2015 Criminal Law Last-Minute Reminders

BOOK ONE

Q: Distinguish mala in se from mala prohibita.

A: Mala in se felonies are defined and penalized in the Revised Penal Code. When the acts complained of are inherently immoral, they are deemed mala in se, even if they are punished by a special law. Criminal intent must be clearly established. Crimes that are mala prohibita, the criminal acts are not inherently immoral but become punishable only because the law says they are forbidden. (Garcia vs. CA, G.R. No. 157171, March 14, 2006)

Q: X was awakened by a man pressing a chloroform soaked cloth with on her face. The man was on top of her. She struggled, was able to kick the man, and the man jumped out of the window. She called for help from the authorities. Was there Attempted Rape?

A: It is NOT Attempted Rape. The act of pressing a cloth soaked with chemical on the face of a woman is not an Overt Act directly connected to rape. The obvious intent was to make the woman unconscious, but it is uncertain what his next course of action would be. (Baleros v. People, G.R. No. 138033, February 22, 2006)

Q: What constitutes Justifying Circumstances of Self Defense?

A: Self Defense does not only include defense of one's life. It also includes defense of one's honor or chastity, defense of one's property coupled with an attack on the person entrusted with the said property. It is an encompassing term. (Art. 11, RPC)

Q: What is incomplete self-defense?

A: When not all the elements of self defense are present, there is incomplete self defense. If only unlawful aggression is present, it is an ordinary mitigating circumstance. If with unlawful aggression and another element, it is a privileged mitigating circumstance. NOTE: there should ALWAYS be unlawful aggression. (Art. 13, RPC)

Page 1 of 20

Q: What is a battered woman?

A: In order to be classified as a battered woman, the couple must go through the battering cycle at least twice. If it occurs a second time, and she remains in the situation, she is defined as a battered woman. Battered women include women in any form of intimate relationship with men. Battered woman syndrome is akin to justifying. It is more advantageous than Justifying because all the elements need not concur; what should be proven is that the wife is suffering from battered woman syndrome. It is through the expert testimony of the psychiatrist, if proven, absolves her from criminal and civil liability. (R.A. No. 9262, People vs. Genosa, G.R. No. 135981, January 15, 2004)

Q: What is the rule when it comes to minors exempted from criminal acts?

A: If a child commits a felony when he is 15 or below, he is exempted from criminal liability. If he is over 15 but below 18, but he did not act with discernment, he is exempted from criminal liability. If he is over 15 but below 18 and he acted with discernment, he is not exempted from criminal liability and will be prosecuted just like any other criminal. (R.A. No. 9334, Juvenile Justice Welfare Act)

Q: How shall the court treat persons under 18 y.o. who have been convicted?

A: The court shall place the child in conflict with the law under suspended sentence, without need of application. Provided however, that the suspension of the sentence shall still be applied even if the juvenile is already 18 years of age or more at the time of the pronouncement of his guilt. As long as he is 18 years and below at the time of the commission of the crime, even if he is above 18 at the promulgation of the judgment, he can still benefit from the suspended sentence. the court shall decide to discharge or to extend the sentence for a specific period of time or until the child attains the maximum age of 21. The maximum limit is 21. (R.A. No. 9334, Juvenile Justice Welfare Act)

Q: What are the elements of treachery?

A: (1) the employment of means of execution that gives the persons attacked no opportunity to defend themselves or retaliate; and (2) the means of execution were deliberately or consciously adopted. (Fantastico vs. Malice. Sr., G.R. No. 190912, January 12, 2015)

Q: When is there “aid of armed men” as a qualifying aggravating circumstance?

A: In "aid of armed men," the men act as accomplices only. They must not be acting in the commission of the crime under the same purpose as the principal accused,

Page 2 of 20

otherwise they are to be regarded as co-principals or co-conspirators. (People vs. Enojas, G.R. No. 204894, March 10, 2014)

Q: How can the accused become a principal by indispensable cooperation?

A: To be a principal by indispensable cooperation, one must participate in the criminal resolution, a conspiracy or unity in criminal purpose and cooperation in the commission of the offense by performing another act without which it would not have been accomplished. (People vs. Dulay, G.R. No.193854, Sept. 24, 2012)

Q: What is the degree of participation by an accused when he gives moral support when a crime is being committed?

A: Being present and giving moral support when a crime is being committed will make a person responsible as an accomplice in the crime committed. (People vs. Gambao, et al, October 01, 2013).

