not sustain any fatal
of his body. When Villostas was rushed to the injury as a result of the shooting, considering
hospital, he was treated and the doctor testified that he and his companions even went in
that all the injuries suffered by Villostas were pursuit of Etino after the incident. The RTC
found Etino guilty beyond reasonable doubt of felony, by reason of some cause or accident
the crime of frustrated homicide to which the other than his own spontaneous desistance.
CA affirmed. Is petitioner Etino guilty of the (Art. 6, RPC)
crime charged?
NOTE: The word directly emphasizes
A: NO. It cannot be reasonably concluded that the requirement that the attempted
petitioner's use of a firearm was sufficient proof felony is that which is directly linked to
that he had intended to kill the victim. After all, the overt act performed by the
it is settled that ''Intent to kill cannot be offender, not the felony he has in his
automatically drawn from the mere fact that mind.
the use of firearms is dangerous to life." Rather,
"Animus interficendi” must be established with
the same degree of certainty as is required of
the other elements of the crime. The inference
of intent to kill should not be drawn in the
absence of circumstances sufficient to prove
such intent beyond reasonable doubt. When
the intent to kill is lacking, but wounds are
shown to have been inflicted upon the victim,
as in this case, the crime is not frustrated or
attempted homicide but physical injuries only.

Crimes Without Frustrated Stage

1. Rape – the gravamen of the offense is carnal

knowledge, hence, the slightest penetration to
the female organ consummates the felony.

2. Corruption of public officers – mere offer

consummates the crime.

3. Physical injury – consummated at the

instance the injuries are inflicted.

4. Adultery – the essence of the crime is sexual

congress.

5. Theft – the essence of the crime is the taking

of property belonging to another. Once the Criteria Involved in Determining the Stage
thing has been taken, or in the possession of (whether it be in attempted, frustrated or
another, the crime is consummated. consummated stage) of the Commission of a
Felony (M-E-N)
Attempted Felony
1. The Manner of committing the crime;
There is an attempt when the offender
commences the commission of a felony 2. The Elements of the crime; and
directly by overt acts and does not perform all
3. The Nature of the crime itself.
the acts of execution which should produce the
 Instances wherein the Stages of a Crime will 2. Attempt to commit Alarms and
Scandals is not punishable. (Art. 15,
NOT apply
RPC)
1. Offenses punishable by Special Penal Laws,
WHY?: It involves insignificant moral
unless otherwise provided for;
and material injuries, if not
2. Formal crimes (e.g., slander, adultery, false consummated, the wrong done is so
testimony, etc.); slight that a penalty is unnecessary (also
known as the De Minimis principle).
3. Impossible crimes;
Exception: Light felonies are punishable in all
4. Crimes consummated by mere attempt or stages when committed against persons or
proposal or by overt act (e.g., attempt to flee to property.(Art. 7, RPC)
an enemy country, corruption of minors,
treason); NOTE: However, this provision is not
always applicable.
5. Felonies by omission; and
Example: If the offender is only an accomplice
6. Crimes committed by mere agreement (e.g., and there are two or more mitigating
betting in sports, corruption of public officers). circumstances without any compensating
aggravating circumstance, the appropriate
penalty will be two degrees lower. It must be
noted that the penalty lower than arresto
menor is public censure. There is no two
degrees lower than arresto menor.

When Light Felonies are Punishable

“ARTICLE 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.”

General Rule: Light felonies are punishable only

when they are consummated.

Examples:

1. An attempt to conceal one’s true

name is not punishable. (Art. 178(2),
RPC)
 3. The presence of attending Circumstances.

NOTE: For special penal laws, it must be

expressly provided that the aforementioned
factors are to be considered.

Persons Liable for Grave or Less Grave Felonies

The principals, accomplices, and accessories.