Q: A was caught selling 33 tires that was proven to have been stolen from B, he what is the crime committed?

A: Anti-fencing. The essential elements of the crime of fencing are as follows: (1) a crime of robbery or theft has been committed; (2) the accused, who is not a principal or on accomplice in the commission of the crime of robbery or theft, buys, receives, possesses, keeps, acquires, conceals, sells or disposes, or buys and sells, or in any manner deals in any article, item, object or anything of value, which has been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft; (3) the accused knew or should have known that the said article, item, object or anything of value has been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft; and (4) there is, on the part of one accused, intent to gain for oneself or for another. (Ong vs. People, G.R. NO. 190475, April 10, 2013).

Q: Define the following: 1. Recidivism2. Habituality (Reiteracion)3. Quasi-Recidivism4. Habitual Delinquency

A: 1. Committed by a person who, at the time of his trial for one crime, shall have

been previously convicted by final judgment of another crime embraced in the same title of the Code. (Article 14, RPC)

Page 3 of 20

2. Committed when the offender has been previously punished for an offense to which the law attaches at an equal or greater penalty or for two or more crimes to which it attaches a lighter penalty. (Article 14, RPC)

3. Any person who shall commit a felony after having been convicted by final judgment, before beginning to serve such sentence, or while serving the same. (Article 160, RPC)

4. A person shall be deemed to be habitually delinquent, if within a period of ten years from the date of his release or last conviction of the crime of robbery, theft, estafa, or falsification, he is found guilty of any of said crimes a third time or oftener. (Article 62, RPC)

Q: When does the accessory penalty of civil interdiction attach?

A: When the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua, or reclusion temporal. (Art. 40 and 41, RPC)

Q: May a person under civil interdiction make a last will and testament?

A: Yes. The making of a last will and testament is in effect a disposition of property mortis causa. The persons under civil interdiction are only prohibited from making dispositions of property by acts or conveyances inter vivos. (Art. 31, RPC)

Q: What are the are two kinds of complex crime?

A: The first is known as compound crime, or when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies while the other is known as complex crime proper, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other. (People vs. Nelmida, G.R. No. 184500, Sept. 11, 2012)

Q: A killed multiple seamen out of revenge for a previous altercation by driving them over with a van, what was the crime committed?

A: When the felony committed by the accused is double murder with multiple attempted murder, it is a complex crime contemplated under Article 48 of the RPC. (People vs. Punzalan, G.R. No. 199892, Dec. 10, 2012)

Page 4 of 20

Q: Distinguish between pardon granted by the offended party and pardon granted by the president.

A:

(Art. 23 and 36, RPC)

Q: What are the rules under subsidiary penalty?

A: If the convict has no properties to meet the FINE imposed by the court, he shall be subject to subsidiary penalty at the rate of one day for each amount equivalent to the highest minimum wage rate prevailing in the Philippines at the time of rendition of judgment of conviction.

1. If principal penalty is prision correcional or arresto and fine – remain in prison until fine is satisfied BUT subsidiary imprisonment NOT exceed 1/3 of term of sentence and not continue for more the 1 year.2. Penalty only fine – NOT exceed 6 mos. for grave and less grave felony; NOT exceed 15 days for light felony.3. Penalty higher than prision correcional – NO subsidiary imprisonment4. Subsidiary penalty suffered because of insolvency - NO relief from fine in case financial circumstances improve. (Art. 39, RPC, as amended by R.A. No. 10159)

Q: Do the rules in subsidiary liability apply to those convicted of B.P. 22?

A: Yes. The RPC applies suppletorily to special laws like B.P. 22 (Art. 10, RPC), hence if it is expressly stated in the judgment that a fine is imposed and that in case of insolvency to suffer subsidiary imprisonment, subsidiary penalty may be applied. (Jao Yu vs. People, G.R. No. 134172, September 20, 2004)

Q: Who are disqualified under Act. 4103 or the Indeterminate Sentence Law?

A: 1. Convicted of death or life imprisonment; 2. Convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason; 3. Convicted of misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition, or espionage; 4. Convicted of piracy; 5. Habitual delinquents; 6. Those who escaped from confinement or evaded sentence; 7. Those who violated

Page 5 of 20

By offended party By the PresidentDoes NOT extinguish criminal liability.XPN: MARITAL RAPE cases (Art. 226-C)

Extinguishes criminal liability

Extinguishes civil liability as it is deemed a waiver.

Does NOT extinguish civil liability

Pardon must be made BEFORE the institution of the prosecution of the case

Can only be granted AFTER conviction by final judgment.

terms of conditional pardon; 8. Maximum period of imprisonment does not exceed 1 year. (Sec. 2, Act 4103, Indeterminate Sentence Law)

Q: Are recidivists entitled to an Indeterminate Sentence?

A: Yes. Recidivists are not disqualified under the Indeterminate Sentence Law. (People vs. Jaramilla, G.R. No. L-28547, February 22, 1974; Romero vs. People, G.R. No. 171644, November 23, 2011)

Q: What are the requisites of Parole?

A: Requisites are: 1. He must be placed in prison/jail to serve an indeterminate sentence penalty which exceeds 1 year; 2. He must have served the minimum term of sentence; 3. Board of pardons and parole found that his release is for the greater interest of society. (Act No. 4103, Indeterminate Sentence Law)

Q: What penalty shall be imposed in lieu of the death penalty?

A: Reclusion perpetua for violations under the RPC and life imprisonment for violations of Special Penal Laws. (Sec. 2, R.A. No. 9346, Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty)

Q: X was convicted and sentenced to a penalty of reclusion perpetua. May he apply for parole under Act No. 4103?

A: No. Persons convicted of offenses punished with reclusion perpetua, or whose sentences were reduced to reclusion perpetua, shall not be eligible for parole under the indeterminate sentence law. (Sec. 3, R.A. No. 9346, Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty)

Q: What are the effects of habitual delinquency as to penalties?

A: 3rd conviction – penalty for the last crime with additional penalty of prision correcional in its medium and maximum period;4th conviction – penalty for the last crime with additional penalty of prision mayor in its minimum and medium period;5th conviction – penalty for the last crime with additional penalty of prision mayor in its maximum period to reclusion temporal in its minimum period, BUT in no case shall the penalties exceed 30 years. (Art. 62, RPC)

Page 6 of 20

Q: X is a minor who was convicted of frustrated murder with attendant circumstances of voluntary surrender and immediate vindication. What should be his penalty?

A: Arresto Mayor in its medium period. The penalty for homicide is reclusion temporal, since the crime is frustrated go one degree lower (Prision Mayor), Minority is a privileged mitigating circumstance, go one degree lower (Prision Correcional), Two mitigating circumstances without any aggravating circumstance, go one degree lower (Arresto Mayor in its medium period), there is NO minimum period since the ISL cannot be applied anymore. (Art. 64, RPC, Act.No. 4103, Indeterminate Sentence Law)

Q: What is the three-fold rule?

A: Whenever a successive service of sentence is impossible, the maximum duration of the sentence shall not be more than 3 times the length of the most severe penalty. It cannot, however, exceed 40 years. (Art. 70, RPC)

NOTE: It is the director of prisons who applies/computes this NOT the Judge.

Q: What is the effect of an accused’s death with regard to his criminal and civil liabilities?

A: The death of the accused pending appeal of his conviction extinguishes his criminal liability, as well as the civil liability ex delicto. Criminal action is extinguished as there is no longer a defendant to stand as the accused, the civil action instituted for recovery of civil liability ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the criminal case. (People of the Philippines vs. Bayot, G.R. No. 200030, April 18, 2012)

Q: What are the effects of acquittal based on (1) the ground that the accused is not the author of the act or omission complained of (2) reasonable doubt on the guilt of the accused?

A: 1. This instance closes the door to civil liability, for a person who has been found to

be not the perpetrator of any act or omission cannot and can never be held liable for such act or omission. There being no delict, civil liability ex delicto is out of the question, and the civil action, if any, which may be instituted must be based on grounds other than the delict complained of.

2. Even if the guilt of the accused has not been satisfactorily established, he is not exempt from civil liability which may be proved by preponderance of evidence only. (Lumantas vs. Calapiz, G.R. No. 163753, January 15, 2014)

Page 7 of 20

Q: Will civil liability survive despite the death of the accused?

A: Yes. The claim for civil liability survives notwithstanding the death of accused, if the same may also be predicated on a source of obligation other than delict. (People vs. Amistoso, G.R. No. 201447, August 28, 2013)

Q: What is the effect when a convict does not leave the penal institution when a state of calamity is announced by the chief executive?