Grave Felonies, Less Grave Felonies and Light

Persons Liable in Light Felonies
Felonies
Only the principals and their accomplices are
1. Grave – those to which the law attaches the
made liable for the commission of light felonies.
capital punishment or penalties which in any of
their periods are afflictive, in accordance with Accessories are not liable for the commission of
Art. 25 of the RPC. (Art. 9 (1), RPC) light felonies. (Art. 19, RPC)

2. Less Grave – those which the law punishes Examples of Crimes considered as Light
with penalties which in their maximum period Felonies
are correctional, in accordance with Art. 25 of
1. Slight physical injuries (Art. 266, RPC);
the RPC. (Art. 9(2), RPC)
2. Theft (Art. 309, pars. 7 and 8, RPC);
NOTE: The criminal can still be
rehabilitated and hence can be the 3. Alteration of boundary marks (Art. 313, RPC);
subject of probation and Alternative
Dispute Resolution insofar as the civil 4. Malicious mischief (Art. 328 (3); Art. 329 (3),
aspect is concerned. RPC);
3. Light – those infractions of law for the 5. Intriguing against honor (Art. 364, RPC); and
commission of which the penalty of arresto
menor or a fine not exceeding P40,000 pesos, or 6. Alarms and Scandals. (Art. 155, RPC)
both, is provided. (Art. 9(3), RPC, as amended NOTE: If one assists in the escape of another
by R.A. No. 10951, 29 Aug. 2017) who committed Alarms and Scandals, he is not
Factors to be Considered in Imposing a Penalty liable under the RPC but may be liable under
for Felonies Punished under RPC (P-E-C) P.D. 1829 penalizing Obstruction of
Apprehension of Prosecution of Criminal
1. The degree of Participation; Offenders.
2. Stages of Execution; and
 Requisites of Proposal

1. A person has decided to commit a felony ;

and

2. That he proposes its execution to some other

person or persons.

There is no criminal proposal when —

a. The person who proposes is not

determined to commit the felony.

b. There is no decided, concrete and

formal proposal.

c. It is not the execution of the felony

that is proposed.
Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit Felony NOTE:The proposal need not be accepted for
“ART 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit the proponent to be criminally liable. If the
felony. — proposal is accepted, it may transform to a
conspiracy because there would then be an
Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony agreement and a decision to commit a felony.
are punishable only in the cases in which the
law specially provides a penalty therefor. Conspiracy as a crime and as a mode of
incurring criminal liability
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons
come to an agreement concerning the 1. Conspiracy exists when two or more persons
commission of a felony and decide to commit come to an agreement concerning the
it. commission of a crime and decide to commit it.
Conspiracy, like the crime itself, must be proven
There is proposal when the person who has beyond reasonable doubt.
decided to commit a felony proposes its
execution to some other person or persons.” 2. Mere presence, knowledge, acquiescence to
or agreement to cooperate, is not enough to
constitute one as a party to a conspiracy, absent
General Rule: Conspiracy and proposal to any active participation in the commission of
commit a felony are NOT punishable. the crime , with a view to the furtherance of the
common design and purpose .
EXCEPT: When the law specially provides a
penalty therefor. 3. When conspiracy relates to a crime actually
committed, it is not a felony but only a manner
a. Conspiracy to commit treason (115); of incurring criminal liability . Thus, an act of
one is the act of all. It is then not punishable as
b. Conspiracy to commit coup d’etat,
a separate offense.
rebellion or insurrection (136);

c. Conspiracy to commit sedition (141).

4. In a conspiracy, it is not necessary to show
that all the conspirators actually hit and killed
the victim. What is important is that all
participants performed specific acts with such
closeness and coordination as to unmistakably
indicate a common purpose or design to bring
about the death of the victim.

Requisites of conspiracy

1. That two or more persons came to an

agreement;

2. The agreement concerned the commission of

a felony; and

3. That the execution of the felony be decided

upon.

Kinds of conspiracy, their differences and

similarities

a) Wheel or circle conspiracy, in which there is

a single person, or hub , dealing individually
with 2 or more persons or groups, the spokes ;
and

b) Chain conspiracy, usually involving the

distribution of narcotics and contraband, in
which there is successive communication and
cooperation.

Offense not subject to the provision of the

revised penal code

“Article 10.-Offenses which are or in the future

may be punishable under special laws are not
subject to the provisions of this Code. This
Code shall be supplementary to such laws,
unless the latter should specially provide the
contrary.”