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 the RPC. (Art. 98, RPC as amended, RA 10592).

Q: X was convicted of frustrated homicide by the regional trial court with a jail term of 6 years and 2 months to 8 years. X appealed to the Court of Appeals and the latter downgraded his conviction to attempted homicide with the penalty of 4 months of arresto mayor as minimum to 2 years and 4 months of prision correctional as maximum. Because of such ruling, X filed for probation. This was opposed by the Solicitor General stating that under Sec 4 of PD 986 (Probation Law), by filing an appeal, X has waived his right to probation. Is the Sol Gen correct?

A: No, the Sol Gen is not correct. An application for probation may be filed despite the perfection of an appeal if the conviction appealed from was downgraded from an offense with a sentence to serve a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 6 years to one with a sentence lower than 6 years. (Colinares vs. People, G.R. No. 182748, December 13, 2011)

BOOK TWO

Q: How is treason proved?

A: There are two ways of proving Treason1) The prosecution MUST present Two-Witnesses who MUST testify on the commission of the same overt act by the accused; or2) The accused himself may make a confession in open court. (Art. 114, RPC)

Q: How can crimes be absorbed under the Human Security Act?

A: If in a scenario more than one of these predicate crimes are present, remember that Sec. 49 expressly states that these are absorbed in the violation of the Act. Thus you will file only one case.

Page 8 of 20

If in the scenario given there are crimes other than the predicate crimes, file separate charges for each crime which is not one of the predicate crimes in Sec. 3 of the Act. (Sec. 3, R.A. No. 9372)

Q: When are the crimes enumerated under sec. 3 of the Human Security Act considered an act of terrorism?

A: When they sow and create a widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand

Q: X is part of a Rebellion and has actually taken up arms. X present during the gathering of the rebellion. X saw Y walking and invited him to join them. Y refused and continued to walk away. X shot Y in the back twice. What crime or crimes will is X liable for?

A: X is liable for the crime of Rebellion. In Rebellion, when murder, homicide, arson, physical injuries and other common crimes are committed in furtherance of, incident to, or in connection with the rebellion, these are considered absorbed in the crime of Rebellion. (Enrile vs Salazar, G.R. No. 92163 June 5, 1990)

Q: Differentiate Illegal Assembly from Illegal Associations

A: First, in the Illegal Assembly the purpose of the assemble is the violation of provisions of the Revised Penal Code, while in Illegal Associations, the purpose of the association may be the violation of the RPC or of special penal laws. Second, in Illegal Assembly it is necessary that there be an actual meeting or assembly, while in Illegal Associations, it is not necessary. Last, in Illegal Assembly what is punished is the meeting and attendance in such meeting, while in Illegal Assembly what is punished is the act of forming such groups and membership in them. (Art. 146 and 147, RPC)

Q: What are the acts punished by Article 161.Counterfeiting the great seal of the Government of the Philippine Islands, forging the signature or stamp of the chief executive?

A: Acts punished: 1. Forging the great seal of the Government of the Philippines;2. Forging the signature of the President; and3. Forging the stamp of the Philippines.

NOTE: What is punished here is the fact forging and not the knowledge that such is forged or the using of such forged documents. (Art. 161, RPC)

Page 9 of 20

Q: Distinguish Article 164 (Mutilation of coins) from PD 247 a (Presidential Decree penalizing the defacement, mutilation, tearing, burning or destruction of central bank notes and coins.)

A: PD 247 does not require that there be intent to mutilate on the part of the offender nor there is a requirement of intent to gather the metal dust from the coin in order to profit or defraud the State. (Art. 64, RPC, P.D. No. 247)

Q: If X was arrested for carrying unfilled out falsified Government forms, will he be liable for falsification?

A: No. The form is not filled out completely not creating any rights for X, thus no falsification. The proper charge would be Art. 176 mere possession of instrument or implements for falsification. (Art. 176, RPC)

Q: If an ecclesiastical minister was to falsify any document, would that make him liable under Article 171?

A: NO. It is necessary the document he falsifies is one that affect the civil status of a person, for if not, he would be liable for falsification under Article 172. (Art. 171 and 172, RPC)

Q: The accused was trying to get a copy of a case filed against him in the Ombudsman office under another name, can he be held liable under the Anti-Alias Law?

A: NO. Since the using of the different name was an isolated transaction with no evidence whatsoever that the accused wanted to be known by that name, it cannot be an alias, thus not liable. (Ursua vs. CA G.R. No. 112170. April 10, 1996)

Q: Why is it that former President Joseph Estrada despite making use the name Jose Velarde in signing for a trust account could not be held liable for the Anti-Alias Law?

A: The name was not publicly used, in fact it was done in secret with only 2 other people knowing about it, and lastly “habituality is not present because no other transaction with the name Jose Velarde.” Thus not liable. (Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560. November 19, 2001)

Q: A was accused of killing B. C, the witness of the prosecution testified that he saw A kill B. C’s testimony was a lie. Can C be held liable for violation of False Testimony against a defendant if the judge did not believe C and

Page 10 of 20

acquitted A? What if A was convicted based on said testimony?

A: 1. If acquitted, Yes C can be held liable for giving false testimony despite said acquittal. The crime would arise the moment the offender testified falsely in open court whether favorable or not to the defendant.

2. If convicted, it depends. If the case has reached finality then yes, a case can be made, BUT if he appealed, such would be premature. Finality is required since the penalty of the person giving false testimony would depend on the penalty imposed on the convict. (Art. 180, RPC)

Q: What is required to be liable for the importation of drugs under RA 9165?

A: It requires that the prosecution proves that the dangerous drugs were taken from a vessel traveling from foreign origins. Thus the importation refer that the said dangerous drugs comes from another country. (Sec. 4 of R.A. No. 9165, Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act)

Q: Who are those liable for maintenance of a den, dive or resort under RA 9165?

A: Owners, persons maintain said den, dives or resort, their employees who are aware of the nature of the place. (R.A. No. 9165, Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act)

Q: What if A was discovered with dangerous drugs in a “party” that hosted only 2 other people, B and C. Will the fact that only 2 other persons arrived at the party mean that no additional penalty will be imposed to A?

A: NO. For as long as Dangerous Drugs were discovered in any party, social gathering or meeting or in the company of at least 2 other people, the maximum penalty prescribed by law must be imposed. (R.A. No. 9165, Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act)

Q: What is the chain of custody?

A: It is the duly recorded authorized movements and custody of dangerous drugs from the time of confiscation/seizure to receipt in the forensic laboratory for safekeeping to presentation in court to its eventual destruction. (People vs. Enumerable G.R. No. 207993, January 21, 2015)

Page 11 of 20

Q: In apprehending the accused what procedure should the apprehending team should follow?

A: 1. Upon seizure of the drugs, it be listed in an inventory;2. Photographs must be taken in the presence of the accused or his counsel, a representative from media, representative from DOJ and an elected public official.3.The elected public official gets a copy of the inventory which must be signed by him. (R.A. No. 9165, Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act)

Q: Can there be attempted illegal sale of dangerous drugs.

A: There is attempted sale of dangerous drugs when the sale was aborted by the fact the drug pusher did not transfer the drugs to the police officer since the police officers introduced themselves as such and arrested him. (People vs. Rolando Laylo G.R. No. 192235 July 6, 2011)

Q: May a person charged under R.A. No. 9165 plea-bargain?

A: NO. Any person charged under any provision of this Act regardless of the imposable penalty shall not be allowed to avail of the provision on plea-bargaining. (Sec. 23, R.A. No. 9165, Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act)

Q: May a person charged under R.A. No. 9165 avail of the probation law?

A: YES. EXCEPT those charged with drug pushing and drug trafficking. (Sec. 24, R.A. No. 9165, Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act)

Q: What if a X and Y were seen from the window of the H20 hotel, facing the water stadium of the park opposite the audience of said park, having sexual intercourse, what would they will be liable for?

A: They will be liable for grave scandal. Since the elements are present, which are:

1. The offender performs an act or acts;2. Such acts be highly scandalous as offending against decency and good morals;3. That the highly scandalous conduct is not expressly falling in the RPC; and4. The act complained of be committed in a public place or within public knowledge or view. (Art. 200, RPC)

Page 12 of 20

Q: What is the act punishable under Sec. 3(e) of RA 3019?

A: Causing any undue injury to any party including the government, or giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official, administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence.

Q: Where do you file a case involving RA 3019?

A: The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction unless otherwise provided by law. There is a law, RA 8429 which provides for the jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan. Under this law, if a public officer is of salary grade 27 and above, it must be before the Sandiganbayan. If the public officer is below salary grade 27, it must be before the RPC. (R.A. No. 3019, Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act)

Q: May private persons be prosecuted under R.A. 3019?

A: Yes. Even if the public officer with whom the private individual can still be prosecuted for violation of RA No. 3019. If there is proof of the crime and conspiracy of a dead public officer with a private individual, the latter can still be convicted for the violation of R.A. 3019. (People vs. Henry Go, GR No. 168539, March 25, 2014.)

Q: What are the elements of of the crime of violence against women through harassment?

A: Elements are:

1. The offender has or had a sexual or dating relationship with the offended woman;

2. The offender, by himself or through another, commits an act or series of acts of harassment against the woman; and

3. The harassment alarms or causes substantial emotional or psychological distress to her. (Ang vs. CA, G.R. No. 182835, April 20, 2010)

Q: What are the exceptions under RA 3019?

A: Unsolicited gifts or presents of small or insignificant value offered or given as a mere ordinary token of friendship or gratitude, according to local customs or usage is exempted from the provisions of RA 3019; therefore the said public officer will not be held criminally liable. (Sec. 14, R.A. No. 3019, Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act)

Page 13 of 20

Q: Can torture be absorbed in any other crime?

A: NO. Under Sec. 15, torture as a crime shall not absorb nor shall be absorbed by any other crime or felony committed as a consequence, or as a means in the conduct or commission thereof. In which case, torture shall be treated as a separate and independent criminal act whose penalties shall be imposable without prejudice to any other criminal liability provided for by domestic and international laws. (Sec. 15, R.A. 9745)

Q: Differentiate Malversation from Technical Malversation.

A:Art. 217MALVERSATION

Art. 220TECHNICAL MALVERSATION

The public officer misappropriates the fund for his personal use

The public officer did not misappropriate the funds for his personal use, he used it for another public purpose other than that which has been appropriated by law or ordinance that is why it is Technical Malversation – the offense is on the technicality of the use of funds.

The public officer has in his possession public funds or property for safekeeping. It is under his custody and control and therefore it is for his safekeeping and he has the obligation to account it later on to the Government.

The public officer has in his possession public funds or property is only under his administration. Not for safekeeping, but only for the purpose administrating it that is, for applying it for the purpose which it has been appropriated by law or ordinance.

Q: What is the main distinction between dating relationship from sexual relationship based on RA 9262.

A: Dating relationship that the law contemplates can exist even without a sexual intercourse taking place between those involved. (Ang vs. CA, G.R. No.

182835, April 20, 2010)

Q: If knowledge or consent of the offended party a defense under RA 9208?

A: No. For liability under our law, this argument is irrelevant. As defined under Section 3(a) of Republic Act No. 9208, trafficking in persons can still be

Page 14 of 20

committed even if the victim gives consent.(People vs. Casio, G.R. No. 211465, December 3, 2014)

Q: If a photo shows the breasts of a man, will that be covered by Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009?

A: NO. The law only cover female breasts as stated in Section 3(e) "Private area of a person" means the naked or undergarment clad genitals, public area,

buttocks or female breast of an individual.

Q: Enumerate the specific acts prohibited and punished under the “Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009

A: Prohibited Acts:1. To take photo or video coverage of a person or group of persons performing

sexual act or any similar activity or to capture an image of the private area of a person/s without the consent of the person/s involved and under circumstances in which the person/s has/have a reasonable expectation of privacy;

2. To copy or reproduce, or to cause to be copied or reproduced, such photo or video or recording of sexual act or any similar activity with or without consideration;

3. To sell or distribute, or cause to be sold or distributed, such photo or video or recording of sexual act, whether it be the original copy or reproduction thereof; or

4. To publish or broadcast, or cause to be published or broadcast, whether in print or broadcast media, or show or exhibit the photo or video coverage or recordings of such sexual act or any similar activity through VCD/DVD, internet, cellular phones and other similar means or device. (Section 4 of Anti-Photo and Video Voyeurism Act of 2009)

Q: Who are liable under the child abuse law (R.A. 7610)?

A: Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child exploited in prostitution or subject to other sexual abuse;

Provided, That when the victims is under twelve (12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the penalty for

lascivious conduct when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period. (R.A. No. 7610, Anti-Child Abuse Law)

Page 15 of 20

Q: Can a woman who committed premature marriage be held criminally liable?

A: No. RA 10655 repealed Article 351 thus the act of premature marriage has already been decriminalized.

Q: A second marriage was entered into without a marriage license. Will that marriage be considered as bigamous?

A: No. A marriage solemnized without a license except those where no license is necessary, is considered void ab initio thus the requisite of bigamy that the

second or subsequent marriage must have all the essential requisites for validity except for the existence of a prior marriage has not been met. (Go Bangayan vs Bangayan, G.R. No. 201061, July 3, 2013)

Q: Jayson, a twelve year-old, threw stones at Mary and Rose. George,the father of the two girls, upon seeing the incident struck Jayson at the back with his hand and slapped Jayson on the face. Should George be held liable for the crime of child abuse?

A: No. Not every instance of the laying of hands on a child constitutes the crim of child abuse under Section 10(a) of RA 7610. George’s action was done at the spur of the moment and indicative of his being then overwhelmed by his fatherly concern for the personal safety of his own minor daughters. George lacked that specific intent to debase, degrade or demean the intrinsic worth and dignity of a child as a human being that was so essential in the crime of child abuse. (Bongalon vs. People, G.R. No. 169533, March 20, 2013)

Q: What are the elements of kidnapping?

A: As for the crime of kidnapping, the following elements, as provided in Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code, must be proven: (a) a person has been deprived of his liberty, (b) the offender is a private individual, and (c) the detention is unlawful. (People vs. Jovel, G.R. No. 189820. October 10, 2012).

Q: Is it necessary for the prosecution to prove wrongful intent to burn on the part of the accused to establish arson?

A: No. Although intent may be an ingredient of the crime of arson, it may be inferred from the acts of the accused.  There is a presumption that one intends the natural consequences of his act; and when it is shown that one has deliberately set fire to a building, the prosecution is not bound to produce further evidence of his wrongful intent. If there is an eyewitness to the crime of arson, he can give in detail the acts of the accused.  When this is done the only substantial issue is the credibility of the witness (People vs. De Leon, G. R. No. 180762, March 4, 2009).

Page 16 of 20

Q: Is there a complex crime of estafa through falsification of private document?

A: There is NO complex crime of estafa through falsification of private document, it is important to ascertain whether the offender is to be charged with

falsification of a private document or with estafa. If the falsification of a private document is committed as a means to commit estafa, the proper crime to be charged is

falsification. If the estafa can be committed without the necessity of falsifying a document, the proper crime to be charged is estafa. (Batulanon vs People, G.R. No. 139857 September 15, 2006)

Q: Is there such a crime as estafa through negligence?

A: There is NO such crime as estafa through negligence. In estafa, the profit or gain must be obtained by the accused personally, through his own acts, and his mere negligence in allowing another to take advantage of or benefit from the thing trusted cannot constitute estafa. (Tabaniag vs. People, GR No. 165411, June 18, 2009)

Q: Is it necessary for the prosecution to prove wrongful intent to burn on the part of the accused to establish arson?

A: No. Although intent may be an ingredient of the crime of arson, it may be inferred from the acts of the accused.  There is a presumption that one intends the natural consequences of his act; and when it is shown that one has deliberately set fire to a building, the prosecution is not bound to produce further evidence of his wrongful intent. If there is an eyewitness to the crime of arson, he can give in detail the acts of the accused.  When this is done the only substantial issue is the credibility of the witness (People vs. De Leon, G. R. No. 180762, March 4, 2009).

Q: Distinguish Highway Robbery under Presidential Decree No. 532 from Robbery committed on a highway.

A: Under PD 532, robbery is committed indiscriminately against persons who commute in such highways regardless of the potentiality they offer; while in

ordinary robbery is committed only against predetermined victims. (Art. 293, RPC, P.D. No. 532)

Q: Is there robbery with homicide aggravated by rape?

A: Yes. Robbery was the main intent of appellant, and AAAs death resulted by reason of or on the occasion thereof. Following Article 294(1) and Article

Page 17 of 20

62(1) of the Revised Penal Code, rape should have been appreciated as an aggravating circumstance instead. (People vs. Hipona, G.R No. 185709 Feb. 18, 2010) Q: X is a overseas worker. Her luggage was subjected to a search as x-ray

scanners located a bullet inside her luggage. She was apprehended by the Aviation Security Group of the and was charged with the violation of the Comprehensive Firearms and Ammunition Regulation Act. What will determine the severity of penalty that might be imposed upon her?

A: The severity of the imposable penalty under the Act is based on the kind of bullet found in her possession. the penalty for the unlawful acquisition or possession of ammunition is Prision Mayor. It is imposed in its minimum if the ammunition is for a small arm, in its medium if the ammunition is for a Class-A light weapon, and in its maximum if the ammunition is for a Class-B light weapon. (Sec. 28 (g), (i), and (k), R.A. No. 10591, Comprehensive Firearms Act)

Q: Given the same scenario above, if what was found in X’s luggage was a spent cartridge which did not have gun powder in it, will the answer be the same?

A: NO. Ammunition refers to a complete unfixed unit consisting of a bullet, gunpowder, cartridge case and primer or loaded shell for use in any firearm. (Sec. 3 (b), R.A. No. 10591, Comprehensive Firearms Act)

Q: After Prosecutor Bagito has filed the case before Judge Z for unlawful possession of ammunition against Joy, the evidence custodian noticed an unusual bulge at the side of X’s luggage. He informed policemen found who found a small arm was found in the compartment in X’s luggage. Prosecutor Bagito filed another case for unlawful possession of firearm against X. Thus, X now faced 2 cases and were joined. The counsel for X filed a Motion to Quash the first case for unlawful possession of ammunition. Should Judge Z grant the motion?

A: Judge Z should grant the motion to quash. Under Section 28, paragraph (g), (i), and (k) of the Act, if the violation of the provision on unlawful acquisition or possession of ammunition is committed by a person charged with the unlawful acquisition or possession of a firearm, the unlawful acquisition or possession of ammunition is absorbed in the charge of unlawful acquisition or possession of a firearm. (Sec. 28 (g), (i) and (k) R.A. No. 10591, Comprehensive Firearms Act)

Q: Suppose after trial it was proven that the gun and the ammunition were just planted by the ASG, will the ASG be criminally liable?

Page 18 of 20

A: YES. He is liable for planting evidence because the ASG willfully and maliciously inserted; placed, and/or attached, directly or indirectly, through any overt or covert act, any firearm, or ammunition, or parts thereof in the person, house, effects, or in the immediate vicinity of an innocent individual for the purpose of implicating or incriminating the person, or imputing the commission of any violation of the provisions of this Act to said individual. (Sec. 38, R.A. No. 10591, Comprehensive Firearms Act)

Q: May crimes committed by public officers under the RPC be complexed with the violation of the Anti-Graft Law (RA 3019)?

A: NO. It is expressly stated in the law that In addition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law, the acts under section 3 shall constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful. (Section 3, R.A. No. 3019, Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act)

Q: X is a public school teacher who was convicted under the Anti Child Abuse Law (RA 7610). What is the effect of her position to her criminal liability?

A: It is an aggravating circumstance. The penalty would be in its maximum period. (Rosaldes vs. People, GR No. 173988)

Q: What is the variance rule?

A: If the crime alleged in the information varies with the crime proven with evidence, the accused shall be convicted of the crime alleged or proven whichever is lesser. (People vs. Bernardo, GR No. 198789, June 3, 2013)

Q: X, husband forced Y, wife to have sexual intercourse. Did X committed the crime of marital rape?

A: Yes. Sexual intercourse, albeit within the realm of marriage, if not consensual, is rape. (People vs. Jumawan, G.R. No. 187495, Feb. 18, 2010)

Q: X used to have a romantic relationship with Y. X borrowed money from Y. When Y demanded payment, X punched Y. Does the incident falls

within the coverage of RA 9262?

A. Yes. For RA 9262 to be applicable, it is immaterial whether the relationship had ceased for as long as there is sufficient evidence showing the past or present existence of such relationship between the offender and the victim when the physical harm was committed. (Dabalos vs RTC, GR No. 193960, January 7, 2013)

Page 19 of 20

Q: May a vasectomy done to a person be considered as mutilation under Art. 262 of the RPC?

A: NO, since the vasectomy operation did not in any way deprive the person of his reproductive organ. The elements mutilation are as follows:

1. That there be castration, that is, mutilation of organs necessary for generation;

2. That the mutilation is caused deliberately, that is to deprive the offended party of some essential organ for reproduction. (Aguirre vs. Sec. of DOJ, G.R. No. 170723, March 3, 2008)

Page 20 of 